Legal responsibility on inheriting half a property

costa_queen

Hello

I am being left a 50% share in a property in a will with my sibling having the other half, the will says that the property is not to be sold and my sibling is to carry on living in it with no rent etc to be paid, if say for example the roof needed replacing, would I be 50% responsible legally for the roof replacement despite not receiving any financial gain from the property until my sibling passes away?

If anyone has experience of this type of scenario I would appreciate some input! 

RAS

All this very much depends on the precise wording of the will, which appears to set up Immediate Post Death Interest trust. 

Has the donor died? 

Regardless have you seen a copy of the will?

Flugelhorn

the key is in the wording of the will - hopefully the donor is still around and the whole thing can be clarified . Lots of things to consider - what is sibling wants to move? what if sibling has a partner - would they be able to stay? who is responsible for insurance ? 

Marcon

costa_queen said:

Hello

I am being left a 50% share in a property in a will with my sibling having the other half, the will says that the property is not to be sold and my sibling is to carry on living in it with no rent etc to be paid, if say for example the roof needed replacing, would I be 50% responsible legally for the roof replacement despite not receiving any financial gain from the property until my sibling passes away?

If anyone has experience of this type of scenario I would appreciate some input! 

What exactly does the will say?

Keep_pedalling

If this has been done properly the will should set up an immediate post death interest trust, in which case you bother will be the beneficial owner of the entire property and legal owner of 50%. The trust will be the legal owner of the other half, so you, as the remainderman, will have zero responsibility in the upkeep of the house.

Even if that is not the case, your sibling will struggle to get any money from you if you simply refuse to pay. 

Savvy_Sue

Flugelhorn said:

the key is in the wording of the will - hopefully the donor is still around and the whole thing can be clarified . Lots of things to consider - what is sibling wants to move? what if sibling has a partner - would they be able to stay? who is responsible for insurance ? 

I'm also thinking 'what if @costa_queen has to claim means-tested benefits / wants to get her own mortgage on a different property / divorces?' In all of those situations, owning half a house from which she derives no benefit could create a lot of problems / cost a lot of money. 

RAS

Savvy_Sue said:

Flugelhorn said:

the key is in the wording of the will - hopefully the donor is still around and the whole thing can be clarified . Lots of things to consider - what is sibling wants to move? what if sibling has a partner - would they be able to stay? who is responsible for insurance ? 

I'm also thinking 'what if @costa_queen has to claim means-tested benefits / wants to get her own mortgage on a different property / divorces?' In all of those situations, owning half a house from which she derives no benefit could create a lot of problems / cost a lot of money. 

The whole point of an IPDI trust is that @costa_queen would currently own nothing. That is why people in this situation don't have to pay the additional SDLT for example.

The Trust and brother each would be the owners of 50% of the property. costa_queen might be one of the trustees, but that depends what set up in the will, as does anything about upkeep. 

It is only after brother's departure or death that the trust ends and costa_queen acquired legal ownership of their 50%. 

Savvy_Sue

RAS said:

Savvy_Sue said:

Flugelhorn said:

the key is in the wording of the will - hopefully the donor is still around and the whole thing can be clarified . Lots of things to consider - what is sibling wants to move? what if sibling has a partner - would they be able to stay? who is responsible for insurance ? 

I'm also thinking 'what if @costa_queen has to claim means-tested benefits / wants to get her own mortgage on a different property / divorces?' In all of those situations, owning half a house from which she derives no benefit could create a lot of problems / cost a lot of money. 

The whole point of an IPDI trust is that @costa_queen would currently own nothing. That is why people in this situation don't have to pay the additional SDLT for example.

The Trust and brother each would be the owners of 50% of the property. costa_queen might be one of the trustees, but that depends what set up in the will, as does anything about upkeep. 

It is only after brother's departure or death that the trust ends and costa_queen acquired legal ownership of their 50%. 

And that's why it matters that it is set up properly, and is an IPDI trust, which we suspect but cannot be sure of!