What if the executor is not telling the truth?

SeniorSam

Dave is also defaulting on income tax, which the Revenue wil take a dim view of. Half the house and possibly more should be part of a Trust with income from Dave being paid to the Trust at full market value, as he and his family are occupying it. That income should be banked in a proper Trust account and accounted for by a tax return from the Trust.

If Trustees have not been appointed and the Trust set up, then the Executor/s are at fault and legally liable in this case.

You really do need to get this sorted for Sally's sake and to correct the wrongful action taken by Dave.

Did the solicitors have anything to do with the Probate or administration of the Will, as they should have been aware of correct procedures. The fact that as far as they are concerned it has 'been completed', does not exonerate them from responsibility if they were involved.

Newly_retired

I am not sure why you and your wife would want to let her brother benefit from his father's death to the detriment of your daughter, illegally, by failing to challenge his actions, which are either negligent or downright dishonest.

And to respond to another question, if somebody is appointed executor, and does not renounce the role, they have a duty to perform the role correctly. They should read up on it, from the library or the internet, to ensure they do it correctly according to the law. Ignorance is no excuse.

Annisele

JacobPasco wrote: »

Would it be possible for the trustees (the Daves) to sell themselves Sally's third of the house, and just have the money in the trust instead?

Did the will leave Sally one third of the house? Or did it say the house should be sold, and the proceeds split three ways? Or just "Sally should have one third of my assets" without specifying?

If the will said the house should be sold, that's what should have happened. In theory the Daves could have bought it (i.e. sold themselves Sally's third) - but I think* they'd have needed the court's permission to do so. (*I'm not sure).

If the will didn't say the house should be sold, then the trustees need to act in the best interests of all the beneficiaries - i.e. in the best interests of the Daves and Sally. That's likely to mean the Daves pay Sally a market rent - again, I'm not sure if the court's permission is needed.

I think it's perfectly possible for all of this to be innocent. It's not difficult to find out what to do (it's certainly not difficult to hire a solicitor), but nobody sits you down to explain. It's kind of assumed that if executors don't know what they're doing they'll ask...

I think your permission is irrelevant to all of this - you're Sally's parent, but so far as I can make out you're not a trustee of anything.

Crabapple

Okay, so if the house is in the names of 'the Daves' then that's better!

They will only have been advised what they needed to do if they took some legal advice. However, they should have taken some knowing there was a person involved who had a share in the property they couldn't take.

There are proper steps that need to be taken, as others are also saying. Your daughter's position needs to be protected. Insurance, rent, repairs & maintenance on the house, details of the amount held in trust, all these things have to be sorted out and you as the parent should have been notified.

If you really feel that there is not so much a deliberate act as just not knowing what to do then take a softly softly approach to start with, but you need to point out to the Daves what their responsibilities are regarding the house given that your daughter is due a share when she is older.

There isn't any reason why the Daves couldn't buy her share out that I can think of, so long as that money is properly invested and they take financial advice as to the best options for investment. It would really depend whether a better return would be obtained from an investment or from rental income.

getmore4less

The trust and trustees exist, by default the will creates it with the executors as trustees.

getmore4less

There is a good chance they may have fallen fowl of the self dealing regulations.

G6JNS

At best the executors must have been incredibly naive not to have taken any steps to find out the legal position. It is very hard to see how they could have transferred ownership in the Land Registry without making a deliberately false declaration. I am sorry to say that everything points towards them having deliberately taken the illegal actions they seem to have done. Even though they may be family as the child's parent you should excersise your responsibility to get matters regularized without further delay.

TBagpuss

Would it be possible for the trustees (the Daves) to sell themselves Sally's third of the house, and just have the money in the trust instead? It sounds like maybe they wouldn't have the authority, even with Sally's parent's permission (which I would give them)

Possibly.
It's also possible, depending on the exact wording of the will, that they don't have the option of just holding n to the house even if they pay Sally market rent for her share - if the will did not grant the trustees additional powers, then their options and discretion as trustees for a minor are pretty restricted.

You are likely to need to get some proper, independent advice.

paddy's_mum

In your shoes, I would find it extremely hard to believe that Dave/s has the wit and ability to accurately and effectively sort out matters with Probate, Land Registry and HMRC but somehow not have the intelligence to go to the local library to take out a book on the duties of an executor.

You are obviously far more trusting than I would be since all those things that benefit himself have been efficiently done while none that benefit your daughter have been.

That's quite some degree of "ignorance" and "disorganised", don't you think?

Somerset

JacobPasco wrote: »

Can we be sure of that? Maybe they just didn't understand their responsibilities? Like I say, I wouldn't have known about trusts and insurance, and all of that. I might have just thought "Oh no problem, I'll look after the house for my niece until she's old enough".

If you ignore the correct procedures, estate accounts and setting up of a trust. Just ignore all that.


How hard would it have been for 'Dave' during those two years whilst he finalised the estate, obtained probate and transferred ownership with the LR - to actually write or phone you to say ''hey Sally's been left X in dad's will'' ??


You don't 'forget' major beneficiaries. You don't 'forget' to inform them for two years. Or you might 'forget' but I can only think of one reason for doing that ....... Your phone calls to him must be a very unpleasant surprise.