Delicate will and inheritance issue.

stephenbalmer

thepurplepixie said:

MoneySeeker1 said:

Re "partner would have had the option to write a will and pass it back to her siblings" and it may be that partner wasn't aware that the amount of time she had left meant she needed to "get her affairs in order" - it may well have been pretty unexpected or she was preoccupied with fighting an illness or the like.

We aren't all well-organised and prepared for these things in advance. I've definitely found that (even in my 60's) I seem to be one of the more organised people I know in that respect - right down to if Lockdown (yep - Lockdown and not Covid) means it all happens sooner than expected. But there are many people that get to be quite elderly and still haven't "got their affairs in order" for whatever reason.

Presumably she did have a will, the OP refers to his partner not his wife so she must have left it to him in a will unless she was actually his wife.

Why should the OP be out of pocket because he has to pay solicitors fees and IHT, if her family want the share of the house the very least they could do is talk politely to the OP about it and offer to cover all expenses.

Yes, it is exactly as I said, we were not married however she (and I for that matter) had a will leaving everything to the other..

thepurplepixie

Stephen I honestly don't see any moral or legal reason for you to give it to them.  It was hers and she left it to you.  However, if you are prepared to give it to them I would make it clear that legally you don't have to and if they want you to change that they need to pay all the expenses.  I think you are a very kind person to even entertain the way they are behaving.

Manxman_in_exile

thepurplepixie said:

Stephen I honestly don't see any moral or legal reason for you to give it to them.  It was hers and she left it to you.  However, if you are prepared to give it to them I would make it clear that legally you don't have to and if they want you to change that they need to pay all the expenses.  I think you are a very kind person to even entertain the way they are behaving.

Agree 100% with that.  To be honest, I'd be a lot less reasonable than the OP and would want to see a change in behaviour on the part of the in-laws.  Think I'd string them along a bit...  (But that's just me being nasty)

Sea_Shell

It appears that this is causing a problem for you now because you didn't know about it when originally dealing with your partners estate.   Had your partner forgotten about it, or did it just not come up in conversation?

If you had known about it, and actively discussed the ownership issue earlier, what would you have both done differently, do you think?   

Would the IHT have been payable on your partners estate anyway, if it was always going to include this property share?

Regardless of what happens next...I'm not sure that you can "legally" expect to be reimbursed for any IHT that's due, as it was always an asset of their estate since the day they were gifted it.    

Also i'm not sure even a DoV would have helped in this situation?  As surely these are to avoid IHT being due on the beneficiaries future estate...not the testators?   

thepurplepixie

Sea_Shell do you think he should pay the IHT and then pay the legal expenses to hand the asset over to them?  If he keeps the share of the house then yes the IHT is his but if they want the house then why should he be left out of pocket by paying IHT for something he doesn't get to keep.  I don't think it can be win win for the family and lose lose for the OP.

-taff

Sea_Shell said:

Regardless of what happens next...I'm not sure that you can "legally" expect to be reimbursed for any IHT that's due, as it was always an asset of their estate since the day they were gifted it.   

Yes, and "legally" they can't expect him to hand it over, as legally, it is his. So if he were to give it to them, he can ask for what he likes for it.

Sea_Shell

thepurplepixie said:

Sea_Shell do you think he should pay the IHT and then pay the legal expenses to hand the asset over to them?  If he keeps the share of the house then yes the IHT is his but if they want the house then why should he be left out of pocket by paying IHT for something he doesn't get to keep.  I don't think it can be win win for the family and lose lose for the OP.

No I don't think that he should hand over the asset for "nothing".   Morally, that's to be agreed between all parties.   But if all this went "legal", then they could argue that they owe him the current valuation of his share, but NOT the IHT element.

MoneySeeker1

There is a big difference between what is legal and what is moral on this issue. Legally he can keep it. Morally he can't keep it.

The brothers have no way of knowing if their sister would or wouldn't have "shared" with OP (ie he'd have had the benefit of it - though it wasn't his). They have to treat it, accordingly, as "It was our sisters money - not sister & husbands money".

warby68

OP you have an unexpected tax bill.
You need to realize an asset to pay it and would like that third share in their property to be that asset. Purely for goodwill, if they wish to keep the property in the family, you will sell the share back at a discounted price, that price being the tax and any associated legal expenses. Otherwise you may decide to pursue the sale or keep that asset in case you need to rely on it in the future having borne the tax bill. If you do not have dependents and your circumstances still allow, you 'may' choose to leave it to the brothers in your own will should it still be in your ownership at that time. You would also wish to come to an agreement regarding rent and maintenance if they prefer you to keep it. 
Brothers, either through ignorance or entitlement want to have their cake and eat it. Time to let them know you are not going to be a complete pushover.
Trying to make you feel bad, rushed and obligated probably suggests its entitlement.
Just for curiosity, I wonder what the brothers' wills say - do they have families or is it down to last sibling standing for them too? What if dad outlives them? Suspect they have made more than one mistake here. 
You are also allowed to feel more than a little hurt here for their lack of recognition of you as their sister's life partner as well as the other insensitivities. I can understand why you are willing to give it back even though you don't have to  but net nil cost is probably as generous as you should be to this pair.
You sound gracious and willing but that does not mean they should treat you as they are.

Sea_Shell

-taff said:

Sea_Shell said:

Regardless of what happens next...I'm not sure that you can "legally" expect to be reimbursed for any IHT that's due, as it was always an asset of their estate since the day they were gifted it.   

Yes, and "legally" they can't expect him to hand it over, as legally, it is his. So if he were to give it to them, he can ask for what he likes for it.

I agree, he can ask for whatever he likes for the property, as it is now his (share).

But if the other siblings do agree to buy him out of his share...they may argue that the IHT on their siblings estate (or the portion thereof) is NOT part of the sale price.

I would not just be "handing it over".... the same as if it were cash, a classic car, or any other asset that I'd inherited.   However, i also wouldn't want to remain a part owner of property with estranged "in-laws", so something would have to be agreed with all parties.