Difficult situation with beneficiaries. How to divide moveable assets?

Tartanbuggy

Thank you very much to everybody for all your advice and great suggestions. I am going to take them all on board and see if I can work out a way to proceed. It is really so distressing having to worry about each step I take and whether somebody is going to get irate about it. It doesn't help that at least one person seems to be motivated by spite more than anything else. The other difficulty is that I am almost 600 miles away and the house is in a remote spot, so it's not as if I can pop round quickly for an hour or so after work.

I have obtained valuations for the car from Glass (thank you to the person who suggested them) and also We buy any car. I can't help thinking, however, that no matter what valuation I get, somebody is going to protest that it's either too low or too high! My mum had the painting valued in about 2007 and was given a provisional auction estimate of £300-£500.

The furniture is bit trickier because there are a few pieces that more than one beneficiary has expressed interest in. The furniture is Ercol and was bought by my parents in the 1960s! The furniture is has been subjected to quite a lot of wear and tear over the years and has never been maintained or lovingly tended. Does anybody know how I might go about getting a valuation for the furniture? Am I correct in thinking this should be based on the current open market value rather than what price might be achieved should the pieces be restored and then sold on?

jackyann

I would begin by ringing round some auctioneers - Google search - even try to see if any specialise in Ercol.

Although my family were nowhere near the scale you are talking about,when I did probate, there were some suggestions that certain items "were worth something". I knew they weren't, but went through the formality of getting such valuations.

It is no good looking on ebay, amazon, abebooks or anything similar. Sellers post silly prices either in hope, typo, or in delusion. I knew this, but my relatives, doing a lazy Google search thought that because someone had posted a price of £x00 for a similar item, then that was what we could actually get!

Fortunately they happily accepted a specialist auctioneer's opinion. Do remember that if your relatives won't take an opinion given over the phone, the estate must bear the expense of someone getting it to the auctioneer to look at etc. (as suggested above). You could try asking the cussed ones to find an auctioneer, or take some of the other sensible suggestions above.

You are correct in thinking that for the purposes of valuation it is as the furniture is at present (think like putting a house on the market). I guess you could all agree to getting it restored at the estate's expense in theory - but that would cause even more headaches!!

I would add that a friend recently tried selling some lovely Ercol 60s furniture but could not get much for it - it seems one of those things that is more talked about than real.

I do wish you luck - make sure you take decent expenses out of this!

Mojisola

If there are beneficiaries who don't get on and won't co-operate with each other, remember that you were made executor and they weren't.

Your mother obviously thought you would do a good job of sorting out the estate. If she had wanted the other beneficiaries to have control over how things were done, they would have been made joint executors.

You have to follow what the will says - does it say you have to divide the items between the family members or does it give you the authority to sell everything and divide the proceeds?

Don't make life too difficult for yourself. You know you're not going to please everyone whatever you do so go with the easiest route. If that means that you employ a solicitor to sort things out (whose bill will be paid from the estate), do that. Having to deal with a solicitor rather than you should keep a lid on people's unpleasantness. Knowing that the longer they make a fuss, the more of their inheritance is going on solicitor's bills should focus their minds.

g6jns_2

Tartanbuggy wrote: »

Thank you very much to everybody for all your advice and great suggestions. I am going to take them all on board and see if I can work out a way to proceed. It is really so distressing having to worry about each step I take and whether somebody is going to get irate about it. It doesn't help that at least one person seems to be motivated by spite more than anything else. The other difficulty is that I am almost 600 miles away and the house is in a remote spot, so it's not as if I can pop round quickly for an hour or so after work.

I have obtained valuations for the car from Glass (thank you to the person who suggested them) and also We buy any car. I can't help thinking, however, that no matter what valuation I get, somebody is going to protest that it's either too low or too high! My mum had the painting valued in about 2007 and was given a provisional auction estimate of £300-£500.

The furniture is bit trickier because there are a few pieces that more than one beneficiary has expressed interest in. The furniture is Ercol and was bought by my parents in the 1960s! The furniture is has been subjected to quite a lot of wear and tear over the years and has never been maintained or lovingly tended. Does anybody know how I might go about getting a valuation for the furniture? Am I correct in thinking this should be based on the current open market value rather than what price might be achieved should the pieces be restored and then sold on?

Ercol furniture of that age is not worth a lot particularly the upholstered pieces. It my sound harsh but you are the executor and should allow them to bully you. The great advantage of auctioning it without reserve is it stops all the quibbling about values and ensures you can distribute the net proceeds easily. Good luck.

ka7e

Re Ercol - check out Ebay SOLD prices for a good idea of values. The dark wood items fetch very little, though a lot is being bought up, repainted and sold as "shabby chic"! The lighter wood sells quite well with some rarer items - bedroom suites, day beds, Pandora coffee tables, bureaus, sideboards and extending tables - selling well, even in poor condition.

pmlindyloo

Personally, having had a similar experience, I think you need to be a bit more assertive in all this. (no offence) The stress must be unbelievable and I am sure your mum would not be happy that the family are behaving in this way.

So my suggestion is to write to each of them saying that you are trying your very best to sort this out amicably (you could say how upset your mum would be, if appropriate) and unless they can put forward a solution that is agreeable to everyone, then you, as executor of the will and having a responsibility to distribute the assets, will be putting the whole lot up for sale (through private sale of car/auction for rest) if an agreement is not reached within 7 days between them all.

Then sit back and let them sort it out. If they cannot reach an agreement then go ahead and sell/auction off.

PS. Refuse to get involved in the 'who has what' and keep repeating - 'you decide between you'.

Flugelhorn

I would agree with those suggesting auctioning the lot - if you go to some auction houses bidders (ie the members of the family who are arguing over items) can watch online and submit remote bids etc - then they don't even have to see each other!

TBagpuss

Auctioning the lot is your deadlock-breaking position, and it would be sensible to let the relations know that, and also give them a deadline by which you will put the stuff up for auction, if there's no agreement by then.

However, it may be worth offering them an alternative. but make clear that you will *only* distribute the items rather than selling them if *all* beneficiaries agree (which then covers your back against allegations than one person's share is bigger / more valuable)

The method I'd suggest is this.

• You make a list of all of the the relevant items
• Each beneficiary (inccluding you, if appropriate) gets a copy of the list.
• Each person numbers their list, starting with 1 for the item they most want to have, and numbering as many or few items as they want, in order of desireablity (so one person might only number 3 items, another might number 20)
• You go through the lists. and look at what everyone has put at No 1. If there is an item which only one person has marked as 1, they get that item. If more than one person has marked the same item, you either toss a coin to allocate it, or chose by some other *previously explained* method (it could be "how many things has this person asked for?" - if they only asked for 3 things, they take priority over someone who asked for 12 things. Or whatever criteria you want, as long as you make it clear in advance)
• Having allocated all of the items marked as '1', you then set aside the lists of the people who now have an item allocated to them, and repeat the exercise for the items marked 2.
• once everyone has one item allocated to them, you start over with everyone's lists, using the lowest number on each individual's list. (so no-one gets a second item until *everyone* has a first item, and for each 'round' you use the highest rated item on each person's list. Once you're on the 2nd and subsequent rounds, instead of using a coin toss t allocate, you can base it on what else they have had - e.g. if you are deciding who gets the Ercol chair, and 3 people all want it, you might say - well, A got their 1st and 3rd choices, B got their 1st and 2nd choices, C got their 3rd and 4th choices - so this will be allocated to C as they have not received the items which were their highest priority.)
• continue to do this until you run out items.

The advantage of this is that it concentrates everyone's minds, as they have to prioritize which things are most important to them. It also allows you to allocate some things without argument, as there are likely to be some things which only one person wants.

If any / many f the things have a financial value you can also make clear that the value will be taken into account and offset against the person's entitlement.

My mum and aunties used this to divide up my grandmother's furniture (they had an easier job than you, as they all get on well, and all wanted to be fair, but they recognized that there were some things which they would all have liked to have. They decide that an objective method would reduce the chances of them having any disagreements!)

g6jns_2

TBagpuss wrote: »

Auctioning the lot is your deadlock-breaking position, and it would be sensible to let the relations know that, and also give them a deadline by which you will put the stuff up for auction, if there's no agreement by then.

However, it may be worth offering them an alternative. but make clear that you will *only* distribute the items rather than selling them if *all* beneficiaries agree (which then covers your back against allegations than one person's share is bigger / more valuable)

The method I'd suggest is this.

• You make a list of all of the the relevant items
• Each beneficiary (inccluding you, if appropriate) gets a copy of the list.
• Each person numbers their list, starting with 1 for the item they most want to have, and numbering as many or few items as they want, in order of desireablity (so one person might only number 3 items, another might number 20)
• You go through the lists. and look at what everyone has put at No 1. If there is an item which only one person has marked as 1, they get that item. If more than one person has marked the same item, you either toss a coin to allocate it, or chose by some other *previously explained* method (it could be "how many things has this person asked for?" - if they only asked for 3 things, they take priority over someone who asked for 12 things. Or whatever criteria you want, as long as you make it clear in advance)
• Having allocated all of the items marked as '1', you then set aside the lists of the people who now have an item allocated to them, and repeat the exercise for the items marked 2.
• once everyone has one item allocated to them, you start over with everyone's lists, using the lowest number on each individual's list. (so no-one gets a second item until *everyone* has a first item, and for each 'round' you use the highest rated item on each person's list. Once you're on the 2nd and subsequent rounds, instead of using a coin toss t allocate, you can base it on what else they have had - e.g. if you are deciding who gets the Ercol chair, and 3 people all want it, you might say - well, A got their 1st and 3rd choices, B got their 1st and 2nd choices, C got their 3rd and 4th choices - so this will be allocated to C as they have not received the items which were their highest priority.)
• continue to do this until you run out items.

The advantage of this is that it concentrates everyone's minds, as they have to prioritize which things are most important to them. It also allows you to allocate some things without argument, as there are likely to be some things which only one person wants.

If any / many f the things have a financial value you can also make clear that the value will be taken into account and offset against the person's entitlement.

My mum and aunties used this to divide up my grandmother's furniture (they had an easier job than you, as they all get on well, and all wanted to be fair, but they recognized that there were some things which they would all have liked to have. They decide that an objective method would reduce the chances of them having any disagreements!)

I doubt this conforms to the terms of the will. In any case it will be complicated to administer and is likely to create more problems than it solves. The executor/administrator needs to be level headed and not allow themselves to be bullied. An auction still remains the best answer.

TBagpuss

That's why I suggested getting the agreement of all relevent beneficiaries, in writing, first.

I agree an auction is the way forward if they will not behave reasonably.