Coming of age and property ownership

M100flash

Hi Guys, I wonder if anyone out there can shine a light on this question,
My grandson's mother died when he was four years old. She left him a reasonably substantial amount of money, and my son (his father) and I were given joint grant of representative by the high court, for the child until he became 18 years of age, which is now three years away. We bought a house with the money which he and his father have lived in for the past eleven years and I contributed the short fall as a future investment.


My son is now considering marriage next year, so I would like to put this arrangement on a more legal foothold, to ensure that my grandson's inheritance remains his and under our control until he attains the age of 18.

The house is registered in his fathers name. There is no arguments or acrimony in the family, but I'm a cautious old bird of 70 and no one knows what the next three years will hold for any of us.

jimbo6977

You used your Grandson's cash to buy a house then registered it in his father's name but you contributed to the purchase and reckon you have some claim on the property?

Reads like a three ring circus.

Did you take legal advice at the time of purchase?

Keep_pedalling

Buying the property in your son’s name was totally wrong. The money money should have been held in trust until your GS reached 18. As you put it in property the ownership of the property should have been with the trust, and your son should have been paying rent to the trust for all the years he has lived there.

chesky

Did you never consider that your son might remarry and have children?

maman

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

Buying the property in your son’s name was totally wrong. The money money should have been held in trust until your GS reached 18. As you put it in property the ownership of the property should have been with the trust, and your son should have been paying rent to the trust for all the years he has lived there.

Presumably your son has accrued funds over the years as he's effectively been living 'rent free' whereas if he wasn't living in what is effectively his son's house he'd have been buying his own home or renting.

It's probably been a sensible thing to do to 'invest' your grandson's money into property. What I think you need to do now is take legal advice on how to separate your grandson's investment /finances from his father's. That's not to say your son doesn't still have a responsibility for him but you do need to regularise things and unpick this rather informal arrangement you have put yourselves in.

Malthusian

You urgently need to take professional advice from a solicitor as to how you can extricate yourself from the failure to follow your legal duties as trustee without getting in any further trouble.

M100flash wrote: »

The house is registered in his fathers name. There is no arguments or acrimony in the family

There soon will be if the father tries to hang on to his son's property.

Gavin83

I agree with the others, you need urgent legal advice. You're on extremely shaky ground here and you need to unwind this before you find yourselves in serious trouble.

Effectively you've stolen your grandsons money, you need to fix this.

jimbo6977 wrote: »

Did you take legal advice at the time of purchase?

I strongly suspect the answer to this question is no. A solicitor would never have gone along with this.

TBagpuss

As others have said, you need to get advice now, about how to untangle this and sort out any issues.

You may or may not have been entitled, as executors, to buy a property for your grandson but if s, it should have neem held by you and your son as trustees for your ganrdson, and any personal funds you invested should have been recorded in a declaration of trust.

You son shoul have been paying rent and the trust (i.e. you and your son as trustees) should have ben keping proper records and paying tax as a appropriate.

Run, don't walk, to a solicitor and get advice on wht you ned to do to protect the interests of your grandson and thento fix the issues.

You have, and had a legal duty to act in your grandson's best interests and letting his mone be spnet on a proprty which is not held in his name or in any way secured or his benefit is a clear breac hof that duty. It may have been reasonable to buy a property to ensure that he had a secure home in whichto grow up, but it should not have been put into your son's name and that needs to be sorted out urgently.

Fire_Fox

Malthusian wrote: »

You urgently need to take professional advice from a solicitor as to how you can extricate yourself from the failure to follow your legal duties as trustee without getting in any further trouble.

There soon will be if the father tries to hang on to his son's property.

Fraud? :eek: Son is in a more precarious position than his mother IMO.

" ... and my son (his father) and I were given joint grant of representative by the high court"

maman

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Fraud? :eek: Son is in a more precarious position than his mother IMO.

" ... and my son (his father) and I were given joint grant of representative by the high court"

I think you've misread this. I think it's the grandfather who is the OP and his son who have bought a house for the grandson using a legacy from the child's mother. That's not the problem as such but the fact that the house isn't in the child's name and AFAIK the child's father hasn't paid rent which he should have done if it had been done properly.

I'd like to think all this has been well intentioned but it's a legal mess that needs sorting ASAP. I hope OP is reading if not posting.

Fire_Fox

maman wrote: »

I think you've misread this. I think it's the grandfather who is the OP and his son who have bought a house for the grandson using a legacy from the child's mother.

That's not the problem as such but the fact that the house isn't in the child's name and AFAIK the child's father hasn't paid rent which he should have done if it had been done properly.

I'd like to think all this has been well intentioned but it's a legal mess that needs sorting ASAP. I hope OP is reading if not posting.

Ooooh! I took "cautious old bird of 70" to be (grand)mother. But it could indeed be (grand)father as you say.

I understood the general premise, I think, but quite forgot there was another mother!
Does this edit make any more sense?
"Fraud? :eek: Son is in a more precarious position than (grand)mother IMO."