Six months delay on distribution of estate

DandelionPatrol

wwl wrote: »

In which case could you not simply tell the solicitor that his services are no longer required and that you will handle everything from now yourselves?

No, not if the solicitor is an executor in his own right.

lonewaiter

DandelionPatrol,

That is indeed the case. Furthermore, there are other aspects which make dispensing with the solicitor not an option.

getmore4less

The sale of the property should be conducted as a sale on behalf of the estate and the trust(if thats how it is held) the proceeds should not all go into the estate account.

Depending what was done at the time of the dads death(if it was transfered) the sale may still require the sigs of those on the grant.

if the sale had been to those holding the other 1/2 the estate would never see the money just that for the part mum owned.

Savvy_Sue

OK, so you've got a 'usually' from the solicitor, and a good reason to ask for an interim distribution, AND a situation where legally 1/2 the house should not be falling into the estate in any event.

I'd answer the letter along the lines of 'appreciate not usually a distribution at this stage, however we are keen to proceed with purchase of a property, plus the house sale proceeds need to be split into estate and not estate so please could we have the not estate part ASAP.'

Would your sibling be happy with this too?

wwl

You might also want to ask the solicitor why he didn't make you aware of the fact that half isn't part of the estate. Sounds like he's not doing his job properly, and this could have resulted in significant loss to you.
I assume you'll be looking elsewhere for coveyancing on the new place...!

FreeBear

lonewaiter wrote: »

"there will usually be no distributions from the estate until the statutory advertisements have been placed and a 6 month period has expired from the issue of the Grant of Probate"

The six month period is to allow time for any creditors to stick their hands up to say that they have a legitimate debt owed by the deceased. It also gives time for any claim under the Inheritance Act to be submitted - In both cases, once the six month period is up, anyone would be out of time to bring a claim.

The executors could distribute the assets before the six months, but they would be liable if any claim surfaced and the beneficiaries would have to return some of the monies (if the claim was successful). What the solicitor is doing is understandable and reasonable - But the 50% share in the house should be able to be distributed without delay.

G6JNS

FreeBear wrote: »

The six month period is to allow time for any creditors to stick their hands up to say that they have a legitimate debt owed by the deceased. It also gives time for any claim under the Inheritance Act to be submitted - In both cases, once the six month period is up, anyone would be out of time to bring a claim.

The executors could distribute the assets before the six months, but they would be liable if any claim surfaced and the beneficiaries would have to return some of the monies (if the claim was successful). What the solicitor is doing is understandable and reasonable - But the 50% share in the house should be able to be distributed without delay.

The statutory notice deals with any unknown creditors within a couple of months. Once the house has been sold there should be no more than a few weeks before the estate is distributed.

lonewaiter

wwl,

It was actually my vigilance which pointed out the half-ownership to the solicitor in the first place!

Different neck of the woods, so definitely different solicitors anyway.:)

lonewaiter

FreeBear and G6JNS,

The two months and a day is for creditors. Six months is for various classes of people who think they have been excluded but have a claim. For example, someone being supported by the deceased but not in the will.

I was slightly involved in a case a few years ago where an adult son suddenly popped up - about whom no-one else had any idea. (But he only got what he got as it was a case of intestacy.)

lonewaiter

Evening all,

Just realised that:

"The Inheritance and Trustees' Powers Act 2014 (“the ITPA 2014”) received Royal Assent on 14 May 2014 and is expected to come into force on 1 October 2014. The ITPA 2014 will make several significant changes to the 1975 Act (as well as the Administration of Estates Act 1925 and the Trustee Act 1925)."


"However, this 6 month time limit is removed by the ITPA 2014 and the Court will be able to treat the deceased's share of such jointly owned property as part of the deceased's net estate to such an extent as the court considers to be just in all of the circumstances of the case.


This new clause will bring uncertainty to the surviving joint owners of assets who previously benefited from the 6 month time limit, however only time will tell how the Court’s will exercise this extended power and the Court must be satisfied that it is just for jointly owned assets to be available for distribution to claimants."


Which makes me ask why a solicitor, who I would expect to know the law, would be quoting and adhering to an act which has been substantially affected by this more recent legislation.


[In fact, these changes could be worse for me, but I want to understand.]