I didn't buy it. Even if what he said is true (That's how his father did it and it's a Mitchell tadition), I thought Phil hated his dad and didn't want to be anything like him? Combine this with the fact that Ben is risking his life to save Phil...

I'm not saying Phil was lying about his reasons, but I just thought the writing was unrealistic that Phil would actually do this, and not even show any remorse or conflict over it.

I think it was totally plausible and believable, Phils a piece of sh*t.

Phil's an asshole, I don't see it out of character the writers seem intent on never ever progressing with him accepting Ben. One minute he does then a few weeks later he goes back to hating it.

Maybe Phil thought Ben might decline his offer of giving part of his liver if he thought his Dad wouldn't leave him any money. Phil didn't want the liver to start with.

perhaps you're right - never thought of it that way

I have a cousin who is an utter degenerate asshole and her parents have made it clear she will never get anything other than a token £1 when they pass, so considering Phillip's son is a little degenerate scummy murderer who is personifies utter evil who can blame him.

Bad attitude and vile scummy behaviour should never be rewarded, that's why I fully support the right of a parent to cut their children from their right to inherent,.

This

Horrible Cretin

In a nutshell.

I dread his appearances these days. A tiresome and beyond vile character.

Philth that is all.

His given reason of protecting the Mitchell line makes little sense. Ben already has a daughter - Lexi - whom Phil has also conveniently forgotten.

I suspect this is probably true. The storyline doesn't make much sense otherwise.

There is no law that says a parent must leave everything they worked hard for over the years to their children. Children just expect it.

If the children want the same life style as their parents then work for it. It's the same as the rich and famous making their children work for their own money.

Phil wasn't left any money so worked / cheated / defrauded or how ever he gets his money house etc so up to him what he does with it.

The Philth is a living pile of excrement so nothing he does ever surprises me.

The only reason he has not murdered anyone in cold-blood is because TPTB want to continue to worship at his feet for as long as is humanly possible.

Just wait until next year when the next big villain enters the square and is 'owned' within seconds by the ancient yellow shortarse.

Yawn.

So if that's the way Phil's thinking then he shouldn't give it all to Louise! Well he was until Sharon got her claws out and demanded money for her and her 'precious' Denny.

I think this too. Also Louise is still a minor and Ben is a trained mechanic capable of making his own way. Still rather cruel of Phil though

I didn't buy that either Phil saying its a Mitchell tradition to leave all your money to your daughters as your sons are expected to earn their own money. By that logic on the death of Eric Mitchell Sam would have inherited all his money but she didn't. Sam was a penniless schoolgirl when she turned up in Walford. Peggy was living with her new bloke Kevin and Phil and Grant were the ones who had money and were able to buy the Arches and the Vic. They could have earned their own money though through working but my point is Sam wasn't some wealthy pampered princess living off daddy's money like Phil would have you believe the Mitchell tradition goes.