Probate sale- required to keep on market?

propertydog

Hi,

Just trying to get my head around buying a property with probate.

If a property has had a deed of probate on it given, are executors always required to keep it on the market all the way through completion?

Or can I negotiate to have it removed from the market once surveys etc start, to prevent gazumping?

Cheers for advice

G_M

I assume you mean a Grant of Probate?

But no - it's up to the executors. Ask them to remove it from the market and they probably will.

Executors do have a legal duty to get a fair price for the property and if the Beneficiaries think they sold it cheap, they (the Bs) could bring legal action against the Es. But it's very rare, and provided the Exs can show they marketed it at a price recommended by EAs, and/or a surveyor's valuation (which may have been obtained for Inheritance Tax purposes) there will be no problem.

davidmcn

And (probably) most of the time the executors are the beneficiaries anyway, so they're hardly likely to start suing themselves, and will just have the same considerations as any "normal" vendor about whether to take it off the market or not.

G_M

davidmcn wrote: »

And (probably) most of the time the executors are the beneficiaries anyway, so they're hardly likely to start suing themselves, and will just have the same considerations as any "normal" vendor about whether to take it off the market or not.

Though if the solicitors in this case were selling, goodness knows what they'd feel they have to do as Executers.....!

propertydog

Ooops, meant grant of probate! Thanks, that makes sense now - in most cases, beneficiaries may also be the executors, I guess, and so if all easily agree to the price it is being sold for on condition of removal from market, that should be fine then.

I was just worried as a lot of ads said 'It is marketed subject to obtaining the grant of probate and must remain on the market until contracts are exchanged.' and so was worried even after probate is granted, executors may legally be forced to keep it on the market even if the beneficiaries are happy with a lower price and taking it off.

Cheers.

moneyistooshorttomention

davidmcn wrote: »

And (probably) most of the time the executors are the beneficiaries anyway, so they're hardly likely to start suing themselves, and will just have the same considerations as any "normal" vendor about whether to take it off the market or not.

Which is exactly what happened when I bought my current house (ie a probate one). The vendor = executor = beneficiary.

I didnt trust the vendor - so kept an eye on him after he'd accepted my firm offer. I was correct not to trust him - as I discovered he was trying to keep taking viewings of the house. I made it very plain the house was now "sold STC" as he knew and those viewings were to stop. They did stop. So yep...there isnt a problem if the seller is also beneficiary (other than anything they decide to create personally regardless....).

So the house was basically safely mine at the point my offer was accepted by him (+ the couple of days it took for me to realise he was still open to viewings on it:cool: and deal with that).

Davesnave

Every house is 'on the market' until exchange.

Most people stick to their word and decision, once made, but everyone has their price. Also every offer must be put to the seller(s) unless they say otherwise..

moneyistooshorttomention

Davesnave wrote: »

Every house is 'on the market' until exchange.

Most people stick to their word and decision, once made, but everyone has their price. Also every offer must be put to the seller(s) unless they say otherwise..

...and they will "say otherwise" if the buyer says "Any more viewings on my house (now that you've accepted my offer) and I'll walk...." It is common for an agreed buyer to have further viewings blocked once a property has gone STC.

Davesnave

The most likely gazumper is someone who has already viewed and gone away to sell theirs, or otherwise find the finances.

This is, of course, more likely to happen with the more esoteric properties, not usually 2 bed terraces in Huddersfield etc.

PasturesNew

Your obligation is to get the best price/situation - to benefit the estate and not any personal preference or agenda.

If it's being sold legitimately to people paying the correct price and there's nothing to sweep under the carpet ... then you can take it off the market.

That's legitimate.

I was selling one and my buyer lost their buyer, so I had to put it back on the market even though I knew that the original buyer would be my "preferred buyer" and I'd have liked to have waited for him to find another buyer for his house .... it wasn't my choice to do that.

Another couple were interested and I wanted them to buy it, for personal reasons, but I declined their offer as they had to put their house on the market to sell it.

So I had TWO buyers who, for personal reasons, I wanted to buy the house - both had an emotional link to the house - but I sold it to a "random stranger" who was able to buy it at the time.

And that's the bottom line ... if something were questioned, later, about why you did XYZ, can you legitimately say you did the correct/right thing and it wasn't an emotionally-driven decision or something iffy.

propertydog

I see - all helpful info, thanks.