Intestacy and Letters of Administration

poseidon1

Aristotle67 said:

Thank you again, everyone, for contributing. Much appreciated.

I have recommended to the sons and grandchildren that they get a STEP solicitor involved and have found one locally who may be suitable. I believe solicitor's fees come out of the estate. I estimate the value of the estate to be between £350000 and £400000 so have advised that they could expect fees to be around £5000 - £6000 at the upper end, depending on the complexity.

I am glad I am staying out of this for the most part. It is indeed going to get rather messy and complicated. 

The latest development, for want of a better word, is that the son who lives there would want to release equity from his 33% share of the property as otherwise he has no money to live on. He was laid off about fifteen years ago and has not worked since. He does not received benefits as he refused to be retrained and attend courses. He essentially sat at home playing on xbox and playstation and his father supported him. Of course, having died intestate, the father has not left the son any access to funds. 

I am not sure if equity release would even be possible as the property would be in co-ownership; but even if it is I don't like the sound of it. The amount owed under equity release can grow and grow; most people I know who have released equity have, ultimately, wished they hadn't. It is something to be considered very, very carefully. The family are not against this happening so that the resident son can continue to have a home and some money on which to live, but there will surely be better options. An obvious one would be for the property to be sold and the proceeds divided according to the rules on intestacy. The resident son could then find somewhere else to live with his share. I am not sure that is acceptable.....but it might be advisable. 

As I say I am glad I am not getting overly involved. My sympathies have waned ever so slightly. The STEP solicitor can have fun trying to sort this out. My only involvement may be to act as a go between for the family with the solicitor, if that is acceptable. The family would prefer me to deal with the solicitor. I would prefer it to be them. We'll see what ensues. 

Thank you once more for those who took time to post and advise.   

If the family dynamics are as chaotic as you suggest, a STEP solicitor may well refuse to take the brief, or having ( perhaps foolishly) taken it on, reach a stage they are no longer prepared to act - I have seen the latter outcome.

You were well advised to place some distance from this mess , but acting as the go between (interpreter) with the solicitor may prove stressful in its own right  . Sadly, some family  situations defy the possibility of a rational outcome depending on the intransigence/apathy/obstinacy of the parties concerned.

Savvy_Sue

Aristotle67 said:

As I say I am glad I am not getting overly involved. My sympathies have waned ever so slightly. The STEP solicitor can have fun trying to sort this out. My only involvement may be to act as a go between for the family with the solicitor, if that is acceptable. The family would prefer me to deal with the solicitor. I would prefer it to be them. We'll see what ensues. 

Noooooo! I really wouldn't advise acting as a go between, it would be a complete nightmare, and I'm confident it would push costs up - which I suspect you have underestimated anyway! For simply giving advice, possibly, but to actually obtain the Letters of Administration quite a bit more. 

The MOST I would be prepared to do would be to explain in words of one syllable what the solicitor has said, and what may happen if that advice is not followed, and I think I would ONLY be prepared to do that for your friend. Which is frustrating for him, especially when I believe he is acting to protect his children's interests, but this looks like such a mess. 

Aristotle67

Thanks, poseidon1 and Savvy_Sue, for your advice and recommendations. These are appreciated greatly.

What a mess! 

I really don't want to get involved, not even as a go-between, but the son-in-law is appealing to me. It is a very difficult time for the family. Not only has this death occurred, but six days earlier the son-in-law's much loved mother, and thus the grandchildren's paternal grandmother, died in hospital. Although I wasn't married to her daughter (we were together as partners for over eighteen years before she died) I regarded her as my mother-in-law and she regarded me as a son-in-law. I was present at her bedside when she passed away. The son-in-law is busy cleaning up her affairs (she has left a will, thank goodness), making funeral arrangements etc. Three years ago, the son-in-law's father died, then two months later his mother-in-law passed, and a few weeks later he lost his wife. Ten months later my partner died. Thus in the last three years the son-in-law has lost his wife, parents, sister and in-laws and the grandchildren lost two grandparents, their mother, their only aunt and, most recently, their remaining two grandparents.  

I regard the grandchildren and son-in-law as family, even though in strict terms they are not. I feel for them and wish this matter was more straightforward.

That said, I am going to follow the advice offered on this forum and not get involved if I can possibly avoid it. It really is too messy and I would be way out of my comfort zone. I might only end up making matters worse, for me and for everyone. 

poseidon1, those possible outcomes had not dawned on me, but thank you very much for bringing them to my attention and your advice. If a STEP solicitor is unwilling to sort this out, I really do not know how or by whom the matter will be handled.   

Savvy_Sue, thank you for your recommendation and thoughts on the estimated costs involved. That won't be good news for anyone, but I am glad you have alerted me to the possibilty that I may be off the mark. 

Aristotle67

Just a brief update on the situation. I am trying to distance myself from this mess but I keep getting phone calls.

The eldest son has said he is fine if the resident son wants to administer the estate. Of course he would have to value the estate for HMRC and then apply for a letter of administration. I doubt very much that he is capable of doing this on his own and would need help with the online procedure and the gathering of information. I do not want to get involved in this. 

I have, in the strongest possible terms, recommended a STEP lawyer with whom the familty can make an initial enquiry. I have forwarded some links to them. They have, so far, done nothing regarding this. 

I have managed to dissuade the resident son from the dreaful idea of equity release, which in my opinion was a non-starter. His immediate personal problem is that he has no funds on which to live. The resident son can get the deceased's main account closed and funds transferred as the amount in question was below the bank's probate threshold. He wants to use some of these funds on which to live. The amount is around £20,000.

Something else I have recommended is that, ultimately, consideration should be given to a deed of trust being prepared by a solicitor to detail how and in what shares the property is owned as tenants-in-common by the two sons, and three grandchildren. I have explained how tenants-in-common is an equitable arrangement and constitutes severance; and that despite what is agreed because the shares are severed it is possible, through a court order, for a tenant-in-common to at some point in the future request a sale of the property in order to obtain their share in money. 

I do hope that the family get legal advice a.s.a.p. 

Thanks again to all who have contributed. Every comment received was most welcome. 

elsien

They would be far better off selling the house splitting the shares and the resident  son renting somewhere. 

He won’t want to, but whatever deeds of Trust you draw up, he’s not going to move in the future if someone wants to sell. Longer he’s there for the harder it’s gonna be to shift them. I have had this situation in my family, It’s now 10 years later and none of the other beneficiaries have had their money property is slowly deteriorating.
Why should the grandchildren have their share tied up in a trust when depending on their age as they might need it sooner rather than later?

Savvy_Sue

Aristotle67 said:

Just a brief update on the situation. I am trying to distance myself from this mess but I keep getting phone calls.

And I know this is hard, but you may need to adopt the cracked record response. "I have given you all the advice I can: it is now up to you to progress this. Now, how are you / how's the family?"

Aristotle67

elsien said:

They would be far better off selling the house splitting the shares and the resident  son renting somewhere. 

He won’t want to, but whatever deeds of Trust you draw up, he’s not going to move in the future if someone wants to sell. Longer he’s there for the harder it’s gonna be to shift them. I have had this situation in my family, It’s now 10 years later and none of the other beneficiaries have had their money property is slowly deteriorating.
Why should the grandchildren have their share tied up in a trust when depending on their age as they might need it sooner rather than later?

I agree entriely, elsien. It would be better to sell the property, but I don't see it happeneing. The deceased's wish was, so I am led to believe, that the resident son should be able to live in the property for as long as he wished or until death. Unfortunately, he did not get round to putting this into a will. None of the family dispute the wish and seem happy for the resident son to stay there.

I also concur regarding the grandchildren. They are of the age when two of them are saving to try and buy a house (one of them got married recently) and their share might well provide a deposit and more, thus enabling them to get on the property ladder. They are more concerned about the resident son - he is in his early fifties but would struggle to cope away from what has been his home - and may well be willing to forego their shares. That is magnanimous of them, perhaps even admirable; but maybe not wise with regard to their own futures. Their father is trying to persuade them not to. 

Sorry to learn that you have had to undergo issues of a similar nature, and thank you very much for taking time to post with your suggestions. 

Aristotle67

Savvy_Sue said:

Aristotle67 said:

Just a brief update on the situation. I am trying to distance myself from this mess but I keep getting phone calls.

And I know this is hard, but you may need to adopt the cracked record response. "I have given you all the advice I can: it is now up to you to progress this. Now, how are you / how's the family?"

Thanks, Savvy_Sue. You are quite right; and it isn't for the want of trying. Maybe I need to try harder.

elsien

Are they also all willing to pay for the property to be insured and maintained? And if the son has no income, he can’t just spend all of dad‘s cash on himself, so can he afford to run the house on his own? They really need to think this through properly. 

Flugelhorn

elsien said:

Are they also all willing to pay for the property to be insured and maintained? And if the son has no income, he can’t just spend all of dad‘s cash on himself, so can he afford to run the house on his own? They really need to think this through properly. 

good point - he needs to realise the costs of running a place and that Dad is no longer around to fund this and he can't really expect the rest of the family to do it