Beneficiary trusting an executor of a will

rpc

troubleinparadise wrote: »

Wouldn't the death mean that the contracts to sell/buy would be nullified?

If OP is correct, there are not yet any contracts in place (just some bits of paper that are intended to form contracts later).

I don't see how the sale/purchase can proceed or even should proceed. It sucks for the rest of the chain, but it happens sometimes.

Tuesday_Tenor

Do you have any reason for questioning the executors honesty in general? Do they have any vested interest in the new property? Was it purchased by the deceased when fully intending to live there him/herself, or were other family members going to live there as well?

So far the executors haven't done anything out of order, so it's only these sorts of factors which would influence how much I wanted to take an interest during the period they are sorting out the estate.

Thrifty76 wrote: »

My concerns are that the executors have advised that ... they have began the process of closing bank accounts and having cheques written to themselves.

As Rob says, the executors should really be operating a separate executors bank account for all estate transactions to go through.
The level of assets suggest this would be prudent, and utilities etc. for a property held by the estate will be better paid for from such an account. If executors are using their own bank accounts, then it will get VERY messy, and make their job of producing the final accounts much more difficult.

That said, some things , utilities etc, have to be contacted and dealings commence , even before the grant of probate is received. Utilities all have their own procedures, and while executing my parents estates, some utility refunds came in the names of my sister or myself, and I received cash for some sales of furniture. We just kept careful records of who had paid (e.g. probate fee) or received (e.g. Phone refund)sums. We called it a petty cash log, for want of a better term, it formed part of the formal estate accounts, and the final distributions were adjusted accordingly.

Some banks will release funds, to a certain level, without probate, but on receipt of a copy of death certificate and some evidence that you are the person to deal with the estate (e.g. Copy of will, or signing an indemnity form). This has to be possible as some estates are too small to require probate at all.

Executors have the discretion to make interim payments to beneficiaries if the whole estate is going to take a long time to settle, but they need to be sure they have enough to settle any tax and other debts still outstanding. It would be courteous/prudent of them to make ALL such payments known to all beneficiaries , and to keep them fair to all. (Which wouldn't necessary mean equal interim payments to all, but should mean similar interim payments if there is a similar reason) .

They have at least told you they have started this process,though I suspect it is more a case of early cheques coming in their own names, prior to setting up an Executors bank account, than an interim distribution.

So, in summary, I wouldn't be worried about some cheques being in the executors names , or about interim payments to beneficiaries, if I trusted them to be keeping proper accounts. I would have some concerns if I knew they weren't operating a proper executors bank account, if they had a vested interest in the new property, if they weren't communicating, or if I had a reason to doubt their integrity in general.

Your problem is that you don't know the executors to start with.

So all you can do really, is to start by trusting them, but get yourself informed so that you can deal sensibly with any concerns that may arise.

There's a mishmash of issues in this post, but hope it all adds to your understanding.

Tuesday_Tenor

Errata wrote: »

One would think so as the deceased is in no position to instruct a solicitor to exchange contracts, nor in a position to sign completion documentation.

Am no expert, and my initial thought was that death would nullify.

However, for sale of the first property, if all parties wanted sale to go ahead, wouldn't solicitor transfer ownership to estate, then executors, as new vendors, and buyer proceed with new contract. Small delay while execs get formal probate, but buyer may accept this.

Regards purchasing the second property, though, it is hard to see how this would be in the best interests of the estate/beneficiaries as a whole. Purchases fall through for all sorts of reasons, and death of purchaser is surely the most understandable of all. I don't understand why the executors have a legal responsibility to carry on with this, even if the they can, and don't see how it can be the correct use of estate funds.

If one of the beneficiaries is wanting to buy it out of their inheritance, that is a different matter. One on which OP doesn't have the full picture.

So , on reflection, OP, I think some questions about the purchase of 2nd house are reasonable, to clarify the situation.

madbadrob

The OP stated that contracts had been signed just not exchanged which technically with my limited knowledge of contract law is sufficient for them to continue and in fact to not continue would be an actionable breach. That said if they hadnt been exchanged then technically no contract exists but the house sale in that case couldnt go through until probate had been approved. I would ask the executors if they have considered secondary advice from an independent solicitor

Rob