Removing a Permitted Occupier After a Death

FreeBear

Alderbank said:

FreeBear said:

Alderbank said: Your mother's adult brother has no right to occupy your house. Words matter here, you must avoid any mention of rent and even of calling him a permitted occupier as that term normally implies a rented property. You don't want to do anything to create a tenancy.

The correct term is "Excluded Occupier" I believe - This infers minimal rights on the "lodger", and all that is required is "reasonable notice". Depending on circumstances, this could be as little as 24 hours, or as much as four weeks. Once the notice has expired, changing the locks is perfectly legal. But... You might want to take proper qualified legal advice before going down that route.

Thanks for that, FreeBear. Uncle was 'permitted' by mum while she was alive but he is now 'excluded' by the new owners who inherited it.

OP, is the house in Scotland? He would have more rights up here.

"Excluded Occupier" is defined in the Protection from Eviction Act - See section 3.

But if this property is in Scotland, then the laws may well confer additional rights & protection. Hence the comment, seek qualified legal advice.

GDB2222 said:

As he was, arguably, dependant on mother, he might be able to make a claim that the will did not make adequate provision for him. He has six months from probate to do this, iirc. 

Ilott v Mitson reaffirms the right of an adult child to make a claim under the Inheritance Act, but they still need to prove their case - Have had a solicitor try and use that when I was dealing with probate a few years back. Long story short, just told him to crawl back under a rock, and heard nothing more.

I suspect a sibling to try to make an IA claim would probably fail at the first hurdle.

Edit - Under Section 1 1.e, he might have a claim, but he would still need to put forward a compelling case.

elsien

GDB2222 said:

As he was, arguably, dependant on mother, he might be able to make a claim that the will did not make adequate provision for him. He has six months from probate to do this, iirc. 

If he has two tenanted cottages and tens of thousands in the bank it would be a very weak argument indeed that he was dependant on mother. 

doodling

Hi,

The house is currently owned by the executor of the will (assuming that there is a will?), on trust for the beneficiaries and the executor can take any action commensurate with ownership.

Probate doesn't change that position but confirms it (in most cases!).  Some organisations (e.g. the land registry) want probate before they will believe that the executor is actually the executor but probate is simply a court affirming the reality of the situation, not changing it.

The key question is what are the executors legally permitted to do?  They need to seek legal advice, it might be as simple as waiting until the occupant next leaves and then changing the locks but I would only do that if I had an unambiguous statement from a solicitor that doing so was within the law.

GDB2222

elsien said:

GDB2222 said:

As he was, arguably, dependant on mother, he might be able to make a claim that the will did not make adequate provision for him. He has six months from probate to do this, iirc. 

If he has two tenanted cottages and tens of thousands in the bank it would be a very weak argument indeed that he was dependant on mother. 

He falls within the scope of the act, as he was being maintained partially by the deceased. The argument as to whether the will makes reasonable provision would take into account his income and money in the bank, and his needs. It would take into account also the financial resources of the beneficiaries named in the will, and their needs.  

I don’t think there’s anything like enough information in this thread to say whether he’d have any chance of being successful. 

I would however suggest some tact is used, so as not to goad him into taking  action. Even if he is ultimately unsuccessful, it could tie the estate up for years.

LostJedi

Thank you for the responses so far, please keep them coming.

It is in England.

He has managed to find a means of not paying for himself or as much as he should for many years.  To say he was partially maintained by the deceased is purely his refusal to pay for himself and expect his sister to cover all the bills while he accepts income.  Not reliant, expectant.  

He has the resources, the means, he just chooses to be a parasite and benefit himself.  His free-ride is coming to an end and he's being belligerent about it.

There is a Will and my mother stated 50/50 for myself and my brother.

All utilities are in our names but as an 'occupier' (included/excluded?) and as such surely we can simply change the locks but I'm getting such mixed answers on whether this is possible.  Although it is ours in all but Probate, this may be the point we can(?)

He has been given notice verbally and written, so when this reaches it's date are allowed to?

GDB2222

You are asking for legal advice on a public forum. People who post here are nearly all not legally qualified. In many cases, people here say what they think the law ought to be, without caring whether it actually is or not. Other people are polite, or care about your feelings, and they will post what they think you want to hear.

This is a serious matter, and you need professional legal advice, for which I am afraid you will need to pay. You might get away with acting on the advice you get here, or it may cause you major trouble. Who knows? You certainly won’t have any comeback. 

km1500

Not sure what this 'notice' is - other than you confirming he has a right to be there by sending it.

Did you get some legal advice? It shouldn't take you more than a day.

As I said, as he is not a tenant then he has no rights (unless by giving him notice you have implicitly recognised his right to be there). Change the locks and call the police.

But this is my view - get it confirmed first.

LostJedi

Thanks all.

We have been speaking to solicitors and have started a process, naturally it is costing us but alas, this is the way of these things.

GDB2222

LostJedi said:

Thanks all.

We have been speaking to solicitors and have started a process, naturally it is costing us but alas, this is the way of these things.

That’s excellent news. I hope that it goes smoothly.

Alderbank

sourpuss2021 said:

km1500 said:

Not sure what this 'notice' is - other than you confirming he has a right to be there by sending it.

Did you get some legal advice? It shouldn't take you more than a day.

As I said, as he is not a tenant then he has no rights (unless by giving him notice you have implicitly recognised his right to be there). Change the locks and call the police.

But this is my view - get it confirmed first.

This is bad advice because OP doesn't own the house yet!!   It is still in probate.

We are told that mum left the entirety of her estate to her two sons 50/50. I had assumed one or both of them (OP or his brother) to be executor of such a simple will.
Is that not the case?