Inheritence and house sale

The ‘nomad’ sibling has been on easy street, not having to commit to working, saving, paying a mortgage like other adults do. Why should he be given a wad of cash now for the life choices he’s made?

This.

(I'm guessing Siblings 2 & 3 are female ...)

When my mother's estate was distributed, interim payments (ie from cash balances/investments) were split equally 3 ways. Then the final payment was made once the house was sold and all disbursements had been paid. If 2 siblings let sibling 1 take £60k initially, they are effectively lending sibling 1 £40k. I wouldn't do that without a formal loan agreement saying it is to be repaid from the house sale proceeds.

Nomad is a grown arsed fucking man who’s made his life’s choices. He’s obviously been pampered to my mother but that’s not his siblings fault.

Splitting 3 ways is whats in the will and 3 ways it should be.

The that's exactly what has to happen. The executor(s) must make it happen.

There is no reason the sibling can’t buy a property as part of a chain I.e. family home sold buy property on same day.

I would not advise doing anything to accommodate waster nomad sibling to the possible detriment of the other legatees. He should be paying rent to the estate if he is still living in the house. Why is it not on the market already?

Hang on, this has been rumbling on for over 2 years?

Has work being done to the house to make it saleable?

If he's been having free rent for over 2 years then he's being a CF bringing up wanting a variation at this point.

All the estate - house + cash - must be split equally, if that is your mother's will;.

If Siblings 2 and 3 want to subsidise a sibling who's made some rather unwise choices in terms of his/her housing security (Sibling 1), then they should do a transfer. That is their choice to do so, but it should not be dictated by Sibling 1.

But no way should Sibling 's proposal be entertained as a fair or compulsory way to divide your mother's estate.

Split the £60k 3 ways. He uses that £20k to get himself housed, either deposit or renting.

Sell the property and split 3 ways.

It's incredibly simple this way and what he's proposing is unnecessarily complicated.

Use some of the £60k to repair the house and get it ready for sale. Then split it equally after all costs. He can live there until the sale.

If you let him have the instant cash, anything could happen. He could use it all on something (like a deposit for him) and then the house sells for less so you miss out as you can’t get any money back from him. There could be £10,000 of repairs needed and he says it’s not his responsibility, just you other two.
He will just have to wait for his share of the money like you. He can rent for six months while the house is sold and all money is gathered, then split three ways. Stand firm!

Why are you getting 80k each and he is getting 60k plus ‘whatever is left’

why aren’t you getting 60k each then splitting whatever is left? Is there something he knows about the house that you don’t?

Also, what if the house is build on shale, where it needs to be ripped up to get a mortgage, or another issue like this that makes the house only suitable for a cash buyer. The house may be impossible to shift. And don’t forget we are watching Trump shit on the global economy, I wouldnt be betting everything on the house being worth enough for it to be fair, even though it most likely will be.

Follow the instructions of the will and split equally 3 ways. The ‘nomad’ sibling has been on easy street, not having to commit to working, saving, paying a mortgage like other adults do. Why should he be given a wad of cash now for the life choices he’s made?

I also think you could be on very dodgy ground anyway, distributing cash like this; what about probate?

I would want to keep it simple.
Wait until the house is sold and all fees paid. Then split everything equally.
Sibling can stay in house until sold then will have to rent until he buys a house. He will still have a lower mortgage. But will have to wait a little longer.

Assuming the house is in a suitable location for nomad sidling to get to work, they should live in it until it can be sold.
Will protect the house, they can do any minor work, a grotty lived in (but clean and tidy) house will likely to be easy to sell than an empty one.

If the house needs lots of work, ask the estate agents advice whether there's anything immediate and not major that would aid a fast sale.

Split the estate evenly once the house is sold.

It doesn’t sound too bad to be honest, although I’m not sure I see the need for it. He can put his full inheritance of £73k towards his house purchase regardless, what he seems to want is to be able to get the cash now rather than wait for the house to sell so that he can move for with a purchase straight away. That’s not completely stupid, but equally house buying chains do exist for a reason.

the risk to the other two is that the house sells for less than 120k after fees ect, and therefore that you aren’t able to get your share. There may also be a need for some cash from the estate to enable the sale.

Id probably agree, but then I have a good relationship with my brother and trust him. Up to you. But do get it in writing that any disbursement to him is an advance on his share of the estate and that ever will need to be equalised.

Everything equally split 3 ways.

I’m always a bit 🙄 at people who can’t fathom paying rent. I had to rent for 20 years before I could afford to buy. I think the cleanest break is the all get 1/3 after house sells and total amount of the estate is determined.

Sibling in the house will not be able to go from this property to a newly purchased house easily. It creates a really awkward chain and will hold everything up. Sibling needs to rent or get a room as a lodger and then buy. It means nothing is held up for everyone else. Plus the house could burn to the ground or have some ridiculous thing wrong with it, which means the value is less than expected and sibling who just purchased has to pay money back that they no longer have.

Keep it simple. Sibling needs to take the initiative to look for suitable accommodation before diving into a first home purchase.

He has proposed to use the £60,000 in the bank as a deposit, smaller mortgage etc, then when the house is sold, the other 2 get their share of the house, their share of the money in the bank, ie £80,000 each and he gets what is left.

I don't know if this is fair, open to abuse, favouring one above the other

If doing it that way you'd have to have a proper deed of variation done to save any potential issues.

Doing it on the say so of each other would be putting the executor in a really dodgy position.

The fair thing to do is what the will says.
Unless OP is the will writer and these are her kids and she's deciding what to do.
Assuming all kids had similar opportunities 3 ways is the fairest way

I hired a solicitor and it was very reasonable and she did all the leg work. Op I assume you are an adult child with a home. I would hire one.