jim_jimmy wrote: » know what you mean , farmers ( in many cases ) are an incredibly selfish bunch , not only are they completely and utterly focused on the farm , they force their kids ( usually sons ) to devote a large amount of time to the farm , a very sizeable number of farmers sons were forced to become farmers themselves
messy tessy wrote: » I think if you have grown up on a farm you can't be under any illusions of the time and sheer effort running a farm takes.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Are you sure about that? I'd be interested to know where you found that out! Honestly.
tomwaterford wrote: » http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/livein-partners-have-rights-new-court-ruling-says-26304026.html Common law marraige
Spanish Eyes wrote: » I think that had more to do with non marital children than anything else. Not having a go, but realistically, if co habitants could get the same benefits as a married person, in all honesty, why would anyone marry?
Consuelano wrote: » I read an article in the Journal containing stories from people whose families were torn apart due to wills and inheritances and I found it fascinating. [Can't post link] I'm lucky in that both my parents are still alive and well, and AFAIK everything is to be divided equally between myself and my sibling, so there shouldn't really be a problem. Yet, the amount of stories I heard from friends and colleagues down through the years of huge falling-outs is staggering and in some ways frightening. Is it a uniquely Irish thing, or is it the greedy part of human nature coming out? I think most people have a story or two that they've experienced, witnessed or heard. So people of AH, where there's a will, is there a way?
Joeytheparrot wrote: » http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/problems_in_marriages_and_other_relationships/redress_scheme_for_cohabiting_couples.html
bubblypop wrote: » I think it's shocking that people assume they are getting everything their parents leave behind. In fact, a lot of people don't just assume, they think they are entitled to it!!! It's your parents money, no one else is entitled to it. I hope my mam spends every single penny on herself before she dies & doesn't leave anything. I'll gladly pay for her funeral. It's her money/ Assets, she earned them, she should enjoy them.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » A lot of farms have been passed on to the under 35s to benefit from the Stamp Duty and Gift tax things, along with a pension for the Dad. I know there are rules and regs, but many have done it. And those who haven't are mad IMO.
foxy farmer wrote: » The fighting that can go on between father and son in these cases can be brutal. Old fella says son is doing something wrong and all hell breaks loose. I see it on a regular basis with one crowd. Father pushing 70 son around 40 having a full blown fuking match over something trivial. Hanging a gate or planning a building job. 9 times out of 10 father is right but son can't stand his idea being shot down. Embarrassing to see it tbh.
josip wrote: » Valid point, but in the case of farms, very often farmers use their sons and daughters as a cheap form of labour to keep it running. It's only reasonable to expect something in return for doing all that.
LexieOnRale wrote: » Can't understand how people can tear each other asunder over something so stupid like land or money. I have one sibling, been through this twice. Land/property/machinery etc. Myself and my sibling would kill each other, but we do take care of each other too. There's been no issue with anything there, we are literally all we have left. We've lost everyone else and I'm sure both of us would give it all up for our family back. I can't understand how people, right after losing one person, would be happy to lose more over stupid stuff.
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Two words... "The Field". Not saying that happened for you or your sib, but it rem ains true for many.
bubblypop wrote: » Yea, but its up to the sons or daughters to decide if they want to work the farm ( obviously I'm talking about when they are grown up, not dependants) So, if they are working for the parents, the wages/ Compensation should be decided well before a parent dies. I understand people wanting to keep the family farm in the family, but as regards just inheritance, no one should feel entitled to their parents assets, IMO.
bubblypop wrote: » Yea, but its up to the sons or daughters to decide if they want to work the farm ( obviously I'm talking about when they are grown up, not dependants)
Spanish Eyes wrote: » There is a lot to be said for veteran farmers passing on their knowledge and so on. That is ok if done in a good way. What about if is done in a not so nice way? I have seen it. Anyway, things are very different now "Down on the Farm" aren't they? Maybe the old timers or previous owners cannot get their heads around that? Understandable really, but what can the current owner do, with all that old time stuff in their face? I have seen this. So do not give out to me please!
Chain Smoker wrote: » A farm isn't really an asset like a house or a car or something, it can be a person's whole livelihood. If you don't understand that much you shouldn't really be talking about the matter tbh. If the parents decided they were going to be a farmer (either intentionally or through not developing any kind of proper plan and availing of the free labour), that child is plenty entitled to something. As for making a choice as an adult, if one of the parents is unwell, that child is gonna be expected to step in and keep things running temporarily. They've already invested years into the thing too, that's gonna sway your decision making process a lot.
josip wrote: » Where I grew up, most of the farmers sons were contributing from the age of 7. Bring the cows out from milking on the way to school, blocking roads when moving cattle, marking dipped sheep, ... By the time they were no longer legally dependents (18), most local farmers had gotten 10 good years of work out of their sons and sometimes daughters. Often farm work took priority over school homework. Some of the luckier ones had tough mothers who wouldn't tolerate that. But I've often heard farmers sons explain that they hadn't homework done because the silage had to be cut or it was lambing season. .
bubblypop wrote: » No, if the parent is a farmer, then the parent is a farmer. If a child wants to be a farmer also, and works the land as an adult, then the should take a wage and/ or be the recipient of the farm. Otherwise, no child is entitled to their parents money / assets.
Chain Smoker wrote: » So if your dad was a farmer, and got cancer, before assuming responsibility for the farm while he undergoes treatment, you'll negotiate wages/etc? Obviously you should do that (and some do, usually when there's a clear heir to the throne and/or everyone is able to deal with the fact that he may not be returning to the farm), but there's a pretty good chance everyone'll be swept up in the chaos of the moment. It's pretty easy to say "here's what they should do" when you've no grasp of how big of a role the whole thing takes in everyone's lives and the kinds of societal pressure involved.
Water John wrote: » Ah Spanish Eyes, they were very soft on ye, where ever you were reared. I know the other side, too well.