Joint Tenants v Common Tenants

Sine_Nomine

Not sure if this is a Probate question or a house selling question.  Looking for some guidance on the following:

Unmarried couple buy a house together 42 years ago, relationship failed immediately after completion of the purchase, and one partner leaves never to be heard from again.  The other partner (who put all the equity into the house anyway) lives on in the house, paying the mortgage until term, and maintaining the house up until the present day.

The occupant never does anything about resolving the ownership issue - the LR title remains in both names.  It is not clear from the LR entry whether it was Joint or Common tenants, but I am assuming Joint is almost certain to be the case.  Is there any way to determine this easily? 

Then the occupant passes away, intestate.

Is it a given that the house passes to their former partner?  (That assumes the former partner survived the occupant of course - not sure how to find this out easily?).

Is there any case to be argued that that partner abandoned the property 42 years ago, and having contributed zilch to the mortgage and upkeep (or indeed put any equity into it at all) that all or some of the property should become part of the deceased's estate?

I realise this would need handling by a decent solicitor and tracing agents, but just trying to get a feel of what to expect initially.

The answer determines whether those administering the deceased's estate should expend any effort on resolving this now, or can just empty the house and walk away from it.

Any advice gratefully received. 

Slithery

Sine_Nomine said:

Is it a given that the house passes to their former partner?  (That assumes the former partner survived the occupant of course - not sure how to find this out easily?).

If they were joint tenants then yes.

Sine_Nomine said:

Is there any case to be argued that that partner abandoned the property 42 years ago, and having contributed zilch to the mortgage and upkeep (or indeed put any equity into it at all) that all or some of the property should become part of the deceased's estate?

No.

Keep_pedalling

I would not want to have to administer that estate. Because of the deceased persons idiocy in not sorting this out decades ago compounded by their stupidity in not making a will they have left a horrible mess for someone else to clear up. If there is no evidence that either of them split the tenancy then the property passes 100% to the survivor

If the other owner died prior to the occupant then it makes thing somewhat simpler, first task is to track them down, hopefully their name was not John Smith.

AdrianC

Sine_Nomine said:

Unmarried couple buy a house together 42 years ago, relationship failed immediately after completion of the purchase, and one partner leaves never to be heard from again.  The other partner (who put all the equity into the house anyway) lives on in the house, paying the mortgage until term, and maintaining the house up until the present day.

All just back-story, with no relevance to the current situation.

The occupant never does anything about resolving the ownership issue - the LR title remains in both names.  It is not clear from the LR entry whether it was Joint or Common tenants, but I am assuming Joint is almost certain to be the case.  Is there any way to determine this easily?

What does the LR entry say about disposition without the other owner? https://help.landregistry.gov.uk/app/social/questions/detail/qid/42/~/joint-ownership---tenants-in-common---which-am-i?
"No disposition by a sole proprietor of the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an order of the court'"

If that's not there, then it's a good bet it's JTs, unless the other joint owner can produce paperwork showing otherwise.

Then the occupant passes away, intestate.

Is it a given that the house passes to their former partner?

If joint tenants, then - yes - the ownership of a joint owner ceased to exist the instant that person drew their last breath.
If tenants-in-common, then their ownership is part of their estate.

If there was no will, then the normal intestacy route determines who inherits the deceased's estate.
https://www.gov.uk/inherits-someone-dies-without-will
Note: The Crown is ahead of "random ex-partner and joint-owner"...

(That assumes the former partner survived the occupant of course - not sure how to find this out easily?).

This is a good place to start - https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/#wills

But, ultimately, there's going to need to be some detective work.
If they were JTs, then if the long-disappeared partner predeceased this one, then this one was full owner, so the entire property is part of their estate.
If they were TiCs, then if the long-disappeared ex predeceased, then the other owner of the property may be some relative that doesn't even know they own it... That doesn't change the rights and responsibilities to get it sorted properly... 

Is there any case to be argued that that partner abandoned the property 42 years ago, and having contributed zilch to the mortgage and upkeep (or indeed put any equity into it at all) that all or some of the property should become part of the deceased's estate?

Nope. The time to sort that out has passed...

Sine_Nomine

Keep_pedalling said:

I would not want to have to administer that estate. Because of the deceased persons idiocy in not sorting this out decades ago compounded by their stupidity in not making a will they have left a horrible mess for someone else to clear up. If there is no evidence that either of them split the tenancy then the property passes 100% to the survivor

If the other owner died prior to the occupant then it makes thing somewhat simpler, first task is to track them down, hopefully their name was not John Smith.

Agreed.  Administering the estate looks like having many challenges other than just this issue.

It may well be worthwhile trying to trace the former partner, though there is a high likelihood she married and there's an (unknown) name change.  She's almost certainly traceable, but it'll need a tracing agent, and they'll need paying.

getmore4less

There is another option and it happens where relatives don't bother to administrate.

There is a house no mortgage.

Owner may or may not still know or care and never turn up.

Someone can just live in it and move on if the owner turns up. 

Sine_Nomine

AdrianC,

There's no such wording on the LR proprietorship register - I am almost certain it will be JT.

Based on your, and other's, answers, it seems worthwhile doing a trace, but only to find out if the former partner is still alive.  If she is, then I am sensing the prudent move may be to just walk away from the house.  The rest of the deceased's estate is virtually nil, maybe one or two £k, only barely solvent.  It is probably a question to ask over on the probate board, but the next question will be whether one can take on the administration of the estate, clear the house of personal possessions, and just walk away from the house?  There is a small mortgage in place which appears to be related to Council enforcement of repairs to the property - so I presume it would become that lender's problem to sell it and disburse excess funds to the former partner.     

getmore4less

Do not take on administrating unless you plan to follow it through.
Don't intermeddle in the estate

You can move contents for safe keeping and secure the property without intermeddling

If you can trace the other owner and find they have passed then if you collect the documentation to satisfy the land registry they died first then best to hand over to the beneficiary.to do the admin.

Sine_Nomine

getmore4less said:

Do not take on administrating unless you plan to follow it through.
Don't intermeddle in the estate

You can move contents for safe keeping and secure the property without intermeddling

If you can trace the other owner and find they have passed then if you collect the documentation to satisfy the land registry they died first then best to hand over to the beneficiary.to do the admin.

I understand about intermeddling.  Ignoring the house, there is probably a small positive value to the estate, so it may be worth administering as it'll yield enough to at least fund the funeral.  The question is whether an administrator can take on the task without having to resolve the house ownership issue.  Would there ever be a case where some costs relating to disposal of the house bounce back as a liability to the estate?

AdrianC

Sine_Nomine said:

Based on your, and other's, answers, it seems worthwhile doing a trace, but only to find out if the former partner is still alive.  If she is, then I am sensing the prudent move may be to just walk away from the house.

If she is, then she now owns the entire property. Wouldn't the decent thing to be to tell her?

the next question will be whether one can take on the administration of the estate, clear the house of personal possessions, and just walk away from the house?

No, it's all-or-nothing.

If you do not want to administer the estate, taking anything from it would be stealing from the beneficiaries.

There is a small mortgage in place which appears to be related to Council enforcement of repairs to the property

I think you mean a charge, rather than a mortgage. So, yes, that needs to be cleared from the estate's assets. That's why you cannot just help yourself to some of those assets without worrying about the debts.

The charge is for the estate to settle. The house's value is not part of the estate.

getmore4less

AdrianC said:

Sine_Nomine said:

Based on your, and other's, answers, it seems worthwhile doing a trace, but only to find out if the former partner is still alive.  If she is, then I am sensing the prudent move may be to just walk away from the house.

If she is, then she now owns the entire property. Wouldn't the decent thing to be to tell her?

the next question will be whether one can take on the administration of the estate, clear the house of personal possessions, and just walk away from the house?

No, it's all-or-nothing.

If you do not want to administer the estate, taking anything from it would be stealing from the beneficiaries.

There is a small mortgage in place which appears to be related to Council enforcement of repairs to the property

I think you mean a charge, rather than a mortgage. So, yes, that needs to be cleared from the estate's assets. That's why you cannot just help yourself to some of those assets without worrying about the debts.

The charge is for the estate to settle. The house's value is not part of the estate.

relocating items for safe keeping is allowed, is not intermeddling or stealing.