Three Executors and small estate

jackyann

Sounds like this:

Mum gifted the house some years ago to her 3 children as tenants in common. So they all own the house, but one of them lives in it (possibly with mum until her death).

There is, in addition a small estate, including mum's personal items.

So the 3 "children" have 2 tasks:

1. to administer the small estate, dividing it up among themselves

2. to decide what now happens to the house they jointly own.

A lot of families seem to have the informal arrangement that the child living in the house rent-free cares for the parent; but now things have changed! Theoretically, if they want to continue living there, they either buy out 2/3, or pay 2/3 of the market rent to their siblings. In practice, things are often not that simple!

Is this the scenario?

Either way, involving lawyers will eat up the money!

hundredk

getmore4less wrote: »

What are you having difficulties with?

The house seems to be in your names already so is not directly relevant to the administration of this estate.

If someone is already living in the house then the contents needed to live there are in practice part of the house.

Was mum living in the house?

What else is there?

What are you having disagreements over? are you sure it is not you that needs to review your views.


Take a week off work and get close if long distance communications is not working.

Difficulties are with getting any information on finances and therefore drawing up estate accounts.

Contents are defined seprately in the will but are effectively part of the house until such time it is split.

Yes, mum lived there.

Disagreements are really over being obstructed/prevented from seeing any financial information and sorting chattels which don't have any monetary value but lots of sentimental value. Also the trust agreement hasn't been forthcoming even though it's in the house.

I've reviewed my views several times and each time end thinking it's reasonable to know about the items we disagree on.

I've taken time off work already and the visits aren't at all productive for reasons above. The way things have been avoided, delayed and different reasons given I'm beginning to suspect foul play which sounds harsh but if that turns out to be the case there could be implications later on.l

hundredk

dzug1 wrote: »

So how did this trust come about? Who set it up and how? It looks as though it predates your mother's demise.

Mum decided to set it up to ensure the property passed to us in equal shares. It was set up with one of children who lived with her several years ago. I've never seen the document and obviously ow it's coming into play I need to see it to understand what happens now and in the future.

hundredk

jackyann wrote: »

Sounds like this:

Mum gifted the house some years ago to her 3 children as tenants in common. So they all own the house, but one of them lives in it (possibly with mum until her death).

There is, in addition a small estate, including mum's personal items.

So the 3 "children" have 2 tasks:

1. to administer the small estate, dividing it up among themselves

2. to decide what now happens to the house they jointly own.

A lot of families seem to have the informal arrangement that the child living in the house rent-free cares for the parent; but now things have changed! Theoretically, if they want to continue living there, they either buy out 2/3, or pay 2/3 of the market rent to their siblings. In practice, things are often not that simple!

Is this the scenario?

Either way, involving lawyers will eat up the money!

That's broadly the case. The problem is one of the children has decided it's for them to administer the estate as they see fit, including financial, decisions on chattels, even introducing mums 'verbal wishes' such as object x to go to xxx where this is not stated.

There is, I believe a condition that while at least one is living there the house stays in trust which I think is the case but cannot understand why I'm being denied access to the trust documents if it is.

Your two 'task' points are correct but effectively I've been fed information about what has been done, told I'll get a financial statement when it's all sorted and told probate isn't necessary.

So my options appear to be either accept all the above suspecting something is amiss or consider expense of solicitors to find the facts that aren't forthcoming.

G6JNS

hundredk wrote: »

That's broadly the case. The problem is one of the children has decided it's for them to administer the estate as they see fit, including financial, decisions on chattels, even introducing mums 'verbal wishes' such as object x to go to xxx where this is not stated.

There is, I believe a condition that while at least one is living there the house stays in trust which I think is the case but cannot understand why I'm being denied access to the trust documents if it is.

Your two 'task' points are correct but effectively I've been fed information about what has been done, told I'll get a financial statement when it's all sorted and told probate isn't necessary.

So my options appear to be either accept all the above suspecting something is amiss or consider expense of solicitors to find the facts that aren't forthcoming.

I have re-read the entire thread and I think the only conclusion is that the other two executors are seriously taking the mickey to be polite. Perhaps a strongly worded letter, from yourself, setting out the points that need to be resolved within 14 days is in order. This should state that failing a satisfactory reply you will take legal action to force disclosure will be taken. Only do this if you are prepared to carry out the promise. Before you do this it might be worth spending a small amount of money with a solicitor. The bottom line as far as I can see is the bluff needs to be called.

hundredk

G6JNS wrote: »

I have re-read the entire thread and I think the only conclusion is that the other two executors are seriously taking the mickey to be polite. Perhaps a strongly worded letter, from yourself, setting out the points that need to be resolved within 14 days is in order. This should state that failing a satisfactory reply you will take legal action to force disclosure will be taken. Only do this if you are prepared to carry out the promise. Before you do this it might be worth spending a small amount of money with a solicitor. The bottom line as far as I can see is the bluff needs to be called.

It's only one who has the information and the other two trying to get access to it. We're considering involving solicitors to find out things if necessary which is obviously an expensive option but we may have no choice. Can one executor finalise things without the consent of the others?

g6jns_2

hundredk wrote: »

It's only one who has the information and the other two trying to get access to it. We're considering involving solicitors to find out things if necessary which is obviously an expensive option but we may have no choice. Can one executor finalise things without the consent of the others?

The executors have to do things jointly and are also responsible. It may be difficuly but if you want the problem sorted you are going to hard hearted and confront the other executor.

hundredk

g6jns wrote: »

The executors have to do things jointly and are also responsible. It may be difficuly but if you want the problem sorted you are going to hard hearted and confront the other executor.

The confrontation has happened to a degree with little or no progress. The more I think about it, the more I come to the same conclusion of more confrontation or finding things out myself.

I think iknow which bank was used. Do you know what would be needed to request statements, or is it possible for executors to set up online access to accounts once they have provided the correct documents?

Where there are disagreements, eg whether to apply for probate, do all executors have to ultimately agree on what to do or can a majority decide and take that course of action?

Thanks

dzug1

hundredk wrote: »

even introducing mums 'verbal wishes' such as object x to go to xxx where this is not stated..

Not necessarily unreasonable if the object has not been left to someone else

dzug1

Banks' working practices seem to vary on this.


You MAY be able to take a death certificate into a branch of the bank and arrange the information you want. OTH you may get told they are already aware of the death and are dealing with someone else on it.


Online access is very unlikely - the accounts should either have been be frozen awaiting probate or been paid out against the indemnity. Any existing online access would be removed once they were aware of the death.