Will & Wishes & the letter of the law

TabbitTheUnbelierver

Hi All,


I'm the executor for my Grandmothers estate. The will calls for the estate to be split equally between her 3 children, one of which has been living with her for the last 30 years.


My Grandmother asked me (but did not state in the will) to give him 6 months in the house to sort himself out and I intend to fulfil those wishes... however it has occured to me that when contacting the bank to close out her accounts I would usually ask for them to cancel the direct debits and consequently close out the utility accounts also. Of course, I imagine my Grandmother intended for the house to have power and water for those 6 months, so I'm not sure how to proceed.


I'm aware that I was made the executor because the 3 beneficiaries are not very nice people and now suddenly very aware of how much trouble they could cause for me if I do something one of them doesn't like and they take a grudge, so I want to make sure that I am doing the most legally appropriate thing at all times.


Should the utilities be kept in my Grandmothers name (or changed to the 'Estate account'?) or is it appropriate that the utilities be transfered to my uncle to pay for these 6 months?


Thanks for any advice

getmore4less

Primary concern should be will the occupier cooperate and won't be making any claims on the estate or not moving out when required.

It is fairly normal for the occupier to take over all utilities and council tax from DOD.

if you think it will become a problem estate for you to sort out you could renounce and let them get on with it.

TabbitTheUnbelierver

I can't say as to whether he'll be difficult, I'll be happy to have him formally evicted when the time comes if necessary.


Unfortunately the beneficiaries all need the money from the estate quite badly and everything my Grandmother spent the last decade doing (saving, paying off the mortgage, leaving everyone else out of the will and of course asking me to be the executor rather than using the solicitors) was to ensure the three of them got as much money as possible... so I'd rather not renounce it unless I absolutely have to, I don't want to let her down.


It's good to know that the occupier usually takes over the utilities though. Is that usual when it's only short term, as well as long term?


Many thanks

Keep_pedalling

Bearing in mind how long probate will take, and the length of time it is going to take to sell the house the current occupant is going to have 6 months plus to find alternative accommodation anyway, so you do not have any reason to delay things.

I suppose you could argue that the occupant is doing the estate a favour in not leaving the house unoccupied and vulnerable so perhaps some form of compromise might be acceptable, but certainly they are legally responsible for paying the council tax, although they should be able to claim a discount for single person occupation.

Owain_Moneysaver

As executor, you could the resident beneficiary to sign a short assured tenancy for 6 months renting from the estate. The other beneficiaries are entitled to the benefit of the income from the house so you can charge him a reasonable rent (and then return one-third to him as equal beneficiary after he leaves.). This should enable you as executor to be able to evict when it comes to selling.

You will find it very difficult to sell the house with a sitting tenant or occupant without a tenancy. Make it clear to all beneficiaries that this will hold up distribution of all assets from the estate and that they have to co-operate.

Your grandmother's utility accounts and council tax accounts should have been closed at the date of death as you will need owing/advance balance amounts for the estate valuation and IHT forms.

After that the utility accounts should be put in the name of the occupying tenant. The landlord/owner's insurance should be in the name of the Executors to the estate of ... and they must agree to the occupied or tenanted state of the property.

getmore4less

Selling houses with occupants without tenancies happens all the time.

The occupier has a beneficial interest just like nearly every normal sale.

The key is will they be cooperating ie a motivated seller.

Not sure I would want to executor to save others money that could do the job themselves.

Malthusian

I would also ask you why you need to get involved with this.

"Gran wanted me to do it" isn't a reason. Legally you have the right to renounce. Morally, either your grandmother liked you in which case she wouldn't have wanted you to act as executor if it caused you a lot of stress. Or she hated you and wanted to land you in the mess, in which case you owe her nothing.

You would have a financial interest if there was any possibility of your parent's share of the estate eventually passing to you, but as all of the beneficiaries apparently have financial problems, that sounds unlikely.

I would seriously consider renouncing and leaving the beneficiaries to get on with it. Not your problem. Not your gran's problem either, her problems have been taken away. It's the beneficiaries' problem, you owe them nothing and you've said they are not very nice people, so I don't see why you need to make their problems yours. Nor would your gran (unless she hated you).

Mojisola

Malthusian wrote: »

I would also ask you why you need to get involved with this.

"Gran wanted me to do it" isn't a reason. Legally you have the right to renounce.

Rather than renouncing and leaving the beneficiaries to fight it out, why not stay as executor but employ a solicitor to do the work - all complaints would have to go through him/her and the more fuss the beneficiaries make, the higher the cost and the lower their inheritance which should focus their minds on not causing trouble.

Marcon

TabbitTheUnbelierver wrote: »

Should the utilities be kept in my Grandmothers name (or changed to the 'Estate account'?) or is it appropriate that the utilities be transfered to my uncle to pay for these 6 months?

They can't be kept in your grandmother's name - she is dead. Either transfer to your uncle, or take over responsibility as executor and re-charge to him by reducing his 1/3rd of the estate when the time comes (make sure he knows this will happen).

But on balance I agree with other posters: if you haven't started doing anything on this estate (technical term is 'intermeddling', which has nothing to do with meddling in its usual sense), renounce and save yourself what is likely to several years of misery, possibly much more.

Gavin83

Oh, I didn't realise you aren't a beneficiary. In that case you really should renounce this and let them deal with it, you could be held personally liable if you make a wrong decision. This has the potential to get messy.

Malthusian

Mojisola wrote: »

Rather than renouncing and leaving the beneficiaries to fight it out, why not stay as executor but employ a solicitor to do the work

I agree that is the second best solution, but the OP may still have to put up with whinging about spending gran's money on a solicitor when they need the money. Of course the OP could stick their fingers in their ears and tell them all communication should go to the solicitor, but that's not always easy.

The other disadvantage is that the OP has then made a decision which costs the estate money, which may cause them guilt. If they walk away they haven't. Any costs that subsequently arise are the beneficiaries' choice.

The OP says they are not rational people, so pointing out that the more trouble they cause, the more expensive it gets, may not stop them from causing the OP trouble. If the OP renounces they no longer have anything to do with the money so they are less likely to cause the OP trouble.