SlurrySlump
Registered User
- Messages
- 651
I think that the key question here is what is best for testator. It seems to me that he should keep the cash or the house for himself to pay for his care.
But to answer your question, the beneficiary has no rights as such.
They may have a right or obligation to intervene if they felt that the other beneficiaries were pressurising the testator to do something not in his interest.
"He is afraid that he may be forced to use some of the money to take care of the person in the person's old age. "
Is it only me or is this the most callous post ever posted on AAM?
A beneficiary has no rights until the testator dies. A will speaks only from death. The testator can change his will at any time.
If I was the testator, I would be re-writing the will and writing somebody out of it!
mf
Totally agree with you mf1,
....this post has come across a bit ruthless alright!
I don't think OP is ruthless or callous! Quite the reverse, it would seem to me, unless OP was asking the question in the third person for the very reason you have pointed out. Perhaps, OP is interested in thwarting the callous beneficiary? I think the alleged thinking of the beneficiary in question is indeed callous and ruthless, but not OP, as far as I can see.
No the OP is certainly not ruthless or callous. As one of the beneficiaries I was asked to sign a legal document by the callous beneficiary wherby I would undertake not to ask the callous beneficiary for any money toward the upkeep of his father if our father ever ran out of money. He would not contribute 1p toward his upkeep.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?