How to split up a car?
 

Mother went into a nursing home 7 years ago. She had purchased a new Buick Lesabre (Let's say value was $15,000) a year or so before she went in.

She has three children.

One of her three children has been driving the car for the past seven years paying for insurance and maintenance. They needed a car to drive at the time.

The Mother just passed away and the car is part of the estate that gets split between the three children. The sibling that has been driving the car still has it, but is looking to trade it in on a new car.

The trade-in value now is about $4,000.

What is a fair payout to the two children that have not been driving the car?

Let the person driving the car just keep it for the trade in.

+1...

If anything, have the person with the car give the other two siblings first dibs on any one item from the estate . Of course it should not exceed the trade-in cost of the car, I'm thinking more of a sentimental thing.

Seems like this is going to cost you more in legal fees than its worth to allocate out. Can you just let it ride until the probate is finished. Deal with it afterwards. Is there a trust? I'm no attorney, just asking.

They really needed it,
they took care of it,
should be theirs.
But then again Sis / or Bro. could well be seeing, and smelling $$$.
Animals do eat their own.
Rika

The person who has been driving the car - they got $15,000 of value 7 years ago, and the car is his/hers now, to do whatever he/she wants to do with it.

Out of the remaining assets being distributed, the 2 others should get additional cash/items valuing $15,000 each.

That's roughly fair. Arguably, the person who got the car got slightly more, with the time value of money, having received his/her $15,000 of value 7 years ago. But close enough.

I certainly wouldn't expect the drivers to offer 5K to the other 2. They could offer 2/3rds of the trade in, but the trade in is going to be low. To settle any and all problems, you could sell the car PP, spilt the money 3 ways and they go get their car.

If it works, why would they sell it? It they were real clever, they'd wait for any other inheritance and give over 1500 ea. to the other 2. Keep the car and save the money. In this economy, that's what you do.

make the kid trade it in on a bus so everyone can ride..

rjp

After reading the's post I realize that I'm just a kind, old softie, albeit with a terrible attitude. His post is totally logical but rather harsh. Glad he wasn't my brother when my mom died.

I recently handled my father's estate. It was just me an my sister, and she was willed the car. I got the cash.

What would I have done? I would let the person with the car keep the car, and give and extra $1300 to the other two people, and give the person with the car $2600 less.

I would get written, notarized sign off from all persons involved. (A smart probate judge would require that anyways.)

If that doesn't work, sit everyone down and ask them what they think is fair. (Or maybe start with that.)

Seems petty, especially considering the amount we're talking about here.

It's not a small amount. One of the kids got a $15,000 car, while the other 2 got nothing.

That's totally unfair to the 2 kids who did not get the car.

Because one person has had the car for 7 years, an argument can always be made that something was unfair.

I'm looking at this from the time of death forward. The past 7 years have happened and nothing can undo them.

What you really need is agreement from everyone else on what is "fair".

"One of her three children has been driving the car for the past seven years paying for insurance and maintenance. They needed a car to drive at the time."

Mother essentially gave the car away years ago as was her right. Who ever has a 2001 Buick should agree to not burden their siblings with future bills for repair and maintainence.

Then you are all even.

Exactly. She gave $15,000 of value to one of the kids 7 years ago, at which time the other 2 received nothing, zip, nada.

If the idea is "fairness," i.e., equal distribution to the 3 siblings, then at the time the $15,000 car was given to one sibling 7 years ago, $15,000 should have been put into each of the other 2 siblings' imaginary "inheritance accounts" at that time.

It surprises me that so many think it is fair to just ignore that, or that the other 2 should only get some nominal additional amount now that the rest of Mom's assets are being distributed to the kids.

The other 2 should receive at least an additional $15,000 each, more than the Buick sibling. That money was put into their "accounts" 7 years ago. Now they are entitled to it - that is fair.

Hmmm...How to split up a car?

wisdom needed here.....


wait for it.....


Answer is:


Solomon says SAWZALL!!!!!!!;)

That's my thinking as well... sounds like Mom was alive and gave the car to one of the kids. Seems fair to me to trade it in and split the cash evenly for whatever the dealership will give you.

Both of my parents are alive. If they decide to give my brother a car, isn't that their right? I would never dream of standing up and saying, "Hey, you gave him a car! Where's MY car? It's not FAIR!!"

So? My parents have bought my Sister 2 cars, they bought my Brother 1 car and helped him with his second. I got when I was 21 a $1500 beater Mazda B2000 that my Dad bought in '83 new that I had been driving since I was 16. So you could say he gave it to me when I Was 21 or when I was 16...the value of the truck was far less when I Was 21 and since it was not given to me officially then - that would be the amount to 'split' if we were to split hairs. My previous use of the car is fair in that I had my Dad's permission to do so.

My point is there is no such thing as 'fair' when dealing with siblings and to cry over the disparities is simply to cry about life.

My parents didn't buy me a car because I didn't need them to do so. My brother and Sister did have need so they got something I did not. If anything it was probably unfair that my parents gave me enough of whatever it was that made me NOT need a car from them.