Executor excluding benificiary

LellSasha

missbiggles1 wrote: »

So at the moment your offer is less (why should the others drop theirs?). Executors are supposed to maximise the estate so they really shouldn't be considering selling it to you for a lower price than they can get elsewhere.

How did that make my offer less..my offer is the averages the amount at the moment....
only if they drop their offer does mine become higher....
because their offer is in principle its already under the asking price and the execs have been advised that the buyers can drop their offer once the surveyor comes back as they may disagree that the house is worth less than their offer. Theyve already rejected offers over the asking the price so theyr clearly not in it for the best price..

DCFC79

LellSasha wrote: »

I have literally just been doing what I have been told to do by the execs

You have quoted yourself in error there.

LellSasha

marksoton wrote: »

The two are very different. Making payment on another persons consideration....?

I'll be honest, i haven't a clue what's going on here!

this is why I am very confused as to where I stand with it all ...I have literally been doing what I have been told to do by the execs..

booksurr

LellSasha wrote: »

Am i not offering a resolution if I want the house and they want the money and it can all be done before this sale completes?

the executors have a legal duty to obtain the most they can for the estate

from what you have posted so far it seems your mother was sensible to make your uncle the executor as that puts the legal responsibility on someone who is outside of the arguing between you and your brothers. Your uncle is therefore able to exercise dispassionate judgement from a distance

it appears your offer is lower than the offer from the other interested purchaser.

it appears you propose to finance your offer via a bridging loan? that is a horrendously expensive choice to make and it is no wonder you are baulking at the size of the fee payable for getting one.

the property is already being marketed by an estate agent therefore it is too late now for you to say your lower offer would avoid the estate having to pay EA fees as the EA contract is now in place. Therefore if your offer is below that of the other person your offer must be rejected by the executor as they can get more money for the estate from the other person. There is of course still a need for the executor to ensure the other offer is in a position to proceed, but frankly it sounds like your uncle is doing you a favour by regarding the other offer as being in a better position than you if it means you do not have to pay bridging finance

i fully sympathise with the emotional attachment you have to the house, and that losing it will be a major change in your life, but so far nothing you have said shows you will be better off owning it

LellSasha

booksurr wrote: »

the executors have a legal duty to obtain the most they can for the estate

from what you have posted so far it seems your mother was sensible to make your uncle the executor as that puts the legal responsibility on someone who is outside of the arguing between you and your brothers. Your uncle is therefore able to exercise dispassionate judgement from a distance

it appears your offer is lower than the offer from the other interested purchaser.

it appears you propose to finance your offer via a bridging loan? that is a horrendously expensive choice to make and it is no wonder you are baulking at the size of the fee payable for getting one.

the property is already being marketed by an estate agent therefore it is too late now for you to say your lower offer would avoid the estate having to pay EA fees as the EA contract is now in place. Therefore if your offer is below that of the other person your offer must be rejected by the executor as they can get more money for the estate from the other person. There is of course still a need for the executor to ensure the other offer is in a position to proceed, but frankly it sounds like your uncle is doing you a favour by regarding the other offer as being in a better position than you if it means you do not have to pay bridging finance

i fully sympathise with the emotional attachment you have to the house, and that losing it will be a major change in your life, but so far nothing you have said shows you will be better off owning it

can somebody please explain to me how my offer is lower? and where you are getting the info from...
ofcourse its lower in terms of the house...but why would I get a mortgage that pays for my own 3rd? my offer covers the money needed for the brothers (equal to what they would be getting from this other seller) mums outstanding mortgage and fees....I repeat I do not need to buy myself out they get the right amount of money and all fees are covered so in those terms i cant possibly see why its a lower off ..theyre not loosing money through my offer!?!?!

LellSasha

booksurr wrote: »

Your uncle is therefore able to exercise dispassionate judgement from a distance

but frankly it sounds like your uncle is doing you a favour by regarding the other offer as being in a better position than you if it means you do not have to pay bridging finance

so far nothing you have said shows you will be better off owning it

dispassionate he is not being...
your proposed 'favour' is not their reason for rejection so does not help in where i stand in the matter..
the loan is my choice and is realistic!
and ofcourse Id be better off owning a house than having said house that a reside in taken away unnecessarily....
I can provide the brothers with what they need, fees covered and the execs done all above board complicated or not. its a win win where as taking the house from me yet still providing them with their wishes is not!

booksurr

the amount of money it will personally cost you is not what we are talking about.

so is the total value you have offered (including your 1/3) more than the total offer the other purchaser has made? The executors must take the best offer they get, for example:

if the other purchaser has offered 90,000 then each beneficiary gets 30,000 from the estate.

if you have only offered 59,000 then each beneficiary only gets 29,500 from the estate. In other words by offering 58,000 you are valuing the whole house at 59/2 x 3 = 88,500 and therefore your offer is lower than the other one.

AnotherJoe

missbiggles1 wrote: »

So at the moment your offer is less (why should the others drop theirs?). Executors are supposed to maximise the estate so they really shouldn't be considering selling it to you for a lower price than they can get elsewhere.

How on earth do you get to "less" from "about the same"

booksurr

LellSasha wrote: »

and of course Id be better off owning a house than having said house that a reside in taken away unnecessarily....
I can provide the brothers with what they need, fees covered and the execs done all above board complicated or not. its a win win where as taking the house from me yet still providing them with their wishes is not!

no you would not be better off. Either way results in you having a place to live in.

You need to live somewhere, as do your brothers. Your mothers legacy is a 1/3 share of her estate

whether you keep your 1/3 in your mothers house or whether you take your legacy as cash and spend it on buying another house the end result is the same, you will have a house and have received the same amount of money from the legacy.

The only difference being you would have an emotional attachment to your mother's house that you would not have if you spent the legacy on a different house.

LellSasha

booksurr wrote: »

the amount of money it will personally cost you is not what we are talking about.

so is the total value you have offered (including your 1/3) more than the total offer the other purchaser has made? The executors must take the best offer they get, for example:

if the other purchaser has offered 90,000 then each beneficiary gets 30,000 from the estate.

if you have only offered 59,000 then each beneficiary only gets 29,500 from the estate. In other words by offering 58,000 you are valuing the whole house at 59/2 x 3 = 88,500 and therefore your offer is lower than the other one.

the end of your reply makes no sense to me...
if i offered 59 why would i then offer 58?
what i have offered divided between the 2 of them then times by the 3 (including my share) equals the exact amount of what the other buys have offered!!
...so what I have offered covers the same amount of what the boys would receive from this other offer. It also covers the existing mortgage and fees.