AIBU - inheritance sad story

Your grandad needs to get proper legal advice on this as him giving his house away could be considered legally as deprivation of assets, the Public Guardian could involve the courts and your mum have to give it back. The other thing to consider is that your mum would have to pay capital gains tax on the sale of her dad's house as it would be considered her second home. I think capital gains tax is 40%, could be wrong so check. If your mum shared the proceeds, the recipients may be liable for tax on what they get. It's a legal mess and you need legal advice to sort it out.

I don’t understand. Did your grandfather leave his first wife, family and the familly home 40- 50 years ago, when the marriage broke down. If he didn’t, where did his first wife and children live?

This is none of your business and you should stay out of it. Your grandad made a decision. It may not have been the best decision for his circumstances but it was made and there are obviously consequences that he can’t do anything about. That’s why you think carefully and take legal advice before making such irrevocable changes.

I dont think that has been stated. It would be interesting to know approx age of wife re why only 2 years granted to her to stay in the house. Also whether there is sufficient money to provide for the wife aside from the house. It does seem really unfortunate on the wife.

I think they should let DSGM (stepgrandma) live there her entire life. He did this to protect them but his wife has been a constant and sounds like a nice lady and she doesnt deserve this treatment.

I dont have advice beyond him getting legal advice but good luck

That’s so sad and I agree with you completely

You have a good heart, thank goodness for people like you.

yes I agree with you, they should morally sign it back for him to do as he pleases.

I think a lesson for all, careful with your assets, you never know.

I wish your family all the best.

This is Brutal!

Well the point is that if nothing changes and you just still live there for free then you haven't really gifted the house.

Not at all. That’s the only way he could remain living there without the house being considered part of his estate upon his death.

That, or they evict him and hope he lives another seven years.

When you say put it in their names - how do you mean? I.e did he gift it entirely or is he still on the title deeds?

Presumably because she'll be around the same age as the owners and might very well outlive them.

Why not let his wife live in the house first the remainder of her lifetime? 2 years is nothing after a 25 year marriage. If the house changed ownership I presume it was done legally via solicitors so cannot easily be undone if at all. But he needs to take legal advice. There will be capital gains tax to consider regardless. This is quite a tricky legal situation. Did his wife contribute to costs of the house? I know of a similar situation but house put in trust not gifted. That has its own complexities

In your situation your grandfather's partner is very likely to die before you and the house will be yours.

In OP's case it's the grandfather's children who own the house and as his partner seems to be very much younger, possibly younger than his children, she could well outlive them.

As a single parent I would want my children protected and provided for. It sounds like he made a big mistake signing the house over. He should have split it equally in his will. Did his wife not have a home of her own when they met?

We had similar issues in our family. Once there’s second marriages and step children it’s really hard to be fair to everyone. Usually it goes the other way though in my experience.

What a mess someone will end up upset as everybody has an opinion and feelings about it they can all be valid as well I just hope the two eldest do split the money between all the children in the end but your mum shouldn’t get anything and his current wife should get a share as you said no one visited him or cared for him but she is with him , I don’t think lawyers can do anything the house isn’t actually his anymore it all lies down to the brothers and your mum’s morals .

So my Dad gave me and my brother the proceeds from one house so we could buy one for him to live in. I pointed out this could still be seen as deprivation of assets if the council asked, but he lived on for a number of years. My brother had a difficult relationship with his wife, but they remained married. He then died of liver issues. His wife inherited half the house. She had absolutely no issue with trying to throw dad out- he could buy a small flat apparently using half the proceeds. He died before she got the chance to do this (and did not attend his funeral). However, it is a cautionary tale. None of us can see in the future and the house you live in may pass via a will or a divorce to someone you do not get on with. They can also force a sale, which again surprised me.

That's rich! Gift the house and pay rent to live there!

Your right. What pigs they are!

What an awful situation. I feel incredibly sorry for him. He does not need this at his age, the poor man. No question. MORALLY the house should be signed back to him to respect his wishes, particularly as the children are comfortably off.

We are in a similar situation. My grandad put the house in a trust. So we have inherited it, however we dont get it until his partner dies. It means she gets to live in the house, and we still inherit it later on so she cant leave it to her children. Maybe that could he a compromise?

It's not in his will. He signed it over years ago. His most recent wife could have a good reason to challenge this but I'm no expert.

“Most lifetime gifts to non-exempt beneficiaries are Potentially Exempt Transfers (PETs)“

Yes, because most people that make lifetime gifts have at least taken legal advice, and as a result are informed enough to know not to do what OP’s grandfather has done.

That he continued to live rent free in the property after the transfer, aka benefited from it, means that it won’t be a PET, no matter how long ago the transfer.

To avoid having to pay IHT on it he would have to either move out in order to start the seven year clock, or pay a market value rent (adhering to all commercial rules and regulations) for a period of at least seven years directly prior to the date of death.

I’m fairly sure that it can’t be an exempt transfer - no matter how long ago the legal transfer of ownership was made - if he’s continued living in the house without paying market rent and thereby treating it as his own in all but name. It’s common sense: if you could do this and just survive 7 years, then everyone would be doing it. You can transfer your house to your children and have the gift be IHT free, but you have to survive 7 years AND if you continue to live in the house, you have to pay market rent. Otherwise, you’ve reserved the benefit of the house to yourself.