Evicting distant relation after probate

PixelPound

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

It is perfectly possible the deceased has basically been a bit naïve.

Time was years back (ie when I took lodgers in) and I made out a Will that I put a provision in it that they should be allowed to stay until they had found somewhere else to move to that would suit them.

I know...I know....how blimmin' naïve can you be?...and those were only lodgers forgawdsake.

You live and learn.....

So - I can well understand how the deceased has, very likely, been similarly well-intentioned and as naïve as they darn well come about possible consequences....It happens...it happens..

Hence none of us can guess whether this woman was a "companion" (ie very dear friend) or the deceased was as spectacularly naïve as some of the rest of us have been in the past....

I'd have said "trusting personality", but yes. The relative wanted to come and stay near her own grown-up children after marital break-up. The Will changed soon after (going be the date). It would be pure speculation as to on whose insistence, though.

gfplux

This is a mess. You need proffesional advise.

DandelionPatrol

nic_c wrote: »

Is this sarcasm? I hadn't read the will when starting this thread, but knew the situation. I had started it wanting information to help my partner who had the prospect of seeing her son homeless. I then asked for the will, so as to be able to clarify the points.

Yes, it was sarcasm. I was asking the question of a poster who was more than a bit too certain about the wishes of the deceased.

The will is of course the definitive expression of the deceased's wishes, even if the deceased themselves can be heard screaming denial from the grave.

It is not clear to me why the children of the deceased are registered as owners, rather than the grandson. Is it because they are the executors? If this is the case, then they will hold the property in trust - and the terms of that trust will be determined by the will.

• If the property only passes to the grandson after the distant relative moves on, then the grandson has no right to live there absent a specific provision.
• If the property should pass to the grandson immediately, but the distant relative has a right to remain, then the grandson has a right to live there absent a specific provision.

In the latter case, perhaps the executors should just pass the property to the grandson and let him sort it out for himself. Indeed the grandson might well be the one who can impose the rules on the distant relative ...

getmore4less

Still not clear

if the GS was left the house in the will how come the children now are the legal owners?

xylophone

if the GS was left the house in the will how come the children now are the legal owners?

I suspect that they are the Trustees of a Will Trust where the ultimate beneficiary is the grandson but the relative has interest in possession.

If there is an IIP, then the terms of it need careful examination.

dashriprock

Ditto with Keep pedalling, moneystootighttomention (obviously a Simply Red fan) and gfplux... Sounds like there is some sort of life interest in the property for the sitting tenant (ST), which is odd given that there is at least one other property in England owned by the ST. You could make an app using the ST's details to see if the ST has and interest more than one property in the UK and Ireland. If the ST has other property/ies in the UK (or even abroad), then it is reasonable to demonstrate that the ST is not dependant on the index property for shelter. Is the other property in England being rented, and if so is tax being paid on the rental income? Should the ST wish to sell the other property the ST shall be liable for Capital Gains Tax (CGT)... possibly the main reason for not wanting to leave the index property. I used to know a bit about housing law but not wills and probate.


Something slightly similar happened to my good friend a few years ago... his grandparents named him in their wills along with their only child, his mother. Both grandparents died, followed by their daughter, but before her death she went on to marry and have a son by her new husband. She and her new husband made mirror wills. The grandson (who was brought up by his grandparents and mother) received nothing. His grandparents trusted their daughter to pass on their wealth to him, but upon marrying and having her new family, she changed her mind about her first son.

If the grandparents had put trusts in place, this sadness would have been avoided. This poor man has struggled for years. To avoid such a sadness my wife and I have recently got our will trusts in place... we went on google and typed in Money Saving Expert Wills. On its guide page titled "Cheap and free wills" MSE listed a law firm in Cambridge (not allowed to name companies or firms) but its wills department is called Expert Wills. They are open at the weekends which suited us as we're still both working (we have to keep working because we lost a fortune from our pension, but that's another story), and are offering half price wills over the phone, so we snapped up their offer. They are also doing probate for just 3% for MSE consumers.


So going back to the Simply Red fan's comments with my own is, you really do have to do your research when instructing professionals. It's also an individual thing. You might instruct the best firm in the country, and you'd expect them all to be above an average standard. However, in my experience over the years I've come to learn that it's best to instruct a firm who specialise in a certain area... whether that be in law, finance, pensions, medical etc. It's a bit like having a Mercedes and getting it fixed by a non-dealer garage, but getting the right will is much more important... it's the most important document you'll make in your life.

moneyistooshorttomention

Above comment has certainly got me wondering whether one question (to the right person!) would resolve the issue, ie:

"Is it possible for someone to have a life interest to stay in a property (ie this woman) if they don't need it - because they have a property of their own and could go and live there?"

Generally, I wonder if there is a legal presumption that someone would only be able to validly seek to use a "life interest in a property" as a way to live in it if they didn't otherwise have a place of their own to live in. I thought "life interests" were done to ensure that a person who doesn't have a home of their own to live in had got a stable "roof over their head" until they die - but have no idea if the law is worked out on that basis or whether someone can use a "life interest" as a way to stay in a property just because they want to iyswim?

****************

The other thing I am wondering about is what exactly is the position of this relatives property of their own? Is it in good condition? Is it in a reasonably accessible area (maybe reason relative is hanging on in there is because its in "back of beyond" and relative no longer wishes to live in "back of beyond" and wants more facilities to hand?)? Is it rented out and relative anticipates problems getting it back from the tenant?

gfplux

My understanding is that a person can have a life interest in a property and having other property's have no effect on this. If you have a life interest in a property you don't have to live in it. You can rent it out and you have a life interest in the rental payments.
Have a look at..... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usufruct

MobileSaver

As Keep Pedalling has already said; without knowing the exact wording of the will everyone here is just guessing as to how to resolve this.

The OP either needs to post the relevant bits of the will or consult a specialist solicitor.

moneyistooshorttomention

Well it does look as if, between us all, we've come up with clarifying the matter somewhat and thinking up the right questions to ask and I guess that must be helpful to OP.

One thing left now - being exactly who would be the most suitable solicitor to ask on this (ie qualified to speak re housing law).