Land registry forms

treecol

Now I'm really confused. I just thought I'd re-read this thread & noticed the last post by Land Reg rep.
This doesn't match the advice I've been given during a number of calls to the Land Registry.
I filled out the forms then called to check one question. Was told late MIL's brother did NOT need to fill the forms out. Carried on completing forms & called to run through all of the forms & was told he DOES need to fill the forms in & he needs to come to an agreement with my FIL as to how the land should be owned between them.
I was trying to avoid solicitor cost, but think now we'll have to go down that route as her brother will not want to comply as there is animosity towards her husband.
Now I read that probate is not required, but both the solicitor & Land Registry who I checked twice with, say probate is required as she owned the land between just her & her brother. We do have probate, but the trouble I had getting family to apply for it! The trouble is, I do get conflicting advice from the registry.

Crabapple

You don't need probate. You will need to sort this out with the brother and by the sounds of it that may not be simple.

As the surviving co-owner he is the only one who can sign the legal title over.

If he refuses to it doesn't change the fact that half the beneficial interest belongs to the husband.

Yorkshireman99

treecol wrote: »

Now I'm really confused. I just thought I'd re-read this thread & noticed the last post by Land Reg rep.
This doesn't match the advice I've been given during a number of calls to the Land Registry.
I filled out the forms then called to check one question. Was told late MIL's brother did NOT need to fill the forms out. Carried on completing forms & called to run through all of the forms & was told he DOES need to fill the forms in & he needs to come to an agreement with my FIL as to how the land should be owned between them.
I was trying to avoid solicitor cost, but think now we'll have to go down that route as her brother will not want to comply as there is animosity towards her husband.
Now I read that probate is not required, but both the solicitor & Land Registry who I checked twice with, say probate is required as she owned the land between just her & her brother. We do have probate, but the trouble I had getting family to apply for it! The trouble is, I do get conflicting advice from the registry.

You say you have probate but the family will not apply for it! That cannot be correct. If the advice from the Solicitor and the Land Registry say probate is required why do you think they are wrong?

treecol

No I said the family refused to apply for probate in spite of land registry & solicitor saying it was needed. We now finally have probate, but the post from the land registry up thread says I don't need it & only 2 days ago via phone call they said it is needed. I was simply saying I'm going to get a whole load of grief from the family for persuading htem to apply for probate if it wasn't needed.
Tennants in common between late wife & her brother means probate is needed for her husband to inherit. That's what LR said last week by phone after checking with a supervisor.
However my confusion is over formsfor the land to be transferred to her husband as I also have conflicting advise ovr whether hr brothr has to fill forms out. This is a family who are hard to deal with & won't trust any advice including solicitors.

Land_Registry

Treecol - I am sorry if you have got conflicting advice from us. The devil is always in the detail and I can only assume that the inconsistency has arisen for that reason, namely not checking on the detail.

Probate is needed for an executor to deal with a deceased's estate. The land is part of that estate but it is important to recognise how the legal ownership changes when land is joint owned.

On death the legal ownership passes to the survivor. Any transfer of that ownership is completed by the surviving owner, namely the brother. Probate is not required for him to transfer it but may be used to evidence the death.

As your late MIL willed her share I suspect that is why they became tenants in common and a restriction was placed on the title to protect that. In many cases that restriction is deemed sufficient but this is where your legal advice comes in.

More than happy to take a look at the registered detail and our records re your previous contacts to clear things up. But it's still wider advice you need as to options available to you and the brother.

The key point is that the MIL's share is now in the beneficial ownership of the land, so effectively her share of the value of the land. If the brother did sell it, after appointing someone to act with him, any claim would be on the sale monies hence the wording of the restriction.

Yorkshireman99

treecol wrote: »

No I said the family refused to apply for probate in spite of land registry & solicitor saying it was needed. We now finally have probate, but the post from the land registry up thread says I don't need it & only 2 days ago via phone call they said it is needed. I was simply saying I'm going to get a whole load of grief from the family for persuading htem to apply for probate if it wasn't needed.
Tennants in common between late wife & her brother means probate is needed for her husband to inherit. That's what LR said last week by phone after checking with a supervisor.
However my confusion is over formsfor the land to be transferred to her husband as I also have conflicting advise ovr whether hr brothr has to fill forms out. This is a family who are hard to deal with & won't trust any advice including solicitors.

Noted. Apologies for misunderstanding what you said. Hopefully they will come to their senses when the LR rep has advised you.

treecol

Thank you all for trying to help. I do understand how hard it is online without knowing/seeing all the details. I'm fraught trying to deal with a family who won't cooperate, so not easy all round.
I have made an appointment with the family solicitor. She has confirmed so far that : probate is needed, father in law is the one who applies to change the register to show his ownership, brother has to fill in parts of the forms & sign.
So now the harc part will be that the brother will not want to cooperate. Goodness knows how this will go.
Thank you again for all your help.
With regard to the Land Registry, I have called, gone through the forms step by step, their advice now corresponds with that of the solicitor. So happy all round - kind of, brother aside!

Yorkshireman99

treecol wrote: »

Thank you all for trying to help. I do understand how hard it is online without knowing/seeing all the details. I'm fraught trying to deal with a family who won't cooperate, so not easy all round.
I have made an appointment with the family solicitor. She has confirmed so far that : probate is needed, father in law is the one who applies to change the register to show his ownership, brother has to fill in parts of the forms & sign.
So now the harc part will be that the brother will not want to cooperate. Goodness knows how this will go.
Thank you again for all your help.
With regard to the Land Registry, I have called, gone through the forms step by step, their advice now corresponds with that of the solicitor. So happy all round - kind of, brother aside!

You have probably told them already but if you tell them how much their pockets will be hurt if they don't cooperate that might concentrate their minds.

treecol

I suspect her brother's logic will be that it will hurt my fil's pocket as he will have to send legal letters etc to her brother asking him to cooperate. When he refuses, it will again cost my fil to instruct solicitor further. Daft isn't it? But his aim will be to string the process out , cost fil money & probably comply at the very last minute.
I will add to this thread when it's all over with an update.