# In-Laws Are In Trouble...



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

Didn't really know where to put this, but here it goes...

My in-laws currently went through an arbitration meeting last week for an accident from almost 4 years ago. Best case scenario they win their asking price of $700,000 (Take home would be around $500,000 after lawyers fees). Worst case...well, squat I guess, but I couldn't see them walking away with nothing.

Here's a problem: They are completely horrible...And I mean _horrible_ with finances. They reluctantly accepted an income settlement of about $30,000 in late August last year (they were hoping to wait longer to get more money, but they were sinking fast, so had to take it) - After clearing up some small debts, fixing up the car, going on a Christmas shopping spree and lending money to family never to be seen again, they were struggling again by this past March. Yes, you read that right; $30,000 in 6 months...GONE. Mother-in-law said it should last them "at least a year" after the cheque was in their hands.

That gives you a small inkling of how responsible they are with money. 

They rent and always have rented. They declared bankruptcy about 7 years ago and continuously max out a small line of credit and credit card they have access to. They don't pay bills fully and constantly get behind on their car payments. The only reason they are not on the street is because they keep getting bailed out by family members (they never pay them back). My father-in-law is the only income earner, bringing home about $24,000/year. My mother-in-law was working home day care, but can not care full-time for infants any more due to an injury she sustained in the accident. We've encouraged her to take older children, but refuses as she "prefers babies and toddlers" - But we know she's holding out until after the lawsuit is over with, playing the pity card.

My husband and I have sat back and watched them create and live with their own struggles financially. We used to loan them money (we'd always get paid back, I think they felt bad about borrowing from their own children), but we stopped doing that after we saw it wasn't teaching them anything. They KNOW how to budget, but they have no will power. 

I am good with finances, so they ask me advice from time to time. However, I don't know what to tell them if they win any amount of money in this settlement. They are 57 & 54 years old. They can't invest with much risk because this is the most money they will ever have at once in their life...And they need ever penny to have a chance at even a modestly stable retirement. They already have plans to buy new furnishings and take a trip overseas (again, an example of just how smart they are with money). The only wise thing they've suggested they might do is pay off their debts, car and buy a house. (We live in an area where $200,000 can buy you a decent home, so that's doable). They need to seek an adviser, but I don't know if they will.

What advice should we give them? Solicited or not, we feel we HAVE to say something if they want to handle this all on their own. Also, out of the blue, they asked me to consider being their Power of Attorney. So what do you think? What if they win $100,000? Or what if they get more? We are just tired of seeing the people we love constantly shoot themselves in the foot! Advice?


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

Two words: structured settlement. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structured_settlement


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

MoneyGal said:


> Two words: structured settlement.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structured_settlement


This is what we are hoping for...And exactly what they DO NOT want. However, I have heard this is how a lot of insurance companies payout, so I wonder if they will even have a choice in the matter? If that is the case, they would likely have to get a mortgage if they chose to purchase a home. They would have a sizable down payment, but because of their income it would probably not be enough to get approved for much of anything right away. Home purchase, to me, is the wisest investment as at least they wouldn't have pay rent any more.

I will encourage a structured settlement, but they really just want everything over with...Not just for some financial stability, but also mentally, which I can understand.


----------



## Oldroe (Sep 18, 2009)

They sound just like my oldest sister and husband. Likely by the time they ask for help it will be to late.

Just Love them but you and I know what will happen in 24-30 months.

I see a family vacation for everybody (likely Los Vegas) a few new cars and you know.

Think I would take everything I could get then give it back to them when they go broke again.


----------



## MRT (Apr 8, 2013)

MoneyGal said:


> Two words: structured settlement.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structured_settlement


it sounds like that would be the ideal option, for sure.

Daytek, any chance you will have some direct influence on what they do, if they are awarded a lump sum? Paying cash for a home would be great, if that is possible.

If the sum proves to be significant, could you perhaps 'gently coerce' them into buying a fixed term or life annuity? Coupled with whatever other income they have (employment or CPP/OAS/?), they may even qualify for a small mortgage.

Perhaps other CMFers could comment on that option. I don't have any experience or in-depth knowledge about annuities to know if they are a good choice from an 'investment' standpoint. 

From a practical standpoint, it would be one way to get a lump sum out of their hands, and provide them with a steady income stream.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

^^^

They want to be able to pay cash for a home, which I hope they will be able to do. 

Thank you for suggesting an idea of a life annuity - I did not consider that. However, as you said, more comments on that particular option would be appreciated from those who have knowledge about it. 

The trouble is everything varies depending on the sum of settlement they get. If they are awarded say $100,000, that becomes more complicated - They would have to pay off their car as payments are ridiculous ($600/month) through the no-credit finance company they went through. After that they have intention to pay back at least _some _ of the money family lent to them, plus any other debts. So after all those repayments, they'd only have $50,000 left; They might see it as pointless to invest the money and just buy new furnishings and live off the rest.

The problem really is that my Mother-in-law will not work until this thing is over. If they had some sort of an income coming from her end, they would at least be able to stay somewhat afloat. They also feel entitled to this 'reward' after "struggling their whole lives." They have practical plans with it, yes, but for the most part the money is already spent before they know how much they are even getting.

Considering they trust and respect me enough to ask me to be their POA, I'd say I do have somewhat of an influence on what they do. But all it is is an influence - Their will power needs to override their pride if they are going to handle this outcome wisely. My husband and I are trying to accept the fact that either 1) They will have learned from blowing the income settlement they received last year and do this differently or 2) History will repeat itself. 

I love my in-laws with all my heart, but when it comes to finances there are some days I just wanna shake them! :|


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

It is important to understand that a structured settlement and a life annuity are quite different things. A structured settlement provides the full payout of a negotiated (offered/accepted) settlement over time in a tax-advantaged manner for the recipients. It is not necessarily lifetime income, but can be structured as lifetime income. The structured settlement payments are based on the size of the settlement and the number of years over which the funds are paid out. 

An annuity, by contrast, is a product sold by an insurance company and is typically a source of lifetime income. The life annuity payments are based on actuarial tables. 

If the settlement is not structured (and if there has been no movement towards a structured settlement at what sounds like a very late stage in the game, it is very unlikely that there will be a structured offer at this point), the recipients can buy their own life annuity with the proceeds. 

However, it is important to understand that this is distinct from a structured settlement - they would be creating their own stream of income over time (based on factors specific to their expected life span), vs. accepting an offer of income over time based on slightly different factors (the total amount of settlement, desired number of payout years, and interest rate for discounting to present value). 

Structured settlements originated in Canada. I wish I had a better link to use than the Wikipedia link, which focuses on the U.S. There are a couple of people here at CMF who can opine knowledgeably on life annuity pricing.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I believe a structured settlement is almost identical to an annuity, with the main difference being that the annuity will be taxable to the recipient (prescribed taxable income of each annuity payment is) whereas the structured settlement will be tax free. The structured settlement annuity must be made within the court order of the settlement. If made afterwards, the tax free aspect will be lost forever.


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

In practice they can be very similar, but in design they can be quite different.


----------



## Oldroe (Sep 18, 2009)

If there is any cash value your in laws will get behind and cash no matter what the consequence. They did it there whole life so nothing will change.

Good Luck


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

When I did my insurance settlement in 1997 I took enough lump sump of my settlement to get us out of debt and the insurance company paid me monthly until 2007 when they approached me to do a lump sum payout .We did that payout and it took about a year for CRA to give me the paperwork and ruling that my lump sum was also tax free.Wage loss was one settled amount , medical was another and the pain and suffering was the later.I was severely disabled in my car accident and I was a passenger ,with many surgeries and therapy I can now manage to stand from my wheelchair take the 3-4 steps require to walk into my shower and sit and shower myself.I spend on average $36,000 a year on Personal Support workers so basically I take what I need for my care from my insurance settlement and roughly $1000 a month as income for myself.When I could get 7% for 5 year GIC I invested everything in GIC over the years I did have a couple 8% but the last few years with low interest rates is the reason I became so involved in learning about investing.Unless this person is missing limbs I dont think she will get anywhere near $700,000.For pain and suffering I got a total of $224,000 but my home care and wage loss was our main concern back then not going on trips .I have Millions literally and I still worry about my future because of this $36,000 a year expense for my care.If something happened to my husband my care would probably triple overnight as he does so much for me now.


----------



## Four Pillars (Apr 5, 2009)

Marina, you should write a book (if you are so inclined). Dealing with the accident, handling the settlement, creating your own job and being incredibly successful at it, is a great and inspiring story. I'm always inspired when I read posts like the one you just did.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

Four Pillers maybe one day I will do this and I made a couple attempts a few times but they became more personal as I wrote them when I was doing the recovery part of my accident.And many of my competition I have met at conferences over the years said same thing but I think they would be looking for a how to book and I don`t plan to share these things !My husband and I are working on something together but it is for people like ourselves dealing with travel and accessibility issues.We are looking for the right property in Florida for Short term rental to turn into a proper Wheelchair accessible home.Some people assume if the wheelchair gets in the front door it is wheelchair accessible with no thought about Personal care aspects.
There is so much you need to know when considering settling an insurance claim and our first thing was eliminate debt and monthly expenses.The debt was direct result of the accident as we spent $78,000 in legal fees ,to this day family members has no idea what we got because many people would view it as a lottery win.There have been times in beginning we were tempted to take additional funds from the investments to go on a trip etc but we had to pretend that money did not exist and even now that money is completely separate from our other assets and we get 1 payment a month from it and it is used for my PSW staff.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

Thanks for all the responses.

Wow, Marina. Incredible how you have handled your situation! Did you seek a financial adviser during the settlement process?

I believe the $30,000 my in-laws received last year was a either a wage-loss or medical expense payout. So now they're in the stage of suing for either one of those plus pain & suffering. My mother-in-law was the passenger and she hurt her left arm badly. She's went through several surgeries, plus physiotherapy, but the pain has not left since the accident. She's had some doctors tell her she can't work and some tell her she can. The insurance company was paying for physio, but stopped sending her cheques after one of their doctors told her "she was fine". She was a home daycare provider for 20+ years. She stopped working after the accident to recover from the surgeries, but didn't start again because of the pain and weakness in her arm; And if she couldn't care for babies/toddlers, she didn't bother considering caring for older children. She has anxiety issues and won't do a job outside of a home environment. 

I believe pain and suffering will be their largest reward in the settlement. However, because she can still take care of herself and do things, that's probably all they'll be getting out of it. She was raked through the coals by the opposing insurance lawyer during the arbitration, which has pulled them back to the reality that this is not a 'cut-and-dry' lawsuit...Something they've skewed themselves into believing for a long time. Before the meeting, they were optimistic that this would be it and the cheque would be in their hands before the end of the month (which they needed badly financially as they are completely maxed out and just borrowed from family to pay back 6 months worth of car payments they were behind on). After the meeting, they realized that the defending party is probably _not_ going down without a fight.

Our hope is that this does end soon. If it doesn't, we will have to once again encourage my mother-in-law to take on older children for daycare. If she doesn't, borrowing from family will be their only option. They are already really down about Christmas this year - Every other year, something has bailed them out (they used their settlement last year, the year before they got a $10,000 inheritance, and the year before that the were receiving insurance payments). They are Christmas junkies and hate not being able to give anything, so maybe that will be the catalyst needed for my mom-in-law to give up the greed and do what's needed to be done.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

DayTek said:


> Thanks for all the responses.
> 
> Wow, Marina. Incredible how you have handled your situation! Did you seek a financial adviser during the settlement process?
> 
> ...


At time of my settlement discussions we used CIBC and Canada Trust so we got advise from both ,remember at that time GIC paid much higher than today so both had similar advise to have a laddered GIC so every year my expenses became liquid and rest were invested in Mutual funds at branch level .Honestly even with the high fees they were good investments .I really knew very little about self investing back then so we did 100% through our branch.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

Marina... your case is rare.

Many auto insurance claims in Ontario are made by dishonest people. These people would take their million dollar settlement, then try to use OHIP free health care with the public. When they are asked by their health care professional if they have any resource for their physio or medication, they almost always say no. They treat their settlement as a jackpot for retirement. They do not see it as an advanced payment for all the treatments that are required in the future. Instead of deploying their settlement money, they clogged up the public health care system such as CCAC and "free" physio http://www.collegept.org/OHIPLocations


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

Insurance companies sometime factor in the 'free' services when they give a settlement too.


----------



## alingva (Aug 17, 2013)

bankruptcy... but they will not accept it until they have to declare it


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

*Update*

Just an update on the situation:

It's been 3 weeks and my in-laws have gained no news from their lawyer. It could be weeks, months or even years depending on how much the defending party is willing to fight.

Last week, they sought the advice of a credit counselor; They advised my in-laws to not declare bankruptcy again, as any settlement they win could be taken away if they did that (I'm not really sure how that works), so they are not filing bankruptcy. When they miss their next car payment, their car will be taken from them and their cable, phone and internet are being cut-off tomorrow. After reviewing their budget, the counselor advised downsizing where they rent so these things won't happen (they live in a 3 bedroom semi with a finished basement and are empty-nesters), but my in-laws refuse that option - They won't settle for an apartment or geared-to-income living. So the credit counselor basically told them to lay low and don't answer any phone calls. They are going to try to get all or some of my Father-in-law's RRSP's through work early so they can buy a cheap car when theirs gets taken away. My Mother-in-law still won't work for fear it will mess with the sum of the settlement.

So that's the gist of it all right now. They are tapped out for family help. This will be the first time in their lives without someone bailing them out. But they've seemed to accept the situation they've put themselves in; They realize the sacrifices they are making. And as long as they don't complain about it, I'm fine with that. It saddens me to see them without and I hope there is a resolution to this lawsuit soon.


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

Bankruptcy involves your creditors taking less than they are owed. Creditors feel that if the debtors come into money shortly after a bankruptcy agreement is entered into (and before it is fully discharged), those assets should be distributed to the creditors. 

This isn't a very nice update to read; I hope that your in-laws make peace with their situation.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

I second marina should write a book!A internet/website barroness,a pro card player in wsop,controlling rentals in multiple areas and in a wheel-chair(never mind that your husbands owns a 40 employee hvac business)You have sure overcome your struggles marina.It is almost like a ''fantasy'' novel.srry don't want to take away from the seriousness of the op's post.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

DayTek said:


> After reviewing their budget, the counselor advised downsizing where they rent so these things won't happen (they live in a 3 bedroom semi with a finished basement and are empty-nesters), but my in-laws refuse that option - They *won't settle for an apartment* or geared-to-income living. So the credit counselor basically told them to lay low and don't answer any phone calls. They are going to try to get all or some of my Father-in-law's RRSP's through work early so they can buy a cheap car when theirs gets taken away. My Mother-in-law still *won't work* for fear it will mess with the sum of the settlement.


Honestly, I have no sympathy for you in-laws.

They cannot afford their current 3 BR home but refuse to move to a smaller rental. They want to maintain their luxurious lifestyle.
Your MIL can work but claim disability instead. She refuse to work for fear that her settlement for disability will be lost.

Exactly what are you here for? In my opinion, it is hard for any hardworking income-producing person to agree with their manipulative tactics for $$$. :greedy_dollars::greedy_dollars::greedy_dollars:


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Is there some way to put the money into a trust so they can have the income but not touch the principal?


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

MoreMiles said:


> Honestly, I have no sympathy for you in-laws.
> 
> They cannot afford their current 3 BR home but refuse to move to a smaller rental. They want to maintain their luxurious lifestyle.
> Your MIL can work but claim disability instead. She refuse to work for fear that her settlement for disability will be lost.
> ...


I definitely don't agree with how they have chosen to handle their situation. I've never agreed with how they handle their finances, either. But on rare occasion, sometimes a situation produces a wake-up call. It's my hope that when they loose their car and have utilities taken away, that maybe it will open their eyes to what poor money management can lead to. 

I truly love these people. They are not bad people, the just make bad decisions when it comes to money. My Mother-in-law has low self-esteem and anxiety issues and has chosen to tell herself (and others) that she can not work so she doesn't have to feel guilty about not working. They have never been forced to give up anything because a hand-out has always been there. They don't _like_ borrowing from family, but they are so accustomed to it that it is not considered a last resort; Where my husband and I would _never_ turn to family because after you choose to live independently, part of that is managing your money independently as well...If that means selling the house or the car or working more hours, that's what you do.

Trust me, I've had to let go of a lot built-up judgement over the last 4 years. At the end of the day, it's their life and their money. My husband and I have agreed that only when they start complaining about going without that we will then solicit advice. 

I can't see them walking away from this thing empty-handed and they have sought my advice before; And considering they asked me to be POA, they obviously trust me. So I want to be able to give them the best advice I can. Whether they follow any of that advice is another story.



Rusty O'Toole said:


> Is there some way to put the money into a trust so they can have the income but not touch the principal?


That would be a good suggestion. I'd like more details on how that would work.


----------



## Janus (Oct 23, 2013)

MoreMiles said:


> Honestly, I have no sympathy for you in-laws.
> 
> They cannot afford their current 3 BR home but refuse to move to a smaller rental. They want to maintain their luxurious lifestyle.
> Your MIL can work but claim disability instead. She refuse to work for fear that her settlement for disability will be lost.
> ...


Hear hear - I fully agree. If they refuse to downgrade their place in spite of all these problems, I think they're a lost cause.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

donald said:


> I second marina should write a book!A internet/website barroness,a pro card player in wsop,controlling rentals in multiple areas and in a wheel-chair(never mind that your husbands owns a 40 employee hvac business)You have sure overcome your struggles marina.It is almost like a ''fantasy'' novel.srry don't want to take away from the seriousness of the op's post.


Donald my husband has no ownership of that business he got out 5 years ago ,he works 1 day a week to keep benefits,his brothers own it.My husband and his brothers made the business today out of nothing but the 4 of them and lots of hard work for many years.My husband was a installer when my accident happened and you have no idea how much he struggled to keep up at work , take care of my needs and read just his life.I play WSOP EVERY year and if you love poker it is one of these things you should so once in your life.Definitely not a PRO but if I had the time and my health I know I could make a good run for it .I was offered a sponsorship at one of the online rooms based on my skill level ,I have Super Nova status at PokerStars think that says enough about my poker abilities.
We live in Ontario and have a house and cottage here , house and cottage in Newfoundland ,rentals in Ontario now Florida and Georgia.I am smart with my money ,took a bad situation that 90% probably would not survive and have built something for myself and my family that I am proud of .Not sure what sort of fantasies you have but I wish I could trade the body I have today for the one I had 20 years ago.
Back to the OP I think the In Laws will be in trouble either way this goes ,even if the insurance shows up with wheelbarrow of cash tomorrow morning.


----------



## Woz (Sep 5, 2013)

A trust sounds like a good way to go.

However, if you think it's likely they'll still end up in bankruptcy in the future, you might want to consider putting some of the money in their RRSP. RRSP contributions made more than 12 months prior to bankruptcy are exempt from seizure. That way you can protect at least some form of retirement for them.


----------



## MoreMiles (Apr 20, 2011)

DayTek said:


> I definitely don't agree with how they have chosen to handle their situation. I've never agreed with how they handle their finances, either. But on rare occasion, sometimes a situation produces a wake-up call. It's my hope that when they loose their car and have utilities taken away, that maybe it will open their eyes to what poor money management can lead to.
> 
> I truly love these people. They are not bad people, the just make bad decisions when it comes to money. My Mother-in-law has low self-esteem and anxiety issues and has chosen to tell herself (and others) that she can not work so she doesn't have to feel guilty about not working. They have never been forced to give up anything because a hand-out has always been there. They don't _like_ borrowing from family, but they are so accustomed to it that it is not considered a last resort; Where my husband and I would _never_ turn to family because after you choose to live independently, part of that is managing your money independently as well...If that means selling the house or the car or working more hours, that's what you do.
> 
> ...


You are right. I admit that my reaction was too harsh. That was my initial reaction for in-law issues. I had a similar experience. From my own experience, I have learnt to do only our best to help without jeopardizing own mental wellness. Some in-laws want you to feel guilty and therefore transfer their emotional struggle to you.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Your journey is beyond amazing is all marina,I have a close friend who is also in a wheel-chair and he is happy i believe now but he had a dark period of years(re-hab and 24 hr care,like yourself-chronic depression ect)He had a accident in a industrial setting and after 8/9 years is finally able to somewhat live independent(he lives at home with his parents,he is 36)
I honestly believe you could prob network with tony robins and the like for motivation videos and a testimony for the world at large and that type of thing,i am being serious,some of your accomplishments are beyond amazing esp because i know first hand how bloody tough of a life challenge being in a wheel chair can be from watching my own friend and his struggles.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I agree these people aren't very good at handling money but that does not make them bad people. It means they need help to organize things to their best advantage. We could all use a little help from time to time.


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

MoreMiles said:


> Honestly, I have no sympathy for you in-laws.
> 
> They cannot afford their current 3 BR home but refuse to move to a smaller rental. They want to maintain their luxurious lifestyle.
> Your MIL can work but claim disability instead. She refuse to work for fear that her settlement for disability will be lost.
> ...


Agreed!

To be honest your mother and father in law make me a little upset. From what you say, they are used to gaming the system. Declaring bankruptcy once and seeing about doing it again? Banking it all on a huge @ million dollar law suit for a hurt arm? Not a high percentage scenario there. 
It sounds like your in-laws are some of those people who expect to be taken care of by society. I have no time for those type of people in my life and my suggestion would be that you shouldn’t either. 
Now, they are your in-laws so you want to have a relationship with them if possible but I would refuse to talk to them about anything financial until you can see that they are taking responsibility for their own lives.
You shouldn’t be feeling bad for them, you should be mad as hell. Borrowing from their kids and not paying back? Offering to pay SOME back if they win the lawsuit lottery? Pretty pathetic in my opinion.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I'm not sure these people are such bad managers after all. They appear to have gotten more for less effort than anyone else, and there does not appear to be any down side for them. They have nice lives, live beyond their means, and when they run out of money somebody else bails them out. Even now we are worrying about how to get them out of trouble while they are not worried a damn bit.

The eerie thing is people like that seem to sit on their *** with their feet up on the coffee table and it never costs them. They never worry or plan or have a thought in their head that is not completely self serving yet somehow they always wind up ok.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

*Another Update*

My father-in-law is withdrawing from a pension earned from when he worked for a company years ago. They will get about $6000 or $7000 from that, which will sustain them at least until the New Year. They will use some of the money to purchase a vehicle in cash after their car gets taken away.

They met with a trustee this week. They have decided to file a consumer proposal. This will be cheaper for them and will also prevent garnishing of any money they come into, including FIL's pension, income tax refunds and any settlement winnings.

They are going to pay their bundled cable, internet and phone bill off. They plan to go without cable and a home phone, find a cheap internet provider and use their cell phones for contact.

This is probably the most effort they've made in their life to stay afloat...Responsibility to change parts of their 'wants' has been forced upon them because they've maxed out all other family members. Talking to them this week, they still can't see where they've gone wrong to end up like this. They still blame it on the accident. 

And yet, I still feel sorry for them. Why? Because of their blindness. To be so utterly and completely blind to their own mistakes and money mismanagement. To completely fail in seeing their own ignorance. And to carry such passionate greed for a chunk of money that may not even meet their expectations in the end. How terribly, terribly sad it must be to think and feel that way...And to be a slave to your finances instead of an owner. I'm in banking and see it all the time - It's so much more difficult when it's your own family 

Some of you may think they are taking a free ride. To me, seeing their stress and constant worry surrounding money, there is no freedom in that.

As I said before, they are _not_ bad people. They are practically my second parents! And I've known them that way half my life. Heck, I talk more to my mother-in-law than I do my own mother! We get together for supper once a week. We play cards, go on outings. They are the type of people that would give the shirt off their backs for friends or family members - Even, unfortunately, when they haven't a shirt to give. I'm very close with them...But so, SO opposite when it comes to our views of money. And if/when this settlement is complete, we will likely be the only voice of reason speaking up.


----------



## wendi1 (Oct 2, 2013)

So sorry you are going through this, Daytek. 

For the sake of yourself and the rest of your family, I hope you don't plan on "helping" these folks with money. Nice as they are, they can ruin your life along with theirs if you are not careful. Feed them if you have to, but don't cover their debts, cosign loans, or give them pocket money.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

They are not sad. They are doing fine. They don't feel the slightest guilt, remorse or regret. You are the one that is stewing.

I'm saying they are right. They are good managers. They manage to get more out of life than you and I do. I have relatives like that and they always have a nicer house, car, newer appliances, better vacations, more fun, better everything than I do.

Once in a while they get in trouble and go around looking for a hand out (they don't get it from me, although they got plenty in the past) and they always seem to bob up again as fresh as a daisy.


----------



## argyle (Nov 12, 2013)

This is something that should be discussed with your MIL's lawyers. Your in laws can identify who you are to them and then let you say your concerns. You might even be able to take part in a meeting with the lawyers so they can understand the situation better. With a prospective settlement in that range, there's probably a big chunk for attendant care or future care costs. That money should probably actually be saved for those purposes.

P.S. Something to explore is a "Henson Trust".

P.P.S. Defence lawyers and insurance adjusters read forums too. Be careful what you write.


----------



## fraser (May 15, 2010)

I am with Rusty O'Toole. 

The best thing that you can do is empathize with them but keep your hands out of your pocket. Don't let them project their self inflicted issues onto you financial well being.

I have a SIL like that. It is always poor me. She is facing retirement with absolutely no savings, no pension, no built up equity. She has run out of time. But it never stopped her from spending, from owning two cars, from buying a new home, etc. She is always concerned about what people will think of her if she lived in a smaller house, an apartment, whatever. 

When you get on with your life, being so lazy that you let things 'happen to you' instead of being proactive, and not planning for the future then there is little question about what you retirement life will be. It is called GIS.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

*Update*

Well, it's been over 6 months since the arbitration meeting and still no end to the lawsuit in sight. The last thing their lawyer contacted them for was an income statement from my MIL from the past 3 years (she hasn't had any income as she stopped working shortly after the accident). This was requested by the opposing lawyers recently. I could see this thing dragging out well into next year (that will be 5 years since this all started).

They bought a cheap car with cash from my FIL's small pension they took out in December. They still aren't saving anything, but are at least breaking even now every month. They have not asked us for money since, so that's been somewhat relieving...Once their car needs a repair, we expect a phone call and then we'll have to hold our ground and decline.

The consumer proposal was completed this month - Hopefully they do not miss payments on that!

That's pretty much all there is. It would be so nice if the settlement could be done with this year.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Glad to hear your in-laws have taken the first step towards changing their spending habits.

As part of the consumer proposal, they will have to take part in 2 counseling sessions, which will be a good learning experience for them.

As part of the consumer proposal, they will have no access to credit, which is good because it keeps them from getting into trouble again.

As a note............if they miss payments on their consumer proposal it can become null and void. But.....if times get really tough and they absolutely have to........payments can be waived and added to the outstanding balance at the end. The proposal MUST be paid out in full by the 60 months deadline though, so missed payments will mean some catching up.

I just mention this..........in case they come calling for money to make the consumer proposal payments..........you should read up on them so you can help them get around a problem, should it arise...........without using your own money.

And lastly, I wouldn't stress out about money.......especially when it involves family.

Family is family..........and there is nothing more valuable, besides good health.

Money is just money............and can be replaced.

I wouldn't put my own finances in jeopardy, but have often helped out a family member and am happy to do so..........just as they have helped out us and each other over the years. A lifetime can mean a lot of lifestyle changes and problems for a large family...........and it is best when everyone pitches in to support the others.

Glad to hear things are going better.........and hope the in-laws can stay on track for awhile.


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

_"I wouldn't put my own finances in jeopardy, but have often helped out a family member and am happy to do so..........just as they have helped out us and each other over the years. A lifetime can mean a lot of lifestyle changes and problems for a large family...........and it is best when everyone pitches in to support the others."_

"Helping" a family member who is behaving irresponsibly is not helping them at all - it is enabling them. 

If the family member is in dire straights, not through making bad decisions, then that is something different. 

However, if you are "helping" someone who is in dire straights because of consistent bad decisions and they are dodging personal responsibility for it, then you are not helping them by giving them money. 

You may feel good about yourself for doing it, but you are not helping them.

It's a big lesson in life to learn this and is widely applicable to many things in life in my opinion.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

They have been through a bankruptcy about 8 years ago and know the consequences of financial irresponsibility. They know exactly how to budget, they just can't stick to it. Month after month, they would just get behind, knowing the numbers won't balance, but still spending; Then asking for help from family just before it's too late and getting bailed out in time before having to make any lifestyle changes. It was their enablers (my husband and myself included) that were just as responsible for their financial incompetence's. To them, they are the _creatures_ of their financial circumstances, not the _creators_.

We only hope their car lasts with no problems until they eventually get something out of this.


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

DayTek said:


> They have been through a bankruptcy about 8 years ago and know the consequences of financial irresponsibility. They know exactly how to budget, they just can't stick to it. Month after month, they would just get behind, knowing the numbers won't balance, but still spending; Then asking for help from family just before it's too late and getting bailed out in time before having to make any lifestyle changes. It was their enablers (my husband and myself included) that were just as responsible for their financial incompetence's. To them, they are the _creatures_ of their financial circumstances, not the _creators_.
> 
> We only hope their car lasts with no problems until they eventually get something out of this.


Exactly. Except replace "can't" with "won't". They are ultimately choosing this behaviour. 
Don't feel sorry for them, it is their decision. If anything, help them understand they are the authors of their own destiny. The real tragedy here is not financial, it is that they do not feel empowered over their own circumstances.

Good luck.


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

I agree with Longwinston. They "won't" change.

Nothing that you say will make people like your in-laws change. People who have this character trait have to "want" to change. 
Only they can change themselves. 

*Do not give them any more money.*

It may take a major event, like the bank foreclosing their home, to get them to change.
However, even that might not be enough.

If they know that they'll always have a safety net, as you've said in this other thread....



DayTek said:


> So yeah, better add an in-law suite, because the way I see it, if financial habits do not change, my in-laws will be joining the party at our place as well.


.... then I guarantee you, there is no chance that they will change.


----------



## scomac (Aug 22, 2009)

It is easy for a group of strangers to offer up the _tough love _remedy when they don't have any emotional attachment with the individuals involved. The first rule of charity after all is to not be judgemental and there has been a good deal of that in this thread deservedly so or otherwise. It always saddens me to see families that are torn apart by selfishness and efforts to control. Whatever transpires, just remember that you must live with your choices; this applies not only to the parents, but the offspring as well.


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

scomac said:


> It is easy for a group of strangers to offer up the _tough love _remedy when they don't have any emotional attachment with the individuals involved. The first rule of charity after all is to not be judgemental and there has been a good deal of that in this thread deservedly so or otherwise. It always saddens me to see families that are torn apart by selfishness and efforts to control. Whatever transpires, just remember that you must live with your choices; this applies not only to the parents, but the offspring as well.


The first rule of charity is to not be a charity case yourself...


----------



## scomac (Aug 22, 2009)

Longwinston said:


> The first rule of charity is to not be a charity case yourself...


You've made it quite clear where you stand. While you make a convincing argument, it is not you that must live with the consequences of whatever actions are taken. It is important that the OP remember this in light of the fact that some progress is being made despite the track record of the individuals involved. Hopefully this situation resolves itself favourably. If not, I hope it isn't for all the wrong reasons.


----------



## Four Pillars (Apr 5, 2009)

scomac said:


> It is easy for a group of strangers to offer up the _tough love _remedy when they don't have any emotional attachment with the individuals involved.


+1


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

scomac said:


> You've made it quite clear where you stand. While you make a convincing argument, it is not you that must live with the consequences of whatever actions are taken. It is important that the OP remember this in light of the fact that some progress is being made despite the track record of the individuals involved. Hopefully this situation resolves itself favourably. If not, I hope it isn't for all the wrong reasons.


And likewise, it is not you who must live with it either, unless I am missing something?
You don't seem to be giving any advice at all other to chastise me for a reason I am unable to decipher.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

here sags' post upthread. My hope is to highlight it as an example of altruism, generosity & compassionate sharing.




sags said:


> And lastly, I wouldn't stress out about money.......especially when it involves family.
> 
> Family is family..........and there is nothing more valuable, besides good health.
> 
> ...



sags didn't put his own finances in jeopardy, while at the same time he didn't hesitate to help out a relative.

imho this is civilized conduct at a very high level. 

longwinston, there is a chatisement for you in this message. Are you able to see it?


_je donne parce'que j'ai reçu
et je reçois parce'que j'ai donné_


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

humble_pie said:


> here sags' post upthread. My hope is to highlight it as an example of altruism, generosity & compassionate sharing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Humble, feel free to have a look at my response. The line between generosity and enablement is on the state of the recipient. If the recipient is in a bad way because of making bad decisions and refusing to take responsibility for them then you are enabling this behaviour if you contribute to it.

If, on the other hand the recipient made a bad decision once or was the victim of circumstance then your generosity can be for the greater good. Not being able or willing to see this distinction merely indicates that the giver is not looking out for the recipients best interests. That is not being 'generous' and it is not a net positive for the recipient.

The OPs situation clearly falls in the latter category and the OP is clearly wise to not want to give them any further financial aid. I also find it quite abhorrent that these parents would "borrow" money from their own progeny and not pay it back.

In other words Humble, there was nuance in my post. Are you able to see it?


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

winston probably i should have quoted sags' entire message. Please find it below.

in the first part, sags offers a positive suggestion to the OP about how they could manage & handle a possible breakdown in their parents' consumer proposal. Sags' tip would mean that the OP & spouse would not have to pay anything out of their own pockets, but could instead direct the parents as to how they could repair their dilemma themselves.

this suggestion seems to be the opposite of enabling. I'd call it empowering. Yet you then scolded sags for "enabling." It's the scolding i was wondering about.

in the 2nd part of his message, sags segues into some examples of give-and-take in his own family & says these are good exchanges that benefit everybody.

if the chips should turn down for some reason in your own life, wouldn't you be glad to have a family member like sags? i know i sure would.




sags said:


> Glad to hear your in-laws have taken the first step towards changing their spending habits.
> 
> As part of the consumer proposal, they will have to take part in 2 counseling sessions, which will be a good learning experience for them.
> 
> ...


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

humble_pie said:


> winston probably i should have quoted sags' entire message. Please find it below.
> 
> in the first part, sags offers a positive suggestion to the OP about how they could manage & handle a possible breakdown in their parents' consumer proposal. Sags' tip would mean that the OP & spouse would not have to pay anything out of their own pockets, but could instead direct the parents as to how they could repair their dilemma themselves.
> 
> ...


Which is why I made the qualifier:

"If the family member is in dire straights, not through making bad decisions, then that is something different."

Which if you would have read and understood you would realize that our positions are not opposed.
It is clear to me that the OP's in-laws are there by choice as opposed to circumstance.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Thanks for your entry into my defense Humble.........

You are spot on in your summation, as is your custom.

To "enable" or not to "enable".........how do you count the ways?

I choose to live my life, without having to count the ways. 

It is a much easier life to live.........without having to justify the wholesale merits of every charitable act.

If it makes me an "enabler" to give money to a street person asking for some, without passing judgement, giving them career advice, or offering to buy them a tuna sandwich instead..........then I plead guilty.

If it makes me an "enabler" to give money to family.......simply because they need it.........then I plead guilty.

I would more happily wear the crown of King Enabler...............than change now.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

But I should also add, 

To each their own. 

Everyone makes their own decisions on such matters, and whatever they are comfortable with is fine with me.


----------



## PoolAndRapid (Dec 3, 2013)

..


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

well, we are moving towards a consensus, which is good. Even winston has budged a little from his original sharply harsh & judgmental post, which goes:




Longwinston said:


> To be honest your mother and father in law make me a little upset. From what you say, they are used to gaming the system. Declaring bankruptcy once and seeing about doing it again? Banking it all on a huge @ million dollar law suit for a hurt arm? Not a high percentage scenario there.
> 
> It sounds like your in-laws are some of those people who expect to be taken care of by society. I have no time for those type of people in my life and my suggestion would be that you shouldn’t either.
> 
> ...



the appealing thing about the OP is that she has worked so patiently to improve a challenging situation with the in-laws, while never being taken in but never developing any ill will either.

fortunately there are some excellent & non-judgmental suggestions throughout this thread; the majority of folks are hoping that the situation clears up well; hoping that the OP can use her power-of-attorney influence to get any amount of money granted locked up in an untouchable format such as a structured settlement; hoping that the counsellor plus the OP will persuade the older generation to settle down & mend their spendthrift ways.

winston even you are softening the crusty edges a little, congratulations each:


----------



## Nemo2 (Mar 1, 2012)

PoolAndRapid said:


> You're contradicting yourself with these two statements. Perhaps that is where the confusion is coming from?


I 'think' Longwinston meant former instead of latter..........


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

PoolAndRapid said:


> You're contradicting yourself with these two statements. Perhaps that is where the confusion is coming from?


I don't see the contradiction. sigh

In the OP's case, it is clear that the in-laws are not taking responsibility and are behaving badly. I would not give them a cent.

In a general sense, on the second quote I was responding to Sags where I was saying that if the recipient of aid is a victim of circumstance then you can perhaps help them by giving them money. 

If the recipient of the financial aid keeps making repeated similar mistakes and shows no inclination to change the negative behaviour then I stand by my words when I say that giving them money in those circumstances is not doing the recipient any favours. 

If you want to call me judgemental and harsh, fill yer boots but it doesn't change the truth of what I am saying. If giving money was the answer to the worlds problems Africa would be the richest continent on the earth.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

there's no *e* in judgmental


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

idk, did the OP ever say that she actually gave them money?


----------



## Nemo2 (Mar 1, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> there's no *e* in judgmental


What's this then....judgm*e*ntal? (Or were you attempting to say that there is only one 'e'?)


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

u are right, there's only one *e* :tongue-new:

you're pretty good at spelling facetious, too


----------



## Nemo2 (Mar 1, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> u are right, there's only one *e* :tongue-new:
> 
> you're pretty good at spelling facetious, too


I can also spell "censorious". :wink:


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

but i'm still asking, did the OP ever actually say she'd given em money? if so, i missed it somehow ...

clearly the in-laws are exasperating. But how can eternally coaxing em to see debt counsellors, downsize housing circumstances & cut budgets to the bone be construed as "enabling"?


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> there's no *e* in judgmental


There is in British English and not in American English. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/judgemental 

OED gives "judgemental" as the preferred spelling but acknowledges "judgemental" as an alternate. 

I think you may have been supplying an example of "irony" however.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

Nemo2 said:


> I can also spell "censorious". :wink:



me i can spell irascible ...


----------



## Nemo2 (Mar 1, 2012)

humble_pie said:


> me i can spell irascible ...


"Practice makes perfect." :biggrin:


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

The OP had lent the In-Laws money, and yes, they were paid back.



DayTek said:


> We used to loan them money (we'd always get paid back, I think they felt bad about borrowing from their own children), but we stopped doing that after we saw it wasn't teaching them anything.


The In-Laws have also borrowed money from other family members.



DayTek said:


> They don't _like_ borrowing from family, but they are so accustomed to it





DayTek said:


> after years of asking us and other family members for cash loans to get by


However, the other family members were *not paid* back.



DayTek said:


> they keep getting bailed out by family members (they never pay them back).


If the In-Laws can't win this legal lottery ticket, it looks like the other family members will *never get their money back.*



DayTek said:


> If they are awarded say $100,000.... they have intention to pay back at least *some* of the money family lent to them


...and it appears that the other family members have stopped lending money to the In-Laws....



DayTek said:


> They are tapped out for family help. This will be the first time in their lives without someone bailing them out.


...because the other family members have given up on the situation and know they will never get their money back.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

but avrex the discussion has been about the OP, not about the relatives! it was the OP who was being scolded for enabling!

that's why i asked, Did she ever give money to the in-laws? i didn't see an instance, perhaps i missed it?

certainly she was compassionate & patient, but all i saw in this thread were efforts by her to guide/push the in-laws towards bankruptcy counsellors, towards strict budget planning, towards ways to get them standing on their own 2 feet.

it also appeared that the OP was clear-eyed about the problems the relatives had experienced & she & husband had every intention of avoiding such problems.

i'm baffled why any of this could be called enabling.


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

Humble, without being _judgemental_, please let us know when the confusion clears.


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

@humble, I think we agree.
As far as the In-Laws spending habits, *I agree* that the OP is definitely *not enabling* the In-Laws.
(Well, except maybe the first time she lent them money. But then she realized that it wasn't helping.)

In fact, she has done everything she can to try and help them, via budgeting and financial advice.

I believe the reason that the OP created this thread was to ask,


DayTek said:


> What advice should we give them?


My response is that I think the OP has done everything right. Her eyes are wide open and she is aware of the problem at hand.
She has been compassionate and has advised them as best she can to try to help them. I applaud her for that.

There may be no more advice that we can give her.


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

I will share *my personal experience* here. 
I have two siblings who, in the past, have needed and asked me for monetary assistance.

*Sibling A.* She was going through a bitter and long divorce. She was in need of living expenses and legal fees to get her through this tough period.
I gave her personal and financial advice. I also gave her *significant monetary aid.*

*Sibling B.* He had a history of financial troubles. Then, he hit the credit wall. 
He had maxed out all of his lines of credit. His paycheck couldn't even cover the interest payments that he owed.
I gave him financial advice and suggested several ways that he could save money to make ends meet.

These are both dear family members. I have great emotional attachment to both. I didn't want to see either of them suffer or endure hardship.
I gave them both financial advice and emotional support in equal amounts. 

However, I only helped Sibling A with actual monetary aid. I didn't give Sibling B any money.
Why did I do this?

Because Sibling B has, what I'll call, the trait of *"perpetual financial irresponsibility"*.

My observations of this *trait* are:
- Spending more money than you make.
- Living paycheck to paycheck. 
- The need for immediate self gratification. "I must have <item>. Therefore, I will buy <item>."
- Never worrying about the future.
- Not seeing debt as a problem.
- "Money burns a hole in his pocket." If he receives any money, he has an immediately urge to spend it.
- Repeating all of the above traits over and over again.....

*What happened to Sibling B when I didn't give him any money? * 
He had to do a major debt consolidation and he had to slowly pay back his debt obligations. His debt is now 'somewhat' under control. 
However, after going through all of this turmoil, he still exhibits and repeats all of observations that I listed above.

In other words, even after everything he went through ..... *I believe he will never change.* (He is now 45 years old.)
Spending money and indulging himself is like *an addiction.*

*How is my relationship with Sibling B?*
My relationship with him is very good. He was the best-man at my wedding and we've always been pals our whole lives.
Yes, he wishes that I gave him money. But he is well aware of the reasons why I didn't give him any money.

It hurts me to see him with these financial issues.
But, I realize that I've done all that I can to assist him.
Giving him more money to spend, would not solve his problems.

*My conclusion/opinion*
I was happy that I was able to offer financial advice and emotional support to both siblings.
However, I realized that monetary assistance was, truly, only going to make a difference in the life of one of my siblings.

Every case is different, but it appears to me that the OP's In-Laws, as described in this thread, clearly exhibit the same symptoms as my brother.

For people who exhibit this trait, I suggest.... Support them emotionally. Provide the best advice you can. 
But, *don't give them any money.* It doesn't help the situation.


----------



## Longwinston (Oct 20, 2013)

Excellent post Avrex. Very wise of you. Thank you for sharing your real life experience. 
You expressed what I was trying to say much more effectively.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

*More of a vent than an update, but oh well...*

FIL calls randomly last Monday (Never a good sign as we see them every Wednesday for dinner and FIL rarely calls just to chat). Apparently, he took my MIL to babysit my SIL's kids on Sunday, who is an hour out of town. FIL says that he doesn't have gas money to pick her up and asks to borrow $40. If this was a test to my saying we would not lend them cash again, I failed _miserably_. I caved, because I was put on the spot and what else were they to do? (Besides not get themselves into the situation in first place, knowing they wouldn't have the money to get home) FIL said he was banking on getting money from SIL, but she's learned all her financial advice from them, so she couldn't spare anything. So husband gives him the money, but not without a hefty pep-talk. 

They haven't asked for money in months so, in my blissful ignorance, I thought they were doing OK. My husband and I talked about it and we were concerned that if they needed $40, it meant they didn't even have _that_ saved. Which means if their car needed repairs, they would be screwed. My husband calls my MIL the next day and explains that we are concerned. She says that she was actually thinking about bringing her budget to us to get some advice...Where THAT came from I'll never know!

So they come for dinner last Wednesday and I plug in the numbers. Long story short, their expenses are not that high, but their income just isn't enough to cover them. They are short almost $300 every month and their rent (3 bedroom, 1 bath semi home with finished basement) is 43% of their net income. After trying to cut and slash any where I could think, I gave them some options: 
1. Downsize to an apartment - Their response: Nope, they're all dumps
2. Go back to geared-to-income housing - Their response: Nope, did that before, won't go back (That's code for "too proud")
3. Bring in more income...FIL needs a job in town (he commutes 40 mins every day and their car is terrible on gas), or get a 2nd job. Or MIL needs to take up a job of babysitting older children evenings and weekends (she can't do babies any more because of her injury...I specifically mentioned under-the-table babysitting on less likely chance it won't mess with the settlement) My MIL ran home daycare for 20+ years, so I told her to play to her strengths - Their response: They go off on a tangent on how they're really in a mess and will have to keep trying to slash expenses...Taking on free grocery store points programs, turning off the heat and putting on sweaters, doing more laundry at night. 

The conversation ended shortly after that. I had nothing else to contribute. As far as I'm concerned, you can be the queen/king of frugal, but if 43% of your net income is allocated towards your housing cost, that will not leave you money in the bank. They have to bring in more income and we can't do it for them. They know what they are short and what they need to do to fix it. 

My husband and I have agreed lending stops NOW. Even if they ask to borrow money on a Monday and pay it back on payday Thursday, as was the case this time, we need to refuse. We are done. It's difficult as Christians to do this - We love giving, serving and donating, but we can not help them any more. We've helped them out financially in the past and given them the most recent advice possible to date in order to show them how to start getting ahead. 'Teach a man to fish', right?

*sigh* Hoping for a more positive update in the future :| And hoping we can stick to our guns!


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

*Another Update*

Well, it’s been over a year since arbitration and almost 5 since the accident.
The settlement has been downgraded substantially to $80,000. It was $700,000 at arbitration.
It probably came down to the fact the my MIL can still take care of herself, although her arm will likely be in pain indefinitely.
After lawyer’s fees and family loan paybacks, they might be looking at banking $30,000.

The only advice I could give them would be that MIL find in-home work and FIL keep working as long as he can (she is 55 and he is 58). Throw the money into a GIC to build up some interest, plus try saving some money themselves. When FIL can’t work any more, shop for a home to retire in and take out a 25-year mortgage. (Will they count CPP and OAS as applicable income when applying for a mortgage?) Then if they need to go into a nursing home, they will have some equity to afford that.

That’s all I can think of in terms of advice at their ages. They still rent, have no savings or RSPs. If anyone has any other advice, feel free to dispense. 

It’s unfortunate the lawyer built them up with an unrealistic settlement amount for so long. It’s even more unfortunate that they were relying on it too heavily to make them financially stable at their ages. It is what it is though. I’m just hoping they’ll make the best of what little they do get.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

Being a victim of a car accident that left me permanently disabled and using a wheelchair ,I knew they had very high expectations and although some people get lucky and get big payouts for little permanent effects I figured she would probably get in the ballpark that she settled for.
I am sure they are disappointed but this is a time they need to get grip on reality,this money will be gone within 6 months if they just put it in the bank and live life as they are used to.You should at least try to talk them into doing a 1 year investment for 50% of the money ,that way at least they will have money a year from now.I cant see them every buying a home with all I read here .


----------



## Nemo2 (Mar 1, 2012)

^ +1


----------



## banjopete (Feb 4, 2014)

If they can limp their way to retirement benefits they might be those people where OAS, CPP etc will actually be a lifestyle increase. So maybe there is still light at the end of the tunnel for them. Thanks for sharing too Daytek, I suspect this story will be a similar one with parents that can't afford to retire going forward. I know my parents are in a similar boat but we haven't shared much of the details so I paint a wild picture and they quip from time to time about "I don't know what we'll do". Your story is making me think it's time to put on my brave pants and just lay some cards on the table, my dad's 68, and my step mom's 62. He works 6 days a week, she hasn't worked in 15 years...


----------



## avrex (Nov 14, 2010)

Although I have no sympathy for your in-laws....

my heart goes out to you, @DayTek.
It's a tough situation to be in. You've tried your best to help them.

I truly hope things get better.


----------



## DayTek (Sep 26, 2013)

*Final update*

Well, it’s finally coming to a close. After 4 years, they made the call to accept $80,000 from the insurance company. Lawyer will take 25% off the top and another $30,000 is deducted as well (for what, I don’t know, some legal thing?). Apparently they owe almost $20,000 in family loans, so after all is said and done, they will have around $10,000 to their name. Four years of waiting, hoping…Counting on this to be their ticket to financial security and they are left with $10,000. All the plans they had of a trip to the UK and buying their first house…Gone. 

They plan to spend $5,000 on new furniture and “bank” the rest (that’s code for ‘live off of’ until it runs out). 
MIL is finally planning on working at something. At what, I don’t know. She won’t work outside the home. I can see her start to babysit in the future again…Or they will have to move into an apartment and they would do whatever they could to not resort to that. FIL turns 59 this year and he will have to work until he physically can’t any more. Retirement will be quiet and likely financially tight for them. At least they have 6 grandchildren to visit and watch grow.

My husband and I are just relieved it’s over. I know my in-laws are too, but the reality check was hard, as they usually tend to be. We don’t have any advice to give them. Life can now go on and the lawsuit will not have to be brought up again. What I hope they will take away from this is that the only money you can only ever truly count on is the money you work for and the money you save.

I still love my in-laws very much and have tried my best to not judge them for the decisions they have made financially over the years. Everyone sees life differently and everyone handles circumstances differently. When it comes to money, my in-laws choose to believe that they are _creatures_ of their circumstances and not _creators_. There are lots of people that view it that way, unfortunately. 

Thanks to all for your advice, even if the opportunity to use it didn’t come to fruition.


----------



## Guban (Jul 5, 2011)

Thanks for the update. At least it is over, and everybody can move on with their lives without this uncertainty hanging over them.

I wonder what sort of furniture is needed for $5k given their financial situation. Maybe a broken appliances?


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

What a sad, unfortunately typical however, story. I met a lot of people in rehab when I got injured, all waiting for the big payday at the end which would set them up for life...for me, I knew there'd be nothing there (since there was no coverage for my injuries) and at first I was a little jealous...

Because there was no pay day waiting for me at the end, I learned how to invest. It wasn't easy, and I had to make some really hard choices, like going into debt, choosing which bills to pay, worrying if I could feed my family, etc. there were some lean times...but I did what I had to do and got through it on my own as family help had too many strings and politics. I was very lucky with my investments and came out more than okay...I also used my good credit rating before it became shot from no income.

Not so for the ones I met in rehab. Turns out, in canada, the settlements are usually pretty small (I think we're expecting usa type settlements from watching too much TV). Most of the guys I met are teetering on financial ruin, bankruptcy or the like...a lot of their relationships have crumbled, and they still can't really work...they have no plan b, and their credit now stinks. These guys who thought everything would be fine, have lost nearly everything.

Funny to think that, the one who wasn't covered by insurance, turned out to be the "lucky" one...


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

As stated in previous posts I was left with permanent disability and for 31 months got very little support and found myself left in middle of 3 insurance companies fighting who had too pay for what.Thank god i had long term disability coverage at my work and after 31 months they finally gave in and started paying me that and then jumped on the wagon to try to get reimbursed by the car insurance companies.I was a passenger did not even have a drivers license but I had to sue my husband's insurance because of the way no fault worked.For us it was basic survival , i had a infant daughter and could not care for her or myself.I think the fact we went in the hole $78,000 for private care expenses helped our case as nobody in their right mind does that unless it is a true necessity.Even with getting a Million plus settlement the breakdown allowed for $3000 a month home care and by receiving the lump sum ,they estimated it would provide an additional $1366 a month income and they determined my husband suffered $24000 worth of pain to have a wife who was permanently disabled.When we went to the bank we set up the investment even today is same way that i get about $3500 a month into a bank account which i pay my monthly care bill ,the only thing we did was put ourselves in a debt free position.The thing that gets me is in the years since my accident had so many friends get rear ended etc and claim whip lash ,back pain etc and some even stop working etc for a few months trying to get 6 figure payouts and a few have gotten some money ,one got a payout about $135,000 and as soon as they got the money suddenly they could go and get a new job ,go boating and fishing etc.I do understand the insurance companies dragging things out because there is so much fraud and exaggerations of symptons but they should have a different set of rules for people who have OBVIOUS signs of trauma and permanent injuries.One of the worst consequences of my car crash is being in a wheelchair means I have put on alot of weight and it is very difficult to burn energy when you are sitting all the time and suffer from the sort of injuries I have.
In any case I am sure they are disappointed but hopefully they make the changes they need to make to have a better quality of life.


----------

