Probate Help Please

AnotherJoe

SensibleSarah wrote: »

Friends of mine had a similar situation. They took the AST and moved in, but the house needed fairly major works (central heating installed, modernisation of kitchen & bathroom) and they obviously couldn't do anything until it had been resolved, which they assumed would be a few months tops. 2.5 years later, they were still living there (and paying a fortune for electric/oil heat) and situation had not been resolved. When eventually it was over 3 years after they started the process, the vendor had the property re-valued and put the price up by £30k - which they couldn't afford.
3 years of their lives wasted making plans for their home and still no house at the end of it. The only redeeming factor was that their rent whilst living there had been pretty low - due to poor standard of the house.

But in the OPs case, they get to sell their current house. They were already talking about selling and renting anyway.
At that point, they are in a good position, they are "test driving" the new house and its location, and best case they buy it within a reasonable time, worst case they are no worse off than if theyd rented some other unconnected house.

xylophone

When the mother died, both brothers were in agreement that the property was to be sold (as is evidenced by the fact that the property was put up for sale).

The surviving brother is now the sole legal owner.

Can he not proceed to sell the property and hold half the proceeds in the executor's account, pending a decision as to who is actually entitled to that money?

https://www.land-registry-documents.co.uk/information/joint-ownership-tennants/

getmore4less

Yes.......

AdrianC

xylophone wrote: »

The surviving brother is now the sole legal owner.

Is he...? He's the sole living owner, sure... But that's a very different thing.

Can he not proceed to sell the property and hold half the proceeds in the executor's account, pending a decision as to who is actually entitled to that money?

If he's the sole legal owner, then why does he need to? After all, it's all his money, if he's the sole legal owner.


Right now, we only know for sure that he owns 25%, documented at LR.
He might well own another 25% (50% of 50%), presuming his mother's estate was properly settled and it did indeed get left to him. But why wasn't it documented at LR?
We have absolutely no idea about his brother's estate. We know for sure his brother owned 25% (the "trust" rumour is just that, according to LR), and the same caveat applies to the remaining 25% (50% of 50%).

We know that, for %ages to be recorded at LR, it must be JT, so the "Well, the brother's kicked the bucket so it's automatically his" of TiC doesn't apply.

In which case, all we can say is that there's probably two legal owners, one of whom is dead and whose estate is currently being disputed by likely recipients. Yes, it will make that dispute a lot easier if the administrator of the estate continues with the sale, and then the dispute is simply about the monies due the estate from it...

But he died intestate, and it sounds like nobody's yet been given letters of administration, so there is no administrator at the moment.

getmore4less

If he's the sole legal owner, then why does he need to? After all, it's all his money, if he's the sole legal owner.

legal ownership and beneficial ownership are different.

You can be a legal owner and have no beneficial interest.

if the they are the sole legal owner they are acting as trustee for the beneficial owners and can sell the house.

without this differentiation trusts with property would not be possible and you could never have more than 4 people own a place.


If the deceased brother was one of the other legal owners he is not now
As soon as the land reg get notified he is dead they can take the name off the title and leaving any survivors.

ThomasGeorge

Sorry to ask a fairly simple question and I'm probably being naive but, if we could proceed with the sale without the deceased brother's estate being resolved then wouldn't 1 of the 2 solicitors dealing with this have mentioned it?! Or is unreasonable to expect this level of knowledge on such a complex situation?

Tom99

ThomasGeorge wrote: »

Sorry to ask a fairly simple question and I'm probably being naive but, if we could proceed with the sale without the deceased brother's estate being resolved then wouldn't 1 of the 2 solicitors dealing with this have mentioned it?! Or is unreasonable to expect this level of knowledge on such a complex situation?

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]It seems its not unusual for a solicitor to tell you probate is require to sell a property when a joint owner dies, but that is not true.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]As getmore4less says the surviving brother, who is now the sole legal owner, can sell the property but would have to include a 2nd person on his side to effect the sale.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]That 2nd person can be anyone, the brother then holds the sale proceeds in trust for himself and the other beneficial owner(s).[/FONT]

xylophone

Sorry to ask a fairly simple question and I'm probably being naive but, if we could proceed with the sale without the deceased brother's estate being resolved then wouldn't 1 of the 2 solicitors dealing with this have mentioned it?! Or is unreasonable to expect this level of knowledge on such a complex situation?

See link in my post above.

Tom99

xylophone wrote: »

When the mother died, both brothers were in agreement that the property was to be sold (as is evidenced by the fact that the property was put up for sale).
The surviving brother is now the sole legal owner.
Can he not proceed to sell the property and hold half the proceeds in the executor's account, pending a decision as to who is actually entitled to that money?
https://www.land-registry-documents.co.uk/information/joint-ownership-tennants/

But remember to go to the official Land Reg website for copy documents and pay £3 not £14.95.

https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/eservices/FindAProperty/view/QuickEnquiryInit.do