Solicitor holding on to money

bobster2

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

Your not understanding in the will it states if one dies before the other the one surviving gets 100% of the house it was written into the will it doesn’t matter if the brother had any descendants? Because he died 4 years ago forget that it doesn’t matter the original post was the solicitor got the money from the sale on 27th November they came up with excuses not to release it ie they had been busy as soon as I asked for a reasonable excuse why they wouldn’t release the money within hours they changed there mind and said they would release half the money that’s when they then asked for the death certificate 27th December 

Yes - you're correct - with a will like this it's irrelevant whether the brother had any descendants.

The key to understanding all this is did the will state - a) the surviving child gets 100% of the named property? Or b) 100% of the residual estate. With one beneficiary it amounts to essentially the same thing. But it alters the process.

Under a) the executor has to transfer ownership of the house (complete TR1) to daughter who then sells it (hiring a solicitor who happened to the executor)..

Under b) the executor could sell the house as the executor and distribute the proceeds to the daughter.

The house was the daughters to sell forget everything else how long does it take to get the money from a house sale was the original question they was hanging on to it because soon as I challenged them they realised half of it within hours 

Sorry but this just doesn't add up. Their actions (e.g. asking for brother's death certificate following the sale but before releasing 50% of the proceeds) are consistent with them selling as the executor.

If they had transferred the property ownership to the daughter a while ago - they would have asked for brother's death certificate back then.

Also the fact that you initially referred to concerns about settling bills (gas, electricity and council tax) would be consistent with them finalising an estate as executors.

If someone is selling a house that they already own - their conveyancing solictor will have no interest in those bills.

So I suspect the situation is (b)

bombom66

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

Your not understanding in the will it states if one dies before the other the one surviving gets 100% of the house it was written into the will it doesn’t matter if the brother had any descendants? Because he died 4 years ago forget that it doesn’t matter the original post was the solicitor got the money from the sale on 27th November they came up with excuses not to release it ie they had been busy as soon as I asked for a reasonable excuse why they wouldn’t release the money within hours they changed there mind and said they would release half the money that’s when they then asked for the death certificate 27th December 

Yes - you're correct - with a will like this it's irrelevant whether the brother had any descendants.

The key to understanding all this is did the will state - a) the surviving child gets 100% of the named property? Or b) 100% of the residual estate. With one beneficiary it amounts to essentially the same thing. But it alters the process.

Under a) the executor has to transfer ownership of the house (complete TR1) to daughter who then sells it (hiring a solicitor who happened to the executor)..

Under b) the executor could sell the house as the executor and distribute the proceeds to the daughter.

The house was the daughters to sell forget everything else how long does it take to get the money from a house sale was the original question they was hanging on to it because soon as I challenged them they realised half of it within hours 

Sorry but this just doesn't add up. Their actions (e.g. asking for brother's death certificate following the sale but before releasing 50% of the proceeds) are consistent with them selling as the executor.

If they had transferred the property ownership to the daughter a while ago - they would have asked for brother's death certificate back then.

Also the fact that you initially referred to concerns about settling bills (gas, electricity and council tax) would be consistent with them finalising an estate as executors.

If someone is selling a house that they already own - their conveyancing solictor will have no interest in those bills.

So I suspect the situation is (b)

I give in ? like I said the house was the daughter’s to sell because the will had been settled prior to the sale I’m sure the buyers solicitors would have checked who owned the house before they sent the money to our solicitors and no they didn’t ask for a death certificate until 27th December fact I’m not making it up 

bobster2

bombom66 said:

I give in ? like I said the house was the daughter’s to sell because the will had been settled prior to the sale I’m sure the buyers solicitors would have checked who owned the house before they sent the money to our solicitors and no they didn’t ask for a death certificate until 27th December fact I’m not making it up 

I know you're not making it up. I just think you might have misunderstood the process.

An executor will commonly sell a house with the deeds unchanged - the deeds will still show the deceased as the owner. To do this they need a grant of probate. 

The buyer's solicitor will check that the name of the deceased owner on the deeds matches the name on the grant of probate. That's all they need to show that the sale can go ahead. 

The buyer doesn't need to know anything about who the ulimate beneficiaries are. This is why they wouldn't have needed a death certificate for a beneficiary at that earlier stage.

I'm just trying to help - but it's very difficult if you can't clarify some simple points. It took several pages to establish that the solicitor was indeed the executor.

This makes a huge difference. A solicitor simply doing conveyancing on behalf of an owner will transfer funds in about 24 hours. But when acting as executor there are various reasons why they might take weeks or months to distribute proceeds.

bombom66

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

I give in ? like I said the house was the daughter’s to sell because the will had been settled prior to the sale I’m sure the buyers solicitors would have checked who owned the house before they sent the money to our solicitors and no they didn’t ask for a death certificate until 27th December fact I’m not making it up 

I know you're not making it up. I just think you might have misunderstood the process.

An executor will commonly sell a house with the deeds unchanged - the deeds will still show the deceased as the owner. To do this they need a grant of probate. 

The buyer's solicitor will check that the name of the deceased owner on the deeds matches the name on the grant of probate. That's all they need to show that the sale can go ahead. 

The buyer doesn't need to know anything about who the ulimate beneficiaries are. This is why they wouldn't have needed a death certificate for a beneficiary at that earlier stage.

I'm just trying to help - but it's very difficult if you can't clarify some simple points. It took several pages to establish that the solicitor was indeed the executor.

This makes a huge difference. A solicitor simply doing conveyancing will transfer funds in about 24 hours. But when acting as executor there are various reasons why they might take weeks or months to distribute proceeds.

Original question how long to get money from house sale soon as I asked why they couldn’t release it the released Half of it within a few hours if I didn’t ring and question it they wouldn’t have realised it so obviously they was holding it 

TBG01

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

Your not understanding in the will it states if one dies before the other the one surviving gets 100% of the house it was written into the will it doesn’t matter if the brother had any descendants? Because he died 4 years ago forget that it doesn’t matter the original post was the solicitor got the money from the sale on 27th November they came up with excuses not to release it ie they had been busy as soon as I asked for a reasonable excuse why they wouldn’t release the money within hours they changed there mind and said they would release half the money that’s when they then asked for the death certificate 27th December 

Yes - you're correct - with a will like this it's irrelevant whether the brother had any descendants.

The key to understanding all this is did the will state - a) the surviving child gets 100% of the named property? Or b) 100% of the residual estate. With one beneficiary it amounts to essentially the same thing. But it alters the process.

Under a) the executor has to transfer ownership of the house (complete TR1) to daughter who then sells it (hiring a solicitor who happened to the executor)..

Under b) the executor could sell the house as the executor and distribute the proceeds to the daughter.

The house was the daughters to sell forget everything else how long does it take to get the money from a house sale was the original question they was hanging on to it because soon as I challenged them they realised half of it within hours 

Sorry but this just doesn't add up. Their actions (e.g. asking for brother's death certificate following the sale but before releasing 50% of the proceeds) are consistent with them selling as the executor.

If they had transferred the property ownership to the daughter a while ago - they would have asked for brother's death certificate back then.

Also the fact that you initially referred to concerns about settling bills (gas, electricity and council tax) would be consistent with them finalising an estate as executors.

If someone is selling a house that they already own - their conveyancing solictor will have no interest in those bills.

So I suspect the situation is (b)

I give in ? like I said the house was the daughter’s to sell because the will had been settled prior to the sale I’m sure the buyers solicitors would have checked who owned the house before they sent the money to our solicitors and no they didn’t ask for a death certificate until 27th December fact I’m not making it up 

The property being left to the daughter in the will doesn't automatically mean it gets transferred to the daughter. A transfer or an Asssnt would have to take place, registered with the Land Registry. 

If that hasn't taken place, and the daughter should be well aware if it has, then no, she didn't have capacity to sell.

bombom66

TBG01 said:

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

Your not understanding in the will it states if one dies before the other the one surviving gets 100% of the house it was written into the will it doesn’t matter if the brother had any descendants? Because he died 4 years ago forget that it doesn’t matter the original post was the solicitor got the money from the sale on 27th November they came up with excuses not to release it ie they had been busy as soon as I asked for a reasonable excuse why they wouldn’t release the money within hours they changed there mind and said they would release half the money that’s when they then asked for the death certificate 27th December 

Yes - you're correct - with a will like this it's irrelevant whether the brother had any descendants.

The key to understanding all this is did the will state - a) the surviving child gets 100% of the named property? Or b) 100% of the residual estate. With one beneficiary it amounts to essentially the same thing. But it alters the process.

Under a) the executor has to transfer ownership of the house (complete TR1) to daughter who then sells it (hiring a solicitor who happened to the executor)..

Under b) the executor could sell the house as the executor and distribute the proceeds to the daughter.

The house was the daughters to sell forget everything else how long does it take to get the money from a house sale was the original question they was hanging on to it because soon as I challenged them they realised half of it within hours 

Sorry but this just doesn't add up. Their actions (e.g. asking for brother's death certificate following the sale but before releasing 50% of the proceeds) are consistent with them selling as the executor.

If they had transferred the property ownership to the daughter a while ago - they would have asked for brother's death certificate back then.

Also the fact that you initially referred to concerns about settling bills (gas, electricity and council tax) would be consistent with them finalising an estate as executors.

If someone is selling a house that they already own - their conveyancing solictor will have no interest in those bills.

So I suspect the situation is (b)

I give in ? like I said the house was the daughter’s to sell because the will had been settled prior to the sale I’m sure the buyers solicitors would have checked who owned the house before they sent the money to our solicitors and no they didn’t ask for a death certificate until 27th December fact I’m not making it up 

The property being left to the daughter in the will doesn't automatically mean it gets transferred to the daughter. A transfer or an Asssnt would have to take place, registered with the Land Registry. 

If that hasn't taken place, and the daughter should be well aware if it has, then no, she didn't have capacity to sell.

Question for you then . 1 how did she sell it then 2 why did the buyers solicitor send money to our solicitors then to the daughter 3 read the original post bye bye

RAS

The daughter didn't sell it!

She is in the process of inheriting an estate left by her mother. When the executor obtained probate, they asked her if she wanted them to transfer the house to her name or for them to sell it. 

Obviously when finalising the estate, someone reviewed the legal file and realised they had no proof that the brother is dead. So they asked for his death certificate. That also explains why they were prepared to make an interim distribution of 50% of the estate.

Of course now the executor has to do another set of accounts etc and will charge for both that and for dealing with your interventions.

bombom66

RAS said:

The daughter didn't sell it!

She is in the process of inheriting an estate left by her mother. When the executor obtained probate, they asked her if she wanted them to transfer the house to her name or for them to sell it. 

Obviously when finalising the estate, someone reviewed the legal file and realised they had no proof that the brother is dead. So they asked for his death certificate. That also explains why they were prepared to make an interim distribution of 50% of the estate.

Of course now the executor has to do another set of accounts etc and will charge for both that and for dealing with your interventions.

What was the original question (post) haha  what are you going on about?????

TBG01

You're bombom66 said:

TBG01 said:

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

bobster2 said:

bombom66 said:

Your not understanding in the will it states if one dies before the other the one surviving gets 100% of the house it was written into the will it doesn’t matter if the brother had any descendants? Because he died 4 years ago forget that it doesn’t matter the original post was the solicitor got the money from the sale on 27th November they came up with excuses not to release it ie they had been busy as soon as I asked for a reasonable excuse why they wouldn’t release the money within hours they changed there mind and said they would release half the money that’s when they then asked for the death certificate 27th December 

Yes - you're correct - with a will like this it's irrelevant whether the brother had any descendants.

The key to understanding all this is did the will state - a) the surviving child gets 100% of the named property? Or b) 100% of the residual estate. With one beneficiary it amounts to essentially the same thing. But it alters the process.

Under a) the executor has to transfer ownership of the house (complete TR1) to daughter who then sells it (hiring a solicitor who happened to the executor)..

Under b) the executor could sell the house as the executor and distribute the proceeds to the daughter.

The house was the daughters to sell forget everything else how long does it take to get the money from a house sale was the original question they was hanging on to it because soon as I challenged them they realised half of it within hours 

Sorry but this just doesn't add up. Their actions (e.g. asking for brother's death certificate following the sale but before releasing 50% of the proceeds) are consistent with them selling as the executor.

If they had transferred the property ownership to the daughter a while ago - they would have asked for brother's death certificate back then.

Also the fact that you initially referred to concerns about settling bills (gas, electricity and council tax) would be consistent with them finalising an estate as executors.

If someone is selling a house that they already own - their conveyancing solictor will have no interest in those bills.

So I suspect the situation is (b)

I give in ? like I said the house was the daughter’s to sell because the will had been settled prior to the sale I’m sure the buyers solicitors would have checked who owned the house before they sent the money to our solicitors and no they didn’t ask for a death certificate until 27th December fact I’m not making it up 

The property being left to the daughter in the will doesn't automatically mean it gets transferred to the daughter. A transfer or an Asssnt would have to take place, registered with the Land Registry. 

If that hasn't taken place, and the daughter should be well aware if it has, then no, she didn't have capacity to sell.

Question for you then . 1 how did she sell it then 2 why did the buyers solicitor send money to our solicitors then to the daughter 3 read the original post bye bye

1.) She didn't. The Executors did. Ie not her. Question for you. Why are you struggling to understand stand this? 

2.) Because the Executors sold the property, and she's a beneficiary. The buyers solicitor doesn't care about the Will and is not responsible for distributing the funds.

I've read your original post several times and 6 pages later still can't make heads or tails of things.

No wonder the Solicitor is also struggling.

elsien

I’m surprised people have hung on this long to be honest, given that the OP wants a straight answer without sharing the relevant information or understanding why the questions are being asked.