<prompt> Human: So heres the situation: My SO inherited an equal share of her parents house with 3 of her siblings. One of the siblings has decided that they want to buy out the shares of the house from my SO and her 2 other siblings. My SO and her siblings are eager to sell because they could all use the cash, so theyre really rushing things. They only problem is when i heard the terms of the deal I found them to be really problematic.1. The sibling who wishes to buy out the shares to the house doesnt want to go through a bank for a mortgage in fear that one day they may not be able to pay and the family house will be repossessed by the bank. She proposes to write up a contract and handle everything in the family.2. She proposes that she pay off her siblings over the course of 10 years.3. The rate of interest she proposes is 1 with the total interest cost as calculated through an online mortgage calculator to be paid off before any of the principal.After the appraisal of the house my SO share turns out to be 115,000 and the total interest over 10 years has been calculated at just under 8,000.I think that this is a terrible idea because the rate of return shes getting is outpaced by even the most modest of investments. A certificate of deposit will return 32,000 over 10 years as compared to the 8000 in interest proposed.Heres what Id like to know from you: what other moderately safe investments could be made that would mature in 10 years or less that would have a better rate of return than 1 compounded annually with a dwindling principal? What rate of return could be expected over 10 years with a moderate risk mutual fund of bond fund? Are there other safe investments Im overlooking?Assistant: If the sibling is worried about defaulting on a presumably 30 year mortgage, what in the world makes her think she can pay off the same principal in 10 years, even with the lower interest rate?Human: The sibling has an extremely paranoid personality. Shes constantly thinking of the worst possible case and makes decisions based on that. Although, theres some chance shes simply being manipulative to get the best possible deal for herself at the expense of her siblings.  <response>: If your SO is the showstopper here, then she should also understand that your SO is taking on ALL of the risk and none of the reward 1 is not a reward, and considering the time value of money, is actually the opposite. There needs to be provisions that compensate for the risk, as well as handling the default case. Maybe everyone keeps their shares until the money is paid in full.You dont need to convince the siblings necessarily; if your SO refuses the deal outright, then there is no deal. But you should bring up the same reasoning to the siblings: that there is simply too much risk for the SO and the family in general to be getting involved monetarily like this. 