Division of property
May 23, 2024 8:26 AM Subscribe
How to batch personal property when dividing an estate?
5 siblings will meet this weekend to engage in a “round robin” and choose items from our parents’ estate. For collections such as valuable china, or scrapbooks, is there a good guideline for whether and *how* to treat it so that one person is not getting disproportionate value? Maybe skip their next 2 turns? I tried to find an answer online, but hits were in context of auctions (in the discretion of the auctioneer). The executor is a sibling.
5 siblings will meet this weekend to engage in a “round robin” and choose items from our parents’ estate. For collections such as valuable china, or scrapbooks, is there a good guideline for whether and *how* to treat it so that one person is not getting disproportionate value? Maybe skip their next 2 turns? I tried to find an answer online, but hits were in context of auctions (in the discretion of the auctioneer). The executor is a sibling.
The way my siblings and I did it was to treat the round robin as more of a guideline than a hard and fast process, and just negotiate like reasonable adults. In fact there was very little conflict because the three of us ended up not desiring the same things; we each took a few items of particular personal importance as mementos but most of it went to the auction house.
As for dividing the real estate: my sister wanted to keep the beach block (which used to have a house on it before Ash Wednesday) so we had that valued; the family house was sold, then we added what we got for that to the valuation for the bush block and split the result three ways, with my sister taking the beach block as part of her third.
Obviously this kind of approach only works if none of the siblings are assholes.
posted by flabdablet at 8:44 AM on May 23 [2 favorites]
As for dividing the real estate: my sister wanted to keep the beach block (which used to have a house on it before Ash Wednesday) so we had that valued; the family house was sold, then we added what we got for that to the valuation for the bush block and split the result three ways, with my sister taking the beach block as part of her third.
Obviously this kind of approach only works if none of the siblings are assholes.
posted by flabdablet at 8:44 AM on May 23 [2 favorites]
We had fewer siblings but this is what worked for our family with an entire house of stuff to go through. There was enough stuff at different value points and a small enough group that no felt that they would get a vastly unequal share because they went later. Also, the understanding was that this was all for personal use and not to be converted into cash. Cash got distributed evenly and we did a later sale of everything that wasn't wanted by a family member. (So much stuff!!!)
1. Each person got a set a post-its in a distinctive color. Everyone went around the house and put a post-it on anything that they wanted.
2. Anything with just one post-it went to that person with no further discussion.
3. Anything with multiple post-its got put together in one place. (Actually there were a couple of piles but all of the most desirable stuff put all together in one room so you can see your choices.
4. Looking at what you got in step 2 and who else wanted it, you could remove your post-it from anything that you didn't care about that much, often leaving just one post-it so it would go to that person.
5. We drew cards to set the order of selection. With a larger group you should go 1-2-3-4-5-5-4-3-2-1 so the person who gets the first pick the first time gets last pick the second time.
6. Most collections got split up - if that doesn't make sense, you need to make a clear at the start that it is all one pick. Once someone picked the first time from a collection or set, then everyone else would take their turns within that set. So if person #3 picks a one of grandma's handmade quilts then every one gets a turn to a pick a quilt before you go on. We then reset the order (ie going back to #4 's turn). Or you could just make each item in the collection its own freestanding choice but we found it cognitively easier to just focus on the collection choices and then move on.
7. After people separated out their piles and started to figure out how to get it all home, there was a bit of swapping or opting out of taking something that they had picked. (Did I say, there was SO much stuff!)
7. After the first round, if you didn't get what you wanted, you needed to remind yourself that you could have picked it earlier but didn't because you wanted something else more. If you wanted something with lower financial value but higher emotional value, that's what you picked. We had enough items at comparable levels of value that it didn't make sense to do give someone a penalty for making a more "valuable" choice.
posted by metahawk at 5:04 PM on May 23 [1 favorite]
1. Each person got a set a post-its in a distinctive color. Everyone went around the house and put a post-it on anything that they wanted.
2. Anything with just one post-it went to that person with no further discussion.
3. Anything with multiple post-its got put together in one place. (Actually there were a couple of piles but all of the most desirable stuff put all together in one room so you can see your choices.
4. Looking at what you got in step 2 and who else wanted it, you could remove your post-it from anything that you didn't care about that much, often leaving just one post-it so it would go to that person.
5. We drew cards to set the order of selection. With a larger group you should go 1-2-3-4-5-5-4-3-2-1 so the person who gets the first pick the first time gets last pick the second time.
6. Most collections got split up - if that doesn't make sense, you need to make a clear at the start that it is all one pick. Once someone picked the first time from a collection or set, then everyone else would take their turns within that set. So if person #3 picks a one of grandma's handmade quilts then every one gets a turn to a pick a quilt before you go on. We then reset the order (ie going back to #4 's turn). Or you could just make each item in the collection its own freestanding choice but we found it cognitively easier to just focus on the collection choices and then move on.
7. After people separated out their piles and started to figure out how to get it all home, there was a bit of swapping or opting out of taking something that they had picked. (Did I say, there was SO much stuff!)
7. After the first round, if you didn't get what you wanted, you needed to remind yourself that you could have picked it earlier but didn't because you wanted something else more. If you wanted something with lower financial value but higher emotional value, that's what you picked. We had enough items at comparable levels of value that it didn't make sense to do give someone a penalty for making a more "valuable" choice.
posted by metahawk at 5:04 PM on May 23 [1 favorite]
I'm not sure how to search for this, but if I recall correctly, someone on here once shared a way they did this over time that could still work well for an in-person division-of-assets event. Basically they did it by dot-voting: Each person in the family got a set of dot stickers in their own color. If you were interested in potentially inheriting an item, you would put a dot on the bottom of it. When the time came for division of assets, each item would be turned over and they'd look at the dots on it. When more than one person had placed dots under an item, they would have a brief discussion about the item and decide who would receive it. You could also add a feature of dot-voting that's commonly used, where everyone gets a certain amount of (or maybe unlimited) smaller dots, but only a few large dots, to be used on items you really want.
In this situation, I imagine that you could track this with a list of all the items each person won (no competing dots) and a list of items with disputed disposition (multiple dots on the bottom). (This also would help the executor with record-keeping.) And for disputed items, the discussion could include some trade-offs between high-value items. E.g., maybe 3 people put a dot on the china set, so you look at how much stuff each of those people has already won, and perhaps the person who won the lowest combined value of other items gets the china set. Or maybe the person who is most likely to actually use the item gets it (though I know one family where that approach led to some resentment, since then the siblings with kids, for instance, got more of the high-value nostalgic items from childhood).
Another way to prevent or resolve disputes: Some items could potentially have joint ownership. When my sibling and I divided physical assets, we created a shared "tool library," for instance, that either of us could take items from if we needed them over time, if we let the other know. My sibling has bit by bit taken a fair amount of those items home, because they had a use for them more immediately than I did (and it was easier for them to bring them home since they live closer to the storage space). At this point, I'm not particularly worried about most of it, as time has reduced the immediacy of my attachment to a lot of it. So that's a way to defer or avoid some decisions.
posted by limeonaire at 6:18 PM on May 23
In this situation, I imagine that you could track this with a list of all the items each person won (no competing dots) and a list of items with disputed disposition (multiple dots on the bottom). (This also would help the executor with record-keeping.) And for disputed items, the discussion could include some trade-offs between high-value items. E.g., maybe 3 people put a dot on the china set, so you look at how much stuff each of those people has already won, and perhaps the person who won the lowest combined value of other items gets the china set. Or maybe the person who is most likely to actually use the item gets it (though I know one family where that approach led to some resentment, since then the siblings with kids, for instance, got more of the high-value nostalgic items from childhood).
Another way to prevent or resolve disputes: Some items could potentially have joint ownership. When my sibling and I divided physical assets, we created a shared "tool library," for instance, that either of us could take items from if we needed them over time, if we let the other know. My sibling has bit by bit taken a fair amount of those items home, because they had a use for them more immediately than I did (and it was easier for them to bring them home since they live closer to the storage space). At this point, I'm not particularly worried about most of it, as time has reduced the immediacy of my attachment to a lot of it. So that's a way to defer or avoid some decisions.
posted by limeonaire at 6:18 PM on May 23
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by Mid at 8:34 AM on May 23 [1 favorite]