Wealthy Guy Faces Moral Dilemma When His Friend Left Him A $1.8 Million Home While His Estranged Children Were Given Token Inheritance From His $10 Million Estate

"Contact his kids and find out why they cut contact."

Chelsi

• Published in Interesting
• July 8, 2024

A 33-year-old was plagued by a moral dilemma when his 67-year-old friend passed away and left him a $1.8 million home. His friend's youngest daughter was given a trust, but her older siblings were only left with token bequeathments.

OP, his dad, and some of their mutual friends were the trustees of their late friend's estate. OP was shocked he was given such an important role in his friend's estate when, while they were good acquaintances, their relationship didn't go past beyond common hobbies and casual conversations.

He thought his earthly possessions would split among his second wife and his three children. His friend's $10 million worth of assets, held in a trust, were endowed to his wife and youngest daughter.

In comparison, his two eldest children both in their 30s were not given an equitable share of their father's estate. They refused to acknowledge the validity of their father's iron-clad will.

Based on the little information OP pieced together throughout the years, his friend was estranged from his eldest children. The relationship started deteriorating after his first wife's death.

OP never met his friend's oldest kids. They have not visited him even once at his retirement home in Thailand, nor did they meet him or OP when they vacationed in the US.

OP knew his friend's children were not financially stable.

In his culture, it was unthinkable to accept a bequeathment this valuable from a friend when their biological relations were passed over.

His friend's wife and youngest daughter left the decision up to OP. He could either sell the house or put it up for rent.

Decline it outright, or he could accept it, sell the property, and donate the proceeds to charitable organizations his friend supported.

The law firm OP consulted said his friend's will would hold up in court should his children decide to contest it. But morally, should OP honor his friend's final wish and accept the house?

OP also asked if his friend's distribution of his assets was a typical occurrence. He didn't attend the reading of the will as he didn't expect to receive anything from him apart from some history books or model collections.

OP said his friend's decision was morally questionable, but his will, should it be contested, was indisputable.

OP admitted in another comment that should he accept the Austin house, it would be the 5th property in his real estate portfolio.

When he wrote his post, all he knew of his friend's relationship with his children was meager.

He belied some assumptions made by Redditors that his friend abandoned his minor children to pursue an affair with his second wife.

OP's dad, who was his late friend's colleague, told him his relationship with his second wife started when he was already a widow. His oldest children were of age by then.

Although his friend was 15 years older than his second wife, she was not a gold-digger who married an old man for his money.

All his friend said was that he and his children had political and lifestyle differences.

He didn't think his friend was a homophobe because he treated their LGBTQ friends well. OP did admit his friend could have felt differently when his daughter came out.

The latest update was OP scheduled a chat with his friend's oldest children to, hopefully, gain more clarity.

The commenters hoped that OP's conversation with his late friend's children could help him arrive at a decision he could be at peace with. He thanked them for their insight but said he had not decided what to do about the house.

OP did say he found it reprehensible that they did not visit their dad on his deathbed despite his second wife footing all of their travel expenses. Whether that would play into OP's decision, only time will tell.

Chelsi