Probate Property: Who is responsible for maintenance?

MoistTowelette

Hi,

I own 1/3 of a property, with the other 2/3 of it due to go through the probate process (still not submitted yet!) as it was owned by my late mother. I offered to pay for the maintenance until the house was sold as we thought we would get probate done quickly and sell quite quickly, but over a year later it is still dragging on with arguments between me and the other two executors. As it's gone on so long I have had a couple of unforeseen repairs to the house (several hundred pounds) and I would like to claim these back in part from the estate as I don't think it's fair for me to pay for the upkeep of someone else's inheritance indefinitely. One of the executors is pushing back against this saying she has had legal advice saying because I live there, and because I offered to cover the maintenance, that I should pay for everything. Is she right?

If anyone had links back up their answers that would be helpful as I can show the other executors.

Many thanks

Keep_pedalling

Are you are living rent free in the property? If so this would seem a fair trade off against having to pay the running costs. Currently you have all the benefits of ownership, while the other beneficiaries have none.

MoistTowelette

It's not a great deal if you are forced to stay in the property because you aren't allowed to sell, and things start going wrong with it. Where would you draw the line, new boiler, new roof?

Flugelhorn

Could be said you should be paying rent to the estate and then the estate paying for repairs, or more specifically 2/3 of a rent and they pay for 2/3 of the repairs.
However the estate also should be glad that there is someone in the house looking after it as that can be a big problem with empty houses going through probate.
Sounds like you need to come to a sensible agreement - either you pay for repairs and pay no rent or your agree a rent and who pays for repairs and in what proportion.
Trouble is there is no set formula.

Keep_pedalling

MoistTowelette wrote: »

It's not a great deal if you are forced to stay in the property because you aren't allowed to sell, and things start going wrong with it. Where would you draw the line, new boiler, new roof?

Tricky, you would think the others would be keen to get this sorted and receive their inheritance, but unfortunately logic can go out of the window with families and inheritances.

I would say day to day maintenance is down to you but anything serious that would effect the selling price is 1/3rd down to your and the rest down to the estate.

I should just say that if the emotional cost of family arguments is far greater than financial costs, it is sometimes worth taking a financial hit to get early closure, and move on with your life, unencumbered with financial ties to awkward siblings.

MoistTowelette

The talk of rent is bizarre to me. Imagine you lived in a house with your wife, and she died, and whilst probate was going on you had to pay rent to her children?

The issue at hand was a leaking boiler, and a leaking garage roof. If I didn't repair it you can imagine the water damage to both the house and the garage, not to mention everybody's inheritance. I don't want to be here, but I'm locked in whilst someone with what could only be described as literal clinical paranoia causes delay after delay. She even put probate on hold because she found everything too much. And I'm supposed to pay her rent?

JJ_Egan

You need proper legal advice .
Local soliciter or your local cab .

getmore4less

If you are a legal owner you don't need probate to sell.

BrassicWoman

If you're going to be moving out after the sale, I would move out now. It takes all the arguments away.

hazyjo

MoistTowelette wrote: »

The talk of rent is bizarre to me. Imagine you lived in a house with your wife, and she died, and whilst probate was going on you had to pay rent to her children?

That seems to contradict what your initial para said.

Can you confirm:

Were you living at the property when your mother died?

I think we presumed from your OP that you and two siblings (or whoever) had inherited a house and that you had moved in. Perhaps wrongly, but it wasn't clear.

If someone was married and their husband died, the living remaining spouse would more than likely stay in the house unless it had to be sold to pay off a mortgage. When my dad died, I wasn't entitled to anything.

If my mum wasn't around and my dad had married someone else, surely she would inherit the house if there wasn't a will?

If not married and the 'partner' of the deceased didn't part-own the house, they'd have no actual right to stay there so I think it would be fair (although not nice!) for them to move out or pay rent to those who would be inheriting the house. (Not sure any of these three scenarios actually relate to you as I am now under the impression you lived with your mum and your step-siblings want their share (could be completely wrong!).

My knowledge is very limited, so asking more than telling! I'd like to know too.

MoistTowelette

You are correct, I owned a 1/3 and lived with my mother during her old age for over 10 years, now we all want to sell but it is being held up by one executor who seems quite mentally unstable. I was happy to pay for general maintenance and utilities but I only asked to claim two things which seemed a little unfair for me to foot the entire bill for considering I am trapped here until the other executor moves on with things.

As it stands, I reckon I'm just going to drop it. Since all this arguing the house has dropped in value 20k and all the solicitors fees are going up so trying to claim this small amount of money is pointless, from a financial point of view. Frustrating though