Evicting distant relation after probate

bouicca21

The relation clearly has the right to live in her home until she wishes to leave or is maybe forced to leave because she needs residential care. That relation possesses another property is irrelevant. Grandson should be thankful she does not have a life interest as if she did her rights to the property would continue after moving into residential care.

My reading if this string of posts is that the grandson and trustees are effectively harassing her and need to butt out.

mrschaucer

And for what it's worth, my reading so far is that this lady is allowed to live in the house until she dies/moves out. Nowhere (yet) does it say that she's entitled to anything at all IN the house ie maybe all furniture is part of the residuary estate, as well as the jewellery, and the Trustees might like to take steps to sell/remove what they can so that the residuary estate can be distributed? Seems unfair on the other beneficiaries if this lady is (literally) sitting on assets which really belong to others?

moneyistooshorttomention

Indeed - it is starting to look as if the deceased had visions of this person giving over the property held within the house on time to the trustees to give to the new owners of that property on the one hand and, quite possibly, didn't stop to think that though most people go on until 85-90 there is no way of knowing whether there might be a Silvercar's friend scenario (ie of them being there till 105).

That's one of the things we don't know - ie how old this relative is - so there is no way of judging just how long this relative might be sitting there with the house "tied up" and, quite possibly, never passing on the jewellery etc left to others until she herself dies. These beneficiaries of the jewellery could be waiting 20 years or more to have their own property in their hands - if it just keeps sitting there within the house and not passed on to the real owners of it.

Actually - I am rather inclining towards its those possessions that are due to have passed on already to the recipients that is the biggest problem objectively speaking. There could be people sitting there waiting 20 years or so to be able to have "Aunty Maud's ring" that she left them as a keepsake.

DandelionPatrol

nic_c wrote: »

It does seem the relation has a life interest, I've pulled the relevant sections.

I GIVE my freehold property .... to my [RELATION] for her life or she vacates the said property. She is to pay all taxes and all other outgoings and keep the same in good repair. ... and after the death of [RELATION] I GIVE the same unto my Grandson [NAME] absolutely.

I GIVE DEVISE AND BEQUEATH to my trustees all my real and personal property not otherwise specifically disposed of upon trust for sale with the full power to postpone sale.

There is the question of her forbidding the trustees to visit (the deceased's possessions, like jewellery etc, are still in the house), and as the house is owned by trustees, the land registry deeds say that the relative should be given notice, of disposition (but cannot block it).

OK, it is very clear to me that grandson has no right to occupy. Arrangements should be made to get him out with the support of the executors.

Once that is done, the executors should get on with their duties, strip the assets out of the house and realise them. Obviously better to take the grandson out first, then think about writing a polite letter effectively demanding access for the purposes of removing the deceased's property and finalising the estate and for a trustees' inspection that the property is being maintained. Then if this is refused, another letter saying the same, but this time mentioning court and costs

moneyistooshorttomention

Think Dandelion has probably worked out the general gist of it.

The one thing I would add is that these trustees are, quite possibly, going to be at risk of getting clobbered by the beneficiaries of the jewellery, etc, for negligence in the performance of their duties if they don't get a move on to get that particular little situation resolved tout suite.

A lot of us have left jewellery to specific people as a keepsake thing - and the expectation is that those beneficiaries will be wearing our jewellery (if they choose to) on a "next month" type timetable after the death. I've certainly left jewellery as keepsakes for instance (and am sure that's very common). Its been divided between two friends and I would expect to see those rings on their fingers very promptly after I had gone.

Some of us really would be "up there on that cloud with our celestial harp" or the equivalent and having a little looksee and thinking "Oh yes....L**** is wearing that ring of mine and S**** is wearing that other ring of mine. Aw...that's nice".

FedUpExecutorLeeds

I am the Trustee in question.

I would like to clarify that neither my brother nor myself have ever put pressure on my Aunt to move out. I once wrote my Aunt a letter begging for her to consider leaving after my Son's relationship broke down and he was forced to leave his family home, making him homeless. She point blank refused saying it wasn't her problem.

My Son was an only Grandchild who was extremely close to his Grandparents. It has never been in any doubt that when my parents both passed away that he would inherit the house. For reasons unknown, we think she was bullied into it, my Mother decided to put the 'life interest' bit for my Aunt into the will. (My father would have been horrified as he loathed my Aunt).

I live some way away from my son so, because of his job and access to his daughter, it wasn't practical to stay with me. He then asked my Aunt if he could stay there. He and my Aunt have always got on so she said he could....with the proviso that neither his ex-lady or me and my brother ever went to the house. I would like to clarify that neither me nor my brother have done or said anything to warrant such antagonism against us.

Also, the possessions belonging to my Mother that we are being refused access to are not jewellery nor anything of any monetary worth (although her wedding ring is still there somewhere). We were each given a couple of mementoes shortly after the funeral but nothing else. As far as my Aunt is concerned she owns the lot. She is depriving us of some precious childhood memories.

moneyistooshorttomention

So this aunt is aunt of the grandson concerned??

That is not nice of her to say "not my problem" - considering she has a place of her own.

What is this house of her own like? Is it a viable proposition for her to go and live in it and she is just choosing not to do so - or is it a Total Wreck/rented out/etc?

FedUpExecutorLeeds

She is my Aunt so his Great Aunt. (My Mother's sister)

She co-owns her large, quite valuable house, with her ex-husband. She refuses to sell her half because a) she doesn't want her ex-husband to be homeless, saying he couldn't afford to buy anywhere else (he's loaded) and b) because she says her share of the house is her Kids inheritance.

She is certainly not without means.

silvercar

So the aunt influenced the grandmother, who then rewrote her will and then passed away.

Nothing you can do about the property, but you could certainly take action to retrieve the goods in the property.

patman99

May be another letter needs to be sent (via a Solicitor if needed) stating that as executors of the will, you will be entering the property on a specified date to remove for sale all saleable assests as per the instructions in the deceased's will and if she does not let you in, you will engage the services of a locksmith (at her expense) to gain legal entry.

I know she is your aunt, but you and your brother need to get tough and do what the will instructs you to. i.e. clear the house of anything sellable and sell it before disposing of the money as per the will.

Just wondering as an aside, but if she does have an IIp, then can she be charged rent to live there ?.