Being pursued for a debt 4 years on from money received from an estate being paid out

auser99

4 years ago, my mother received a payment from the estate of a distant relation who had passed. The adminstrator handling it took over £1k or so from the fee.
(Same for the other beneficiaries).

Today, she's received a letter from the same administrator, sheepishly saying that the relation's old landlord is pursuing rent arrears, including for 2 years after she'd died, apparently he hadn't noticed!

The administrator has basically implied we can either return "our share" of the debt, another £1k, or the costs could escalate from being taken to court by the claimant, and we assume eat well into the original money received 4 years ago, or maybe even go higher? Have no idea.

The administrator is apparently fighting the charge of "maladministration" of the estate, and can't represent us due to a conflict of interest, but will provide updates.


So just wanted to get any in the know people's take on this whole scenario.
And whether simply issuing 1k back to him ends it cheap, or whether this all sounds like it has any basis to it?

Shelldean

The landlord wants rent for the two years after the tenant died??

auser99

Shelldean said:

The landlord wants rent for the two years after the tenant died??

Apparently yes.  "Hadn't realised".

But some amateur googling tells me death doesn't immediately end someone's liability, it's on the tenancy agreement etc. Which we have absolutely no way of knowing the details of.

Shelldean

It does sound like the administrator has messed up royally. Who has accused them of maladministration?

auser99

Shelldean said:

It does sound like the administrator has messed up royally. Who has accused them of maladministration?

Can only assume it's the landlord.

You'd have thought any claim like this should have been handled well before issuing money to beneficiaries.

I did see something on google about an executor is responsible for any debt that arises after money has been issued through probate.
But I've no real knowledge on whether he counts as the executor or whether this is "probate". So could be totally irrelevant.

HampshireH

So Rent is owed until a tenancy ends.

The executor should have ended that tenancy as part of their executor duties.

Is the administrator a solicitor or a relative/friend etc

That said the landlord couldn't have failed to notice if they were carrying out a gas cert annually (if it had gas of course).

How nice is must be not to miss a monthly incom for 2 years!

sheramber

What are the other beneficiaries saying about it?

auser99

sheramber said:

What are the other beneficiaries saying about it?

Letter only came today and would have to make calculated guesses on who the others are and if they're still around!

auser99

HampshireH said:

So Rent is owed until a tenancy ends.

The executor should have ended that tenancy as part of their executor duties.

Is the administrator a solicitor or a relative/friend etc

That said the landlord couldn't have failed to notice if they were carrying out a gas cert annually (if it had gas of course).

How nice is must be not to miss a monthly incom for 2 years!

Administrator is a professional from a firm who split estates out. Not a well meaning amateur.

You do wonder how you could let arrears go for 2 years.

theoretica

auser99 said:

4 years ago, my mother received a payment from the estate of a distant relation who had passed. The adminstrator handling it took over £1k or so from the fee.
(Same for the other beneficiaries).

Today, she's received a letter from the same administrator, sheepishly saying that the relation's old landlord is pursuing rent arrears, including for 2 years after she'd died, apparently he hadn't noticed!

The administrator has basically implied we can either return "our share" of the debt, another £1k, or the costs could escalate from being taken to court by the claimant, and we assume eat well into the original money received 4 years ago, or maybe even go higher? Have no idea.

The administrator is apparently fighting the charge of "maladministration" of the estate, and can't represent us due to a conflict of interest, but will provide updates.


So just wanted to get any in the know people's take on this whole scenario.
And whether simply issuing 1k back to him ends it cheap, or whether this all sounds like it has any basis to it?

'The administrator handling it took over £1k' - was this expenses paid out or their own charges?  Because they are only permitted to charge if they are a professional, and if they are a professional firstly they have messed up big time, and secondly they should have insurance to cover such things.

My understanding is that there is no way your mother can be held responsible for more than she received - and it would not be the debtor pursuing her - but the administrator!  Worth getting more expert advice than mine though.

auser99

theoretica said:

auser99 said:

4 years ago, my mother received a payment from the estate of a distant relation who had passed. The adminstrator handling it took over £1k or so from the fee.
(Same for the other beneficiaries).

Today, she's received a letter from the same administrator, sheepishly saying that the relation's old landlord is pursuing rent arrears, including for 2 years after she'd died, apparently he hadn't noticed!

The administrator has basically implied we can either return "our share" of the debt, another £1k, or the costs could escalate from being taken to court by the claimant, and we assume eat well into the original money received 4 years ago, or maybe even go higher? Have no idea.

The administrator is apparently fighting the charge of "maladministration" of the estate, and can't represent us due to a conflict of interest, but will provide updates.


So just wanted to get any in the know people's take on this whole scenario.
And whether simply issuing 1k back to him ends it cheap, or whether this all sounds like it has any basis to it?

'The administrator handling it took over £1k' - was this expenses paid out or their own charges?  Because they are only permitted to charge if they are a professional, and if they are a professional firstly they have messed up big time, and secondly they should have insurance to cover such things.

My understanding is that there is no way your mother can be held responsible for more than she received - and it would not be the debtor pursuing her - but the administrator!  Worth getting more expert advice than mine though.

I believe it was their fee as a professional. 
And that they do have insurance but that was in the original letter in case another beneficiary came to light.

It does feel that this administrator, who is fighting the maladministration is asking us to put the 1k in each to cover him.
But just a cynical feeling.