Evicting distant relation after probate

moneyistooshorttomention

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

Leaving aside the coercion

I would say that the executors do have a right of entry in order to compile an inventory and to secure or property not explicitly ceded to the great aunt. Which should have been done a long time ago and cannot be a repeated excuse.

I would also think that they should have a right of entry as trustees to ensure that the requirement for the great aunt to maintain the property is being fulfilled. They are the legal freeholders and I think that their rights in this respect would equate to the rights of a private landlord. Such visits should not be excessively frequent.

:T agreed

Presumably it states clearly in mothers will exactly which possessions have been left to OP? - even if its only a vague phrase along lines of ".....and I leave all my possessions to my daughter, apart from the house". If its not stated exactly - then it would boil down to the normal assumption in our society is that daughters come before sisters and the law would therefore possibly assume the daughter gets all the possessions - if it wasn't specifically stated???

But...yep....I would have thought it would be the norm for trustees of a house to expect to inspect it at reasonable intervals, precisely in order to confirm that the condition about it being kept in good order was adhered to. As that provision seems to have been specifically put in the Will - then I would think that means the trustees actually HAVE to inspect the house at intervals (ie the law doesn't just say they can - but presumably obliges them to do so).

Landlords inspect their property at intervals - and its an analogous situation to that. That being the trustees having both the right - and the duty - to inspect that house at reasonable intervals to ensure aunt is keeping up the maintenance work.

Personally, I would be checking out how often landlords normally inspect their property and giving official (ie 24 hour) notice in writing that I, as trustee, would be coming in for inspection on X date - say once a year? The trustees have an obligation to ensure the house stays in good order for the grandson. There is obviously quite a risk that any older person wont bother much with maintenance (ie the "I wont be around to enjoy it much longer - so why bother?" thing). Add the fact aunt might well think "Its not my house anyway - so why bother?" and the house is at quite noticeable risk of deteriorating if not kept an eye on by the trustees.

Its surprising just how fast houses can start "sliding" on the maintenance front if not kept a proper eye on. I've seen this "life interest" thing twice - one time it was someone who looked after things, but you wouldn't want to see the state of the 2nd house by the sound of it:eek:

NB; Not forgetting that its common advice to normal home-owners to inspect their properties thoroughly once a year and I've often seen suggested checklists for what to look at (eg check the gutters, check the roof, etc).

getmore4less

THis is the sort of thing that needs legal advice and I suspect has come up before so a bit of google will find stuff that is relevent like(the top two in a search) to have a background wider set of opinions.

http://www.thelawforum.co.uk/trusteebeneficiary-rights-regards-life-interest-property

http://www.thelawforum.co.uk/trust-life-interest-problem

moneyistooshorttomention

One thing that isn't clear here is what OP's mother thought/felt about why she had left aunt this life interest. We don't know/maybe no-one knows just how long mother assumed aunt would be living there for. We don't know mothers feelings respectively towards her sister and grandson.

I don't think any of us can tell whether mother was very fond of sister and only somewhat fond of grandson and honestly didn't give a darn how long sister stayed living there on the one hand OR whether mother felt somewhat "obliged" to sister and sister is up in her 80s (ie so mother assumed sister wouldn't be there much longer anyway presumably, and didn't take account of fact of the occasional person living past 90 scenario).

The only clues as to how mother viewed the whole set-up will be in the Will and, if mother hasn't made the Will out clearly enough for people to be able to see what she thought/felt about the situation - then we are drawing a blank and would have to work on the assumption that mother didn't care how long sister might end up living there (even if sister lived to an enormous age).

Overall - it looks like grandson has no right to live there/aunt lives as long as she lives and she certainly looks most unlikely to move back to her own home by the sound of it. That does only leave the trustees having the right/obligation to visit at reasonable intervals to inspect the house and daughters' right to immediately take possession of any goods specifically left to her (and it would be wise to do so - to ensure they don't have time to vanish in other directions).

The wording re leaving of possessions needs to be very clear in the Will - as there is a tendency by some people to "loud and long" proclaim that items are "theirs" just because they want them to be theirs - rather than because they really are theirs. I've encountered this and some people can be very vehement indeed that something is "theirs", though they know very well it isn't and are trying to steal it by sheer force of will.

silvercar

The wording re leaving of possessions needs to be very clear in the Will - as there is a tendency by some people to "loud and long" proclaim that items are "theirs" just because they want them to be theirs - rather than because they really are theirs. I've encountered this and some people can be very vehement indeed that something is "theirs", though they know very well it isn't and are trying to steal it by sheer force of will.

Isn't the expression that if you turned a house upside down everything that falls is contents and everything that remains is part of the house?

Dird

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

If and only if. But he isn't

If the owner died 5 years ago & left it to him then he is?

Mojisola

Dird wrote: »

If the owner died 5 years ago & left it to him then he is?

From the sound of it, he only inherits the house once the relative decides to leave it or dies.

Dird

OP has now removed the first post so who knows what is the case

FedUpExecutorLeeds

Thank you all for your input. We have made an appointment to see a Solicitor to see what our options are.