How would an estate of £1000 be lost in 7 years?

[snuttall]

In 1930 my great-great-grandmother was left an estate of £1000, which included four terraced houses. We have a rent book showing that rent was collected on some of the houses as late as 1934.

However, when she died in 1937, she left an estate of just £24.

What do you suppose could have happened?

My family were all cotton mill workers, and at one point in 1928, there were eight of them all living together in a standard 2-up 2-down terrace, so they weren't a well-off family (and nor were their descendants).

Part of me wonders if she used it to buy houses for her children or something? I know that several of her children (also cotton workers), at the times of their death at least (in their eighties), did own their homes (again just standard mill terraces).

[louisa maud]

In my opinion a sensible woman to get rid of her money before she died, at least, if she did, she could see her family comfortably off and enjoying their lives, hopefully

Louisa Maud

[chris_49]

I agree. I've been unable to find what the inheritance tax threshold was in the 1930s but I expect it was pretty low.

How much of the £1000 was tied up in the houses, do you know? Googling finds an average price of £350 in London in the 1930s - so I'd expect standard terraces in Lancs to go for much less. When I first bought such a house for under £5K in the 70s I found that the previous sale (in the 60s) had been for about £700, so I'd expect them to go for even less back then.

Home ownership was rare amongst the working classes back then. George Orwell in "The Road to Wigan Pier" finds that almost everybody rented (some squatted) and a typical landlord might be a poor old woman investing her savings in 3 such houses and trying to live off the meagre rents from the other 2.

I'd expect your ancestor never previously owned a home, and if they were 8 to a 4-roomed house they would surely move into at least 2 of the inherited houses. The rent from the others might never be reliable, with so many unemployed - falling behind and even doing moonlight flits. Perhaps after 1934 the whole family needed all 4 houses. 

[bugbear]

Just as an alternative thought, spending money has never been hard.

 BugBear

[louisa maud]

Or wasting it Bugbear

I had an aunt who used to  be some sort of money lender, she had loads of stuff that people bought to her and she bought, when I was 21 and then got married I had 2 sets she gave to me, only they weren't sets, they were odd, all got from this money loaning caper, she was also purported to buy up a house or two, houses that were eventually going to be pulled down

Pity you can't find someone in your family to ask about it, will be interesting to say the least, perhaps she was generous enough to give it to the poor and needy, nowadays it seems one cannot give money away at a whim

Louisa Maud

[Andrew Tarr]

Before WW2, £400-500 would buy you a decent house, so £1000 was a tidy sum.  If that was enough to be worth engaging the services of a financial advisor, he would have arranged for the estate to be valued at the least possible amount.  Just as today I should think.

[chris_49]

Before WW2, £400-500 would buy you a decent house, so £1000 was a tidy sum.  If that was enough to be worth engaging the services of a financial advisor, he would have arranged for the estate to be valued at the least possible amount.  Just as today I should think.

I'd think financial advisers were a bit thin on the ground back then, though you might get unofficial advice from the solicitor arranging the inheritance, or from a knowledgeable friend. Not from banks - working class people were not encouraged to use the big banks back then (TSB and Yorkshire a little different) and their opening hours were when most people were at work. Even in the 60s factory workers were paid cash with wage envelopes - hence the "wage snatch" crimes that used to occur then.

As I said, if £350 was the average London price then I'd expect Lancs terraces to go for a fraction of that, as now - meaning there might be assets other than the houses that have also to be accounted for. If the OP has the will (not the g-g-grandmother's but the one leaving the £1000) some light might be thrown on the matter.

[arthurk]

I agree. I've been unable to find what the inheritance tax threshold was in the 1930s but I expect it was pretty low.

£100 according to this document - Inheritance Tax was then known as Estate Duty:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rates-and-allowances-inheritance-tax-thresholds-and-interest-rates/inheritance-tax-thresholds-and-interest-rates

[mazi]

The 1930s was the time time of the Great Depression and the Jarrow hunger marches, it was just as bad in Lancashire, if she could not bear to see her grandchildren go hungry then  1000 could easily disappear.

Mike