I saw a story on Facebook about a guy who had been helping take care of his grandmother for a couple of years, only to have himself and his mom be subjected to a home search from the police and essentially thrown out of their own home through some greedy/controlling relatives of his. The relatives took over. He and his mom tried going to court, but the court ruled against them, mainly due to the corrupt relatives having connections within the legal system.
One week after the incident and the relatives took over, his grandmother died. The family crisis only lasted a week.
Is this the end of the crisis or could they be at risk of losing their inheritance, or at least their share of it? Could these relatives make more trouble even though the guy's grandmother is gone?
"...essentially thrown out of their own home through some greedy/controlling relatives of his." This is too much of a summary, w/o facts. to draw conclusions on the relatives. Maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. Who knows? And how can it be proven?
" but the court ruled against them, mainly due to the corrupt relatives having connections within the legal system." I've worked in court systems, at 2 different levels. And I've worked in law for most of my life, including being a court reporter and covering both juvenile, probate and adult criminal cases hearings.
We were accountable, believe me. Even with friends and/or relatives, there still are standards, and we adhered to them faithfully. I really find this assumption insulting to anyone who has worked in court systems. Juvenile Court was particularly challenging, and very, very sad. But I certainly saw absolutely no evidence of corruption and/or insider dealing.
What I did see was heartbreaking, and I also saw very, very dedicated social workers trying their best to help families, sometimes in the worst of conditions.
The "corrupt relatives having connections" is so absurd, so completely unfounded that it doesn't bear consideration. Certainly it's possible that relatives could be involved in court actions, and perhaps influential, but this conclusion is absolutely unfounded and ridiculous.
Those who work in the court system have to be accountable, and can be prosecuted for illegal acts. I won't deny that there are people who aren't up to par, and that they should be accountable for their actions. But for the accusation to be believable, a lot of evidence and documentation would be required.
"Could these relatives make more trouble even though the guy's grandmother is gone?" Who knows? There isn't enough information to make any judgment calls.
I will absolutely never understand why people participate, post, rely and/or believe anything on FB, which is a giant manipulative business which exploits people. Who do you think benefits besides Zuckerberg and his staff and successors? What value does FB provide to life, to the US, to individuals, to anyone but Z and whatever flunkies support him?
Forget about FB stories and live your own life.
It does happen: for example, in Italy systematically. Mafia corrupting the legal system. A normal individual wouldn’t have any influence. But a dubious individual, yes.
Prosecutions for offences alleged to have been committed during the grandmother's lifetime can continue after she is dead; but any processes connected with protecting the grandmother's wellbeing, such as applications for or appeals against emergency protection orders, will naturally cease.
Any will she left will be carried out. If she did not leave a will, her property will be distributed as per her State's due processes.
There *are* circumstances in which a beneficiary of an estate can be debarred from inheriting, but they'd have to be more serious than, say, being a useless caregiver or having fallen out with the rest of your family.
What's it to you, anyway?
I'm an only child and I'm in no danger of losing my inheritance.
See All Answers