Executor excluding benificiary

moneyistooshorttomention

missbiggles1 wrote: »

In fact, I'd be very careful about letting a friend move in without some kind of legal arrangement with the three of you because, if somebody else buys the house, they aren't going to want it with a sitting tenant!

Huh??????????

All the more reason to take the friend in - ie to put off other buyers.

Cakeguts

LellSasha wrote: »

How dare you!! how dare you comment on the relationship between me and my brothers and inject that I am putting a pile of bricks above our relationship. You know nothing of our backgrounds. My brothers are drug fuelled selfish people who are only interested in drugs and money and were like that even before my mother passed away hence my mother asking me to move into her house to keep her and her house running for as long as possible. My mother was a money machine for them and theyve verbally expressed this something they out aboive family values. They have been offered their money like they wanted and that should be enough - instead they are hell bent on fighting ME to keep what is now the roof over my head. The roof I want. They dont want it so were not fighting over it theyre just fighting me on getting the option I want when either way they get theirs! You have no idea the type of people they are and it goes beyond fighting over a pile of bricks. This pile of bricks is my home and was my mums that she worked damn hard for. They do not care where they lay their head they just see it as another thing they can destroy at no cost to them. I do not need to justify my family situation to a stranger on the net because their judgement was all wrong.

Well in that case why do you want to carry on annoying them over a pile of bricks. If you buy that house your brothers will be on your case for the whole time that you own it. That your mother worked hard for that house is true but she also gave birth to your brothers (I assume that it is their mother who has died as well.) If you can't see that house as just any other house how do you expect your brothers' to do the same? They look on it as their mother's house which you think that you are entitled to buy and live in against their wishes.

It is only a house it is just like any other house. It doesn't belong to your mother anymore it belongs to her estate. It is no different from any other house that belongs to anyone else. It is just a house. Your brothers may be the most unpleasant people in the world but they are still your mother's sons and they are as entitled to an opinion on what happens to her house as you are. It isn't your house. It may be where you live but you don't own it all or maybe any of it at the present time. The wishes of the executors and your brothers are being totally ignored by you. Why?

booksurr

LellSasha wrote: »

my fact comment was based on your assumption of how I view the house..
in regards the rent this is my first time ever in a situation like this I wasnt to know...and the execs havent discussed this with me...ever...all they say is a stay here for free (aside from me paying the insurance) which I thought meant from when I stopped paying the mortgage..

the exec is your uncle. I doubt he has any more knowledge about estate administration than you do, so hardly surprising it has not been mentioned as it is a technicality which many estates would not bother with if the beneficiaries were not fighting with each other

as this thread is now so long it is hard to know what is still at issue
- your mother made a will leaving her estate equally to her 3 children
- the estate includes a house. The executors have discretion to "retain or sell" the house
- your brothers each want their 1/3 share as cash. They want the money now and are pushing for a sale asap as they have already had to wait many months
- you wish to retain the house as your 1/3 share of the estate

therefore you need to pay money to the 2 brothers equal to 2/3 of the value of the property (less 2/3 of any costs incurred by the estate in selling it)

the executors have received an offer from an outside purchaser. You have also made an offer. The executors must accept the best offer which would normally be the highest offer from anyone able to proceed the quickest

you are in the processes of arranging finance, but the offer you have made is "about the same" as the outside offer. It is not more than, it is merely "about the same". You explain that means you have deducted the EA costs from it because your offer is not through the EA. It is far from certain that the EA will not claim costs anyway so your offer would be less than the outside purchaser's offer

you also say the executors have not yet reached final offer stage from either you or the outside purchaser so they cannot as yet discharge their duty to sell at the best price to either you or the outsider

you need your offer to be better than the outsiders, not "about the same", if you want this to reach a swift conclusion

moneyistooshorttomention

Words fail me.cakeguts.......and I'm so glad I'm not OP...

missbiggles1

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Huh??????????

All the more reason to take the friend in - ie to put off other buyers.

I thought we were supposed to be offering the OP unbiased advice and information - not to be her cheerleaders!

Cakeguts

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Words fail me.cakeguts.......and I'm so glad I'm not OP...

Just trying to come up with a different point of view. There are two sides to every story. At the moment we only have one.

itchyfeet123

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I'm afraid that it is a fact that neither you nor your friend can live rent free in a house you don't own.

Obviously that's not true; there are any number of arrangements where people let others live in their houses for free.

It may be that the executors are legally obliged to charge rent in this case -- I have no idea about the law -- but given that it apparently became an issue fairly recently they must have failed in their earlier handlings the estate. If it's simply the brothers want to charge rent as part-owners, then the OP should counter by pointing out the mortgage payments she made on her own.

LellSasha

Cakeguts wrote: »

Well in that case why do you want to carry on annoying them over a pile of bricks. If you buy that house your brothers will be on your case for the whole time that you own it. That your mother worked hard for that house is true but she also gave birth to your brothers (I assume that it is their mother who has died as well.) If you can't see that house as just any other house how do you expect your brothers' to do the same? They look on it as their mother's house which you think that you are entitled to buy and live in against their wishes.

It is only a house it is just like any other house. It doesn't belong to your mother anymore it belongs to her estate. It is no different from any other house that belongs to anyone else. It is just a house. Your brothers may be the most unpleasant people in the world but they are still your mother's sons and they are as entitled to an opinion on what happens to her house as you are. It isn't your house. It may be where you live but you don't own it all or maybe any of it at the present time. The wishes of the executors and your brothers are being totally ignored by you. Why?

you need to leave this feed..you have paid no attention to anything i have said...
they do not want the house..i do
they want cash...i can provide it
they dont want me to live it in it...not good enough to not sell to me...

once they have sold they are no longer entitled to bother the buyers..or can they hound the new owners if their offer is taken over mine lets say because theyve blown through their cash and now want more money...because hounding me is the same as hounding them ..they have no legal right to the house once its bought...

I repeat they do not want this just a house..they want cash...the fact that they dont want me to live in a house that I am willing to buy is not a valid reason to reject my offer..if it were surely i could stop the other offer because I dont want them to live in a house that theyre willing to buy! regardless of it being mums!!

missbiggles1

itchyfeet123 wrote: »

Obviously that's not true; there are any number of arrangements where people let others live in their houses for free.

It may be that the executors are legally obliged to charge rent in this case -- I have no idea about the law -- but given that it apparently became an issue fairly recently they must have failed in their earlier handlings the estate. If it's simply the brothers want to charge rent as part-owners, then the OP should counter by pointing out the mortgage payments she made on her own.

I should've added, "without permission" but I did say that a legal arrangement was needed.

LellSasha

Cakeguts wrote: »

Just trying to come up with a different point of view. There are two sides to every story. At the moment we only have one.

I dont want/need a different point of view!! I want to know if I have any power whatsoever in this situation...
you do not have the other side so dont assume it!!!!!!
I have given factual info all along disclosing personal and in some cases upsetting and embarrassing peices of info to give a true reflection of what is happening on both sides...all your making me do is tread old ground on explaining stuff already covered and quite frankly irrelevant...
they do not want the house can i make that any clearer! they want cash!! but because of a very tempermental family situation they dont want to make life easy for me at the same time !! Iv had enough if you have nothing constructive then you need to leave me be!