Who's responsible for the house bills between probate to its sale?

discountdude1_

Hi, so I'm the administrator of an intestate estate in England with two beneficiaries. I wanted to organise the house sale as one of the first priorities, but due to a very problematic and threatening beneficiary it took over a year. Before the death, I was in the house as a carer and lived in it after the death, with the plan always being to buy it (which the other beneficiary knew before the death).

Due to the continuous legal threats and harassment from them, there really is no love lost so I want to be lawful, not "nice". As I understand, I could charge the estate for house insurance and CT and security (change of locks due to also threatening ex partner! What a process this has been!), and presumably because I'm the administrator, I could (at my discretion) charge the estate for the utilities because the administrator needs somewhere to live. The water was at rateable charge, and internet was pretty much only used for probate and research, the landline phone bill was only used for calling utilities and other professional agencies, and elec was for powering the laptop for all of this! I understand I could charge the estate a relevant percentage used for management of the estate.

My question is, as the administrator / PR living in the house, is the estate, or am I responsible for the bills? Utilities, insurance, CT, etc? Any relevant case-law would be great.

Thanks

Hoenir

discountdude1_ said:

presumably because I'm the administrator, I could (at my discretion) charge the estate for the utilities because the administrator needs somewhere to live.

The Administrator's legal duties and responsibilities relate purely to the Estate, in short, taking care of all of the deceased's assets, debts, and taxes.

There's no rights to occupation to a property. For the Estate to pay living costs. Nor for the process to be unduely delayed. 

Keep_pedalling

If you were living there you were responsible for the council tax. With no one living there there would have been an exemption all the way through administration and for 6 months after obtaining probate.

doodling

Hi,

The general rule is that if there is someone living there then they pick up the bills, if the property is empty then the estate picks them up.

This rule is not absolute, what is reasonable depends on the bill and the exact circumstances.  For example, in the case of something like buildings insurance, where the loss would be to the estate if the place burnt down, it would be appropriate for the estate to pay.  I can't think of any justification for an estate to pay the utility costs of someone living in a property.

It wouldn't be unreasonable for whoever was living there to be paying rent to the estate, unless they were due to inherit the whole property, although whether it is appropriate (or possible) to throw someone out if they didnt is a somewhat different question.  Whether someone paying rent is a good idea also depends on whether it is in the interests of the estate to create a tenancy with all the legal obligations and constraints that go with it.

An executor / administrator has no special status with respect to any of the above - the estate has no obligation whatsoever to provide them with anything, other than (for a lay administrator) the direct costs of administering the estate (and for the avoidance of doubt, accommodation is not generally one of those).

Exodi

I think I'm probably more siding with the beneficiary on this unfortunately. I understand its an incredibly emotionally charged time, but I'd take a step back and re-consider whether you're acting completely reasonably. For example, I'd say the below is not reasonable and would unsurprisingly put the back up of a beneficiary...

discountdude1_ said:

because I'm the administrator, I could (at my discretion) charge the estate for the utilities because the administrator needs somewhere to live.

One could even suggest you should have been paying rent to the estate while you were living there.

saajan_12

discountdude1_ said:

As I understand, I could charge the estate for house insurance and CT and security (change of locks due to also threatening ex partner! What a process this has been!), and presumably because I'm the administrator, I could (at my discretion) charge the estate for the utilities because the administrator needs somewhere to live. The water was at rateable charge, and internet was pretty much only used for probate and research, the landline phone bill was only used for calling utilities and other professional agencies, and elec was for powering the laptop for all of this! I understand I could charge the estate a relevant percentage used for management of the estate.

My question is, as the administrator / PR living in the house, is the estate, or am I responsible for the bills? Utilities, insurance, CT, etc? Any relevant case-law would be great.

Thanks

No, after death you have no inherent right to live there unless you were given a life interest. There is no responsibility to house you, this isn't your full time job with perks, its a role you can choose to give up. If you continue in the role, then only actual, direct costs are claimable, eg for the number of pages printed, calls made, and utilities used (think 5%). Not the leccy for your tv, lights, cooker, etc etc. 

If it was empty, the estate would cover the bills (insurance, standign charges, etc). However if not, the resident would certainly be liable for council tax, utilities, lock changes needed due to the particular person living there. Property insurance could theoretically be on the estate. 

That resident could be anyone, eg a 3rd party tenant, and you living there, incurring higher utility costs and lock change bills isn't in the best interest of the estate. Arguably you should be paying rent. 

msb1234

I’m assuming that as there was no will, and the house was in the deceased’s name only so had to be sold, then you had no legal right to live in the property. All bills linked to the house after the death would be yours to pay. 

lincroft1710

You have a most unusual (and not quite correct) understanding of your role as administrator.

As administrator you administer the estate, As administrator you have no rights to live in any property of the estate. As you have chosen to live in the house (for whatever reason) as occupier you are responsible for the CT and all utility bills plus telephone/internet (although any utility usage in your role as administrator could in theory be claimed back from the estate). Insurance and maintenance costs of the property are the responsibility of the estate, any repairs necessitated by your negligence would be your responsibility.

In theory the estate could demand rent from you, but the legalities involved in this probably would not make it worthwhile