Urgent Advice: Inheritance due for payment—any legitimate options on timing vis-à-vis benefits?

silvercar

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043621#Comment_82043621

there are some exemptions if a property is for sale.

poseidon1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043539#Comment_82043539

You have outlined an unusual scenario where the original executor has apparently completed the administration of the estate ( from their perspective) by vesting de facto legal ownership of the property in hands of the beneficiaries entitled thereto.

This means as far as the property is concerned it is not an estate sale, but a direct sale by the entitled beneficiaries.

Therefore, on day of completion of the sale the proceeds legally belong to those beneficiaries outright.

The fact that the initial monies will be held in a single account belonging to just one beneficary is irrelevant. That beneficiary will be holding on bare trust for the both of them.

Therefore OP, for UC purposes you will legally have reportable capital cash in your 'possession ' as of 30 June assuming completion does happen on that date.

My original comments presupposed this was a sale by an ongoing estate in administration. Your belated revelation today indicates this clearly is not the case, and frankly will have led to incorrect observations by myself and others on a variety of different issues over your various threads.

Rinchen

Thank you for your replies.

In response, the house has already been transferred to the beneficiaries names and it has been on the market since that date.

Regarding poseidon1's points, I reread the original post, which does not indicate this refers to a sale by an ongoing estate in administration, which is not the case. The further details I added were sourced since (but are consistent with), the original post. I regret if there has seemingly been a confusion. It has been my intention to lay out the situation as clearly as possible at each stage, in the hope of gaining clarity as to any legitimate potential for a delayed transfer.

Robbie64

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82043800#Comment_82043800

The Case Manager at UC has to make this decision to exempt the property. This means that ownership of half of the property should have been reported to UC when ownership of the property passed from the estate to the two beneficiaries. It most likely will be exempted while the property is for sale but ownership of the property (an asset) has to be reported.

To answer the OP. Once the property has been sold, the beneficiaries will gain title to the funds. A person acquires capital from the exact date the person legally becomes entitled to the funds or asset. This applies whether the funds at the time are held by a solicitor, in a bank or in this case, by the other beneficiary.

Grumpy_chap

Following that nightmare scenario, the property title was transferred into the names of the two children in mid-June 2025 and was immediately put on the market the same day.

So, half the house belong to the benefit recipient from mid-June 2025. The house should have been declared as capital at that time. A disregard can be applied where the house is actively being marketed for sale. Usually that disregard is limited to 6 months.

The inheritance will be significantly over the £16k limit so any expenses or essential purchases will not have a substantial bearing on that aspect.

How "significantly over"? I mean if it really is a long way over, let's consider £100k for the purpose of discussion, then the next UC date is irrelevant as UC will stop (and potentially should have stopped back in 2025, which could give rise to a possible UC reclaim). If the inheritance is going to be a long way over the £16k, then the best advice would not be managing the timing of the inheritance to maximise UC eligibility one last time, but supporting the individual to manage the money for their long term benefit.

Rinchen

The transfer of equity of the property (to the two beneficiaries, who are the offspring of the deceased) took place a year ago.

Just to clarify, what is the basis for silvercar's comment that 'the timing only needs to be reasonable and doesn't need to be instant' (for example, is it personal experience, concrete knowledge of the DWP protocols or another source)?

silvercar

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82045358#Comment_82045358

A judge in a court case, but nothing to do with hmrc or dwp.

Grumpy_chap

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82045358#Comment_82045358

Then the (half) equity in the house should have been declared via journal a year ago when the transfer occurred. It would then be possible for the DM to apply a disregard on the basis of the house being up for sale. That disregard is usually limited to 6 months.

The timing of the sale and the actual proceeds (money) landing in the individual's account become irrelevant as the capital was received a year ago.

huckster

Agree with @Grump_chap

The inheritance should have been reported to UC a year ago.

If it is reported now a Decision Maker may realise the late reporting and overpayment of UC may be calculated following closure of the claim from the relevant date.

Spoonie_Turtle

Then the (half) equity in the house should have been declared via journal a year ago when the transfer occurred. It would then be possible for the DM to apply a disregard on the basis of the house being up for sale. That disregard is usually limited to 6 months.

It is 6 months to start with but can be extended if they can show they are genuinely trying to sell the property - which since it did sell, they evidently were.