Probate, a house and a difficult sibling

poppystar

As it seems the house is the issue rather than the estate as a whole is it not possible for sibling 3 to do something at the Land Registry to prevent the change of name without their agreement?

In fact can whoever gets the LoA actually change the names without agreement of all siblings? Surely there must be something to stop changes without evidence of agreement?

Also OP how much is the financial part of the estate? Is there enough to pay sibling 3 both their third of that and an amount equal to his share of the house from your and sibling 2s shares?

Yorkshireman99

poppystar wrote: »

As it seems the house is the issue rather than the estate as a whole is it not possible for sibling 3 to do something at the Land Registry to prevent the change of name without their agreement?

In fact can whoever gets the LoA actually change the names without agreement of all siblings? Surely there must be something to stop changes without evidence of agreement?

Also OP how much is the financial part of the estate? Is there enough to pay sibling 3 both their third of that and an amount equal to his share of the house from your and sibling 2s shares?

In the case of an intestate estate the assets are just lumped together. The executor just has to liquidate the assets such as the house and distribute the net assets of the estate according to the intestacy rules in this case 1/3 to each. Of course if there is unanimity amongst the beneficiaries then a DOV can be done to distribute the estate differently. In the absence of this sort of agreement the executor is legally obliged to liquidate the estate assets and distribute them within a reasonable time usually within a maximum of a year. The executor has no discretion about this and if they don't do the job within a reasonable time then they can be personally liable for any losses.

poppystar

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

In the case of an intestate estate the assets are just lumped together. The executor just has to liquidate the assets such as the house and distribute the net assets of the estate according to the intestacy rules in this case 1/3 to each. Of course if there is unanimity amongst the beneficiaries then a DOV can be done to distribute the estate differently. In the absence of this sort of agreement the executor is legally obliged to liquidate the estate assets and distribute them within a reasonable time usually within a maximum of a year. The executor has no discretion about this and if they don't do the job within a reasonable time then they can be personally liable for any losses.

This is what I thought but the OP seemed so sure that the names were going to be changed "at the end of probate" and had been talking as if the house and money were separate issues that I thought I might have missed something!

Thanks for the clear and concise explanation.

Yorkshireman99

poppystar wrote: »

This is what I thought but the OP seemed so sure that the names were going to be changed "at the end of probate" and had been talking as if the house and money were separate issues that I thought I might have missed something!

Thanks for the clear and concise explanation.

As the estate is intestate the separation of the estate assets is quite irrelevant.