Intestacy on going more than 12 years

g6jns_2

Ol_Jay wrote: »

Thanks G6jns, much appreciated. :beer:

You are welcome. Please keep us up to date and also ask here if you need any more advice. I, and I hope others are keen to see you succeed. The money is a fife changing amount.

RAS

Ol_Jay wrote: »

That's the problem and maybe what the Admin is counting on I'm of very limited means. My share in the estate would probably be about 100k though so obv. a solicitor might work on that basis.

Hi

A couple of random thoughts.

1. Does your uncle claim any means-tested benefits? Or might he have done so in the last 14 years? Based on comments on the Benefits forum here, property and inheritance affect benefits entitlement from the date of distribution, not the date of probate/administration or date of death. In which case he could have his cake and eat it?

2. Has anyone ever administered the estate of the deceased parent in whose name is still on the deeds for the residential land? If not, I think the LR might have issues registering it unless the property was held as a joint tenant with the deceased?

3. £400K (4x£100K) is above the current IHT limit. What was the value of the estate at the time of death? What was the IHT limit at that date and even if IHT did not exist the same info needs to be obtained for when the deceased parent died.

So is there some outstanding IHT liability that has not been dealt with?

4. I would also want to check (because I do not have a first clue) whether there might be a CGT liablity because of the time since admin was granted?

Ol_Jay

RAS wrote: »

Hi

A couple of random thoughts.

1. Does your uncle claim any means-tested benefits? Or might he have done so in the last 14 years? Based on comments on the Benefits forum here, property and inheritance affect benefits entitlement from the date of distribution, not the date of probate/administration or date of death. In which case he could have his cake and eat it?

Hi,
Good point. I'm sceptical that his motives are self serving. Though i think poss only pension and in last few years.

2. Has anyone ever administered the estate of the deceased parent in whose name is still on the deeds for the residential land? If not, I think the LR might have issues registering it unless the property was held as a joint tenant with the deceased?

They haven't done Admin for his father but it's been mentioned as an option.
Poss bit awkward as so long ago?
I don't think they were joint tenants no, it was solely in his fathers name or poss. father and mother. She died inbetween (intestate!)

3. £400K (4x£100K) is above the current IHT limit. What was the value of the estate at the time of death? What was the IHT limit at that date and even if IHT did not exist the same info needs to be obtained for when the deceased parent died.

So is there some outstanding IHT liability that has not been dealt with?

Very valid points.
A lot lower figure i would think was declared, but it's hoped that the land has potential for PP and development?
Hopefully he addressed the IHT properly at the time of getting the L of A.

4. I would also want to check (because I do not have a first clue) whether there might be a CGT liablity because of the time since admin was granted?

I think that there's a potential liability on the difference between valuation for IHT, nearly 14 years ago, and sale figure. If i understand correctly?

Thanks again RAS

Ol_Jay

Mojisola wrote: »

No knowledge of this situation but I would think his legal obligations as an executor would over-ride him claiming anything for himself.

Been looking into this further and it looks like as well as him trying for squatters rights personally could be seen as self-dealing by an Administrator it is unlikely to succeed with Land Reg...


Time does not run against one beneficiary while another beneficiary is in possession of the land - See more at: http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/professional/guides/practice-guide-5#guide-mark-9

Ref: Limitation Act 1980 Sch 1, para 9:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58/schedule/1

See Earnshaw v Hartley [1999] 3 WLR 709 for the operation of this provision in the context of beneficiaries under an intestacy:

Earnshaw and ors v Hartley; CA (Nourse, Buxton LJJ. Sir Christopher Staughton)
31 Mar 1999.

THE INTEREST of someone absolutely entitled to a share in an unadministered estate was a sufficient interest for the purposes of s 9 of the Limitation Act 1980. Where, therefore, one beneficiary had been in possession of property comprising such an estate he was unable to sustain a claim for adverse possession against the other beneficiaries.

Posted as update,for this forum,to one certain aspect,as the thread here has developed more and thought this might be of interest.
Will be posting still on the House buying,renting forum about relevant aspects, eg Land Reg.

Thanks

RAS

Ol_Jay wrote: »

Hi,
They haven't done Admin for his father but it's been mentioned as an option.
Poss bit awkward as so long ago?
I don't think they were joint tenants no, it was solely in his fathers name or poss. father and mother. She died inbetween (intestate!)

So it appears that there are five deaths, in what order?

My understanding from your comments is

GGF (Grandfather's father and spouse to GGM?) owned property - any will? Estate ever taken to probate or administered as would be required if the property was in his sole name?
GGM - had two children; GF by GGF and half brother by A N Other? Died intestate, no administration of estate?
GF - Did he predecease his mother? Predeceased his half-brother? Did he have a will? Was this ever taken to probate?
Half-brother - where did he die in the order of things? Ditto above
HB's son - died 14 years ago, admin obtained but no distribution.

Were there any other siblings of GF and HB? Surviving or not?

I think one problem is that if GGF had a will, that might affect distribution? Do you know? Have you checked probate records?

If however everything passed to GGM, when she died intestate her estate should have been distributed half to GF and half to HB (assuming no other siblings) or their children.

Depending on the timing of GF's death and whether he had a will, his portion should have been distributed either on his death or his mother's if he pre-deceased.

HB's portion would go to his son on HB's death.

And now the son's portion can also be distributed.

But admin cannot sort out the estate because at least some of the previous estates have never been proved and the most recent deceased may not actually wholly own the property?

Ultimately I think you need to prove all the estates that have not been which might be a bit of a nightmare.

However in my family some parts related to a will proved in 1930's were only finally distributed in the C21 as they were held in trust during the life-time of one beneficiary.

You may end up with the amount of money, but would infact be inheriting from 2 or 3 different estates depending who died when?

Ol_Jay

RAS wrote: »

So it appears that there are five deaths, in what order?

My understanding from your comments is

GGF (Grandfather's father and spouse to GGM?) owned property - any will? Estate ever taken to probate or administered as would be required if the property was in his sole name?
GGM- had two children; GF by GGF and half brother by A N Other? Died intestate, no administration of estate?
GF - Did he predecease his mother? Predeceased his half-brother? Did he have a will? Was this ever taken to probate?
Half-brother - where did he die in the order of things? Ditto above
HB's son - died 14 years ago, admin obtained but no distribution.

Hi RAS, thanks.

Sorry, I think maybe my previous post was misleading.

To go through the 5 relatives mentioned (and added more), in order of their deaths:

GGF - (Grandfather's father and GGM Spouse) Owned no property AFAIK. Not sure about will, certainly haven't found any mention on a popular family tree website I use.
GGM had 3 children, GF and Great Aunty by GGF and (half) Great Uncle by ?. No fathers name on his birth cert. Prior to marriage to GGF. Owned no property AFAIK. Again not sure of will etc,same as GGF.
My Great Aunty died next
Then,
(Half) Great Uncle Owned property. Died intestate. No Admin. Wife and son, then just son, carried on living in property with deeds not being changed.
His wife then died intestate, no Admin, son continued living alone in property.

MY GF
My mother
Half-cousin (once removed). My GF HB's son. Died intestate, my maternal uncle is Admin. (My mums only sibling).

I think this is correct timeline, have double-checked.

RAS

Thanks

At least that makes things rather easier.

Did Great Aunty marry or have any children?

Again, depending on the intestacy allowances at the time of HGU and wifes' deaths and whether the property was owned by HGU and wife as a joint tenancy or was in his sole name, the estate may have passed on HGU's death wholly to wife or an element to wife and the rest shared between wife (life interest) and son.

Then on wife's death everything went to son (HC).

Only when you have admin on HGU and wife do I think it will be possible to finally administer HC's estate.

Ol_Jay

RAS wrote: »

Thanks

At least that makes things rather easier.

Did Great Aunty marry or have any children?

Sorry, no to both (as sure as we can ever be anyway.. would be a shock,if otherwise, 36 years on)

Again, depending on the intestacy allowances at the time of HGU and wifes' deaths and whether the property was owned by HGU and wife as a joint tenancy or was in his sole name, the estate may have passed on HGU's death wholly to wife or an element to wife and the rest shared between wife (life interest) and son.

Then on wife's death everything went to son (HC).

Only when you have admin on HGU and wife do I think it will be possible to finally administer HC's estate.

Ok thanks.

That would make sense. Though 14 years has gone by already and was hoping... Some other thoughts....

I guess I was hoping that it could be viewed simply (from Land Reg point of view)as having passed through intestacy through the wife and son (HC).
Or/and that they lived there all their life and so were legal "occupiers". Could that "possession" of land pass through intestacy into the hands of Admin and then the beneficiaries?
Even is it possible ,as it's 14 years now since HC death, to claim Possessory title,using adverse possession maybe, collectively as beneficiaries??

Sorry if repeating, from other thread on House, Buying forum maybe, this is quite a steep learning curve for me and still have a lot of queries

RAS

The thing is you have still got the IHT, death duty issues to deal with on each estate, depending on their value.

And the LR require probate/admin to transfer property from the deceased to a new owner. If HC and wife were joint tenants, then that step would be easy but based on other responses by Land Registry Representative they are not going to agree full registration of the property now until admin is done supporting the transfer from wife to HC.

Until that is done HC's estate does not "own" the property.

I suspect that presented with all the documentation in place that the LR would register the transfer from the original owner(s) HGU/and wife to "the estate of HC" in one move but without all the required estate being proved, no.

Hopefully LR Rep will pick this up.

Ol_Jay

RAS wrote: »

The thing is you have still got the IHT, death duty issues to deal with on each estate, depending on their value.

And the LR require probate/admin to transfer property from the deceased to a new owner. If HC and wife were joint tenants, then that step would be easy but based on other responses by Land Registry Representative they are not going to agree full registration of the property now until admin is done supporting the transfer from wife to HC.

Until that is done HC's estate does not "own" the property.

I suspect that presented with all the documentation in place that the LR would register the transfer from the original owner(s) HGU/and wife to "the estate of HC" in one move but without all the required estate being proved, no.

Hopefully LR Rep will pick this up.

Ok,thanks again RAS.

Noted re: IHT etc

The LR "offered" possessory to my Uncle a few years back, though he decided to wait to see if it could be bettered in time.

Would this, if "offered" again and taken up ,be classed as "good" Possessory maybe and combined with insurance be worth not much less than the Absolute title?

Realise this is straying into other forum territory really.
Have tried to revive my thread over there