Possible aquired property -shared beneficial interest in inheritance property

BROKEBUT4HOPE

Hi really need some help.

I am a case where me and my family members are suing another family member for taking our share of the family estate. 
At the time i declared B in 2009 i was not sure if i would have a beneficial interest as my father had just died.
Now my solicitor is saying that my OR could have an interest and this makes my claim for the beneficial interest nullified unless I get the OR to assign their claim back to me.

I am being adviced either to request the OR to do it and pay their legal fees- at which point they may decide to do it or agree with me a certain amount.

My question is how is it that they still could have a vested interest even when the B was discharged in 2010.

Also what amounts of money could they be asking for- my B debts were well under 100k and some of it was paid back. The inherited property is to be divided by 5 plus solicitors fees.
 My solicitor needs a decision on with i withrdraw my claim from the inheritance or i take the risk with with the OR.

Any experience here?

Keep_pedalling

Did your father have a will, if so who did he leave his estate too? If not what was his marital status and how many children did he have? 

BROKEBUT4HOPE

He didnt, hen was married and had 6 children - the eldest took control of it all and was meant to hold it in trust for us but no paperwork was drawn as such so we are fighting him

Grumpy_chap

As it appears there was no Will, the Estate should be distributed as per the rules of intestacy.
It is unclear why the Estate would have been held in Trust given the OP had, presumably, attained the age of majority (by virtue of having debts and bankruptcy) at the time of the death.

The starting point for any civil legal action (suing the family member) would be to put the OP back into the position that the OP would have been had the OP not be wronged (assets from the Estate taken by the eldest sibling).

To make sense of that and the impact on the bankruptcy, it needs to be considered in the context of relative time-line and value of the inheritance relative to the bankruptcy.
If we assume the bankruptcy was after the OP should have received the inheritance, then the value of the inheritance will be of interest to the OR as the position at that time would have been that the OP had additional assets to be considered in relation to the inheritance.

It is quite some time since the Estate should have been settled (2009) - where are the funds now that were not correctly distributed?  Does the eldest sibling still have the funds to distribute?

BROKEBUT4HOPE

@Grumpy_chap

Thank you for your reply. My father had left the legal ownership in the name of the eldest sibling but this sibling was meant to distribute the properties- there was nothing in writing so the burden of proof is on us to prove it was left in trust for us. Eldest sibling denied out beneficial interest at time of B and 20 years later we are suing him.

My solictor is of the view that the OR has a vested interest and my part of the claim will fail unless the OR assigns their interest back to me. I am now paying the OR their legal fees to work out what their stance is.

The debt on the B was my asset which was saved as it didnt have enough equity in it for the OR to be interested and unsecured loans circa 60k.

I believe if i win my share in court for my part i may get 200k  but this has its oown complications with order of sell of properties  then minus court and solicitors fees.

Do you think the OR will assign back or take a share or ....
i wonder what will happen if i remove myself from claiming my inheritance since it all all be taken by the OR anyway and therefore is it really the heartache i am going through with going to court etc.

Grumpy_chap

BROKEBUT4HOPE said:

@Grumpy_chap

Thank you for your reply. My father had left the legal ownership in the name of the eldest sibling but this sibling was meant to distribute the properties- there was nothing in writing so the burden of proof is on us to prove it was left in trust for us. Eldest sibling denied out beneficial interest at time of B and 20 years later we are suing him.

My solictor is of the view that the OR has a vested interest and my part of the claim will fail unless the OR assigns their interest back to me. I am now paying the OR their legal fees to work out what their stance is.

The debt on the B was my asset which was saved as it didnt have enough equity in it for the OR to be interested and unsecured loans circa 60k.

I believe if i win my share in court for my part i may get 200k  but this has its oown complications with order of sell of properties  then minus court and solicitors fees.

Do you think the OR will assign back or take a share or ....
i wonder what will happen if i remove myself from claiming my inheritance since it all all be taken by the OR anyway and therefore is it really the heartache i am going through with going to court etc.

You have a Solicitor engaged already and they are far better placed than anyone on an internet forum to advise in a  complete and reliable manner.

The issue is obviously rather complex, so I am going to start by asking the very first question that comes to my mind.

Are you saying that, before your father died, the family home was registered and legally owned by the eldest (of 6) siblings? 
If that is correct, then that asset would not have formed part of your father's Estate when he died and, hence, there is nothing from the house to be distributed to any Beneficiaries of the Estate.
The implication is that your father either sold or gifted the family home to the eldest sibling prior to death.
If the family home was outwith the Estate, was there sufficient value in the remainder of the Estate to make it worth pursuing?
Obviously, this is a very fundamental question, so has your Solicitor commented on this regard?

BROKEBUT4HOPE

there are several properties that were put in his name to be held on trust and to be distrubuted to us, my father died unexpectedly and the sibling is not giving us our interest. our solicitor is dealing with it on that trust basis and we have evidence such as the surviving spouse affirming that it was not all meant to be for him.

Grumpy_chap

BROKEBUT4HOPE said:

there are several properties that were put in his name to be held on trust and to be distrubuted to us, my father died unexpectedly and the sibling is not giving us our interest. our solicitor is dealing with it on that trust basis and we have evidence such as the surviving spouse affirming that it was not all meant to be for him.

There is a need to separate what actually happened (in legal terms) from what you and other family members understood happened / would happen.  Particularly as eldest sibling seems to have a different understanding with regard to what would  / should happen.

What appears to have actually happened (legal terms) is:

• Father gifted the properties to eldest sibling
• Father died unexpectedly
• That earlier than expected death may mean that the properties (or part thereof) was still assessed to be within the Estate for IHT purposes, so a tax liability had to be settled.
• Whenever the properties are sold / transferred, the eldest sibling will incur a CGT liability given the properties cannot all be principal private residence.
• Other considerations may arise if the eldest sibling ever sought to claim means-tested benefits and / or relationship breakdown.

• In addition to the above, there may have been discussion that the eldest sibling was to divide the properties ' value between all siblings when the Father died.  This discussion may have mentioned "trust" but was that mentioned in the legal context (that a formal Trust would be established) or informally ("I trust you to split the properties between all siblings when I am gone")?

What the OP seems to understand happened / should have happened is:

• Properties transferred into eldest sibling's name
• Intent that a Trust is established to hold the properties for the benefit of all siblings
• Did Father take any legal advice on this at the time? - assume not
• If the properties were to be into a formal Trust, why wouldn't the transfer have been direct from Father to Trust?  The transfer to eldest sibling seems an unnecessary step.

• In addition to the above, the Father's spouse also states that the properties were never meant to be all for the eldest sibling.

I really think any Solicitor is going to need to focus on what actually happened in legal terms. 
Trying to unpick verbal discussions of a "he said / she said" that were held 20-odd years ago and one of the parties to those discussions is deceased is nigh on impossible. 
There would need to be some formal record of those discussions from 20-odd years back and it seems as though that record never existed.

What grounds does the current Solicitor believe the claim against the eldest sibling can succeed?
What evidence if the current Solicitor expecting there to be that is not evident from the thread?

BROKEBUT4HOPE

Hi again, 
on grounds that there was admission in writing that he held properties for us the siblings and my mothers statements.

I still need to know whether the OR will assign their interest back to me or not? 

Would you have any idea?

Thanks
Shalima

Grumpy_chap

BROKEBUT4HOPE said:

Hi again, 
on grounds that there was admission in writing that he held properties for us the siblings and my mothers statements.

I still need to know whether the OR will assign their interest back to me or not? 

Would you have any idea?

Thanks
Shalima

I am not sure that your Mother's statements will carry much weight.

I am unclear what the "admission in writing" is, who made it, when?  What form is this statement?  How was it obtained?

What I seem to have gained from the thread is that the OP believes they "should" have inherited around £200k before they went bankrupt in 2009 with debts of £60k.
I am not well versed to comment on how the OR would treat that £200k if received by the OP now.  Others may be better able to advise.

The OP also indicates they were one of 6 siblings, so five others. 
If the OP's share was £200k and the siblings all stood to inherit equal shares, that makes the total around £1.2M. 
All of that total was retained by the eldest sibling rather than being distributed.
It is unclear whether the £1.2M should have been distributed to all siblings (legally), or whether the eldest was entitled to hold all the funds as their own.
Even if the funds should have been distributed, any legal action is moot if the eldest no longer has the assets to distribute.  Does the £1M or so still exist or has it all been blown on fast cars and fast women?

BROKEBUT4HOPE

Well he has remorgaged a lot of the properties and bought himself multiple houses and holidays