Family home

Myci85

I believe the usual thing to happen is rather than the physical house being left to you all to share, the value of it is included in the estate, so the house would be sold to liquidate the estate and allow beneficiaries to be paid their share. 

As someone above has alluded to, if you all were to become joint owners of the house, you would then lose your FTB status if you later decide to buy your own house, meaning you would have a much higher amount of stamp duty to pay. 

Sadly, it is so often the case that families end up falling out over things like this, at a time when you'd hope to all come together and support each other, and trying to cohabit the house with adult siblings sounds like a sure fire way to cause issues when the inevitable happens and one or two decide they want to sell up. 

gwynlas

It partly depends on the wording of the will but generally where a house is left to three siblings the one in residence will need to buy out the others shares if they wish to continue living there

In law you would have no right to remain and family home holds no meaning

It sounds as though your mother is being fair in stating equal shares

Sea_Shell

gwynlas said:

It partly depends on the wording of the will but generally where a house is left to three siblings the one in residence will need to buy out the others shares if they wish to continue living there

In law you would have no right to remain and family home holds no meaning

It sounds as though your mother is being fair in stating equal shares

In circumstances like these, one can be equally both FAIR and UNFAIR at the same time!!

Split 3 ways  = fair
2 siblings not being able to realise their financial interest, without a potential fight = no quite so fair.


OP, will you be happy to sell up and move out, when the time comes? 
Or, would you rather stay there, and co-own with your 2 siblings?

maman

Does, for example, the potential estate have other assets (like savings other assets ) as well as the house? Will the mother perhaps have to pay for care in the future? How old is OP?

All unknown variables which make it more difficult to offer advice. 🤔

itsthelittlethings

I feel like the OP is wondering about the possibility of squatting 🤣

noviceSon

Appreciate all the replies thankyou ! 
I am a bit strapped for time right now but will process the many replies and reply in depth asap tomorrow.
In the meantime, feel free to add anything.

To answer SeaShell and maman however before I go.... 

I am early 50s, youngest of 3
I am not sure if I would be happy to sell up or not.- don't really want to unless family dynamics disintegrate,.
However I wonder if I will have any choice alone, unless another agrees. 
Who knows, perhaps we will co-habit happily, hard to know !
But I take keep_pedalling's point - things may change.
I would he happy to stay, but that could all chanhe later if one sibling decides to move in too.
I suppose the truth is, we haven't really talked about it. 
That's why I wanted to know where I stood legally before doing so, so to speak.

There are no real assets, but a few other savings - nothing huge. 
With the different nil rate allowances presumably transferrable, IHT is not expected.
Who knows if my (remaining) father will need care. 
Hopefully not aa it's effectively my role to look after him - not that he is disabled. 

Thanks again !

Marmaduke123

noviceSon said:

I suppose the truth is, we haven't really talked about it. 

Best to talk about it now with your siblings and your father. Each of you may have a different idea about what will happen if your father needs care, and when he dies. For the sake of family unity it's best to avoid misunderstandings.

Myci85

You say you'd be happy to stay there and cohabit, unless one sibling decides to move in. I can't imagine many people being happy to inherit a third of a house and see no gain for themselves, either by selling and getting their share of the money, or by living in the house themselves. Unless some agreement was made that you pay rent to the sibling/siblings not living there, but I imagine that would be complex. 

I would imagine the only way you could stay living there is if you can afford to buy out the other shares. 

Sea_Shell

Marmaduke123 said:

noviceSon said:

I suppose the truth is, we haven't really talked about it. 

Best to talk about it now with your siblings and your father. Each of you may have a different idea about what will happen if your father needs care, and when he dies. For the sake of family unity it's best to avoid misunderstandings.

I agree on the talking front.   Get everyone's thought and opinions out in the open.

HOWEVER, this does run the risk of the parent changing their will in favour of the resident sibling, if after giving it more thought, they decide they don't want to be that fair, after all.  

Even changing it to include a clause to let the resident sibling remain living in the property for 'life', would have the effect of preventing the other siblings from realising their share, potentially for decades, and also land them on the hook for ongoing maintenance and costs.

It may be that the other siblings are aware that this might happen if they "rock the boat", and would rather it not be addressed, so they can pursue their share (with whatever action needed) when the time comes.

Alternatively, they could change their will to make the selling of the property mandatory.

It's a minefield.

noviceSon

Myci85 said:

I can't imagine many people being happy to inherit a third of a house and see no gain for themselves, either by selling and getting their share of the money, or by living in the house themselves.  

I suppose the one point we can all agree on is it's quite a nice house to live in. 

But while I find the propsect of living in house myself rather appealing, I greatly appreciate your point.

I wonder if so far, I've been cajoled into doing what at least 1 other wants me to.

Which is basically wait until I die and hand over my third of the house to their offspring.

Suffice to say I haven't been told the intricate details !

But it's clear the intention is to "keep it in the family" (or hers !)