Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Inheritence and house sale

214 replies

Lanzarotelady · 06/04/2025 12:28

Interested in others opinions here - what's fair?

Mum dies leaves house worth 160,000 and £60,000 in bank

3 adult children

1 living at home - never had a mortgage - has had a nomadic life style
2 living in a house, paid for - single
3 living in a house -paid for- married with children

1 know he needs to get a mortgage, but with no deposit and no real credit history is struggling to get one

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

What do you all think

OP posts:
nc43214321 · 06/04/2025 12:31

Think the cash in bank needs to be split 3 ways and then house 3 ways. Presume house sale will be priced to go through quickly. Can sibling 1 live in it until sold.

BlueMum16 · 06/04/2025 12:32

Would 1 buy 2 and 3 out of the house by getting a mortgage.?

If not then they find a house pending the sale of the family home. Same way anyone else does.

I'm not sure why they need the £60k now as a deposit.

CopperWhite · 06/04/2025 12:32

I think a mum would want to know that all her children have secure homes so if that can be done without long term disadvantage to any of them, then that would probably be what she wanted.

Fluffyholeysocks · 06/04/2025 12:32

Sell the house, split house sale money and cash 3 ways.

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 06/04/2025 12:34

Is there a will? Who is the executor?

rwalker · 06/04/2025 12:35

As long as the house will definitely sell for at least 120k + enough to cover fees then you will all get at least 60k
mid be happy with that as sounds like you don’t instantly need to money

doodleschnoodle · 06/04/2025 12:35

Presumably he can live in the house until it’s sold, so can’t it just be split three ways at that point? He can just look for a house while waiting for that one to sell, like is pretty standard.

Problem with him getting the £60k now is if there’s then issues getting house sold, it doesn’t reach the value, the roof falls down, whatever, then you and other sibling might end up with less, as the value of the house is only theoretical until it’s actually sold.

Original poster
Lanzarotelady · 06/04/2025 12:37

BlueMum16 · 06/04/2025 12:32

Would 1 buy 2 and 3 out of the house by getting a mortgage.?

If not then they find a house pending the sale of the family home. Same way anyone else does.

I'm not sure why they need the £60k now as a deposit.

No it is too big for him to live in alone and it needs a lot doing to it

OP posts:
Original poster
Lanzarotelady · 06/04/2025 12:38

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g · 06/04/2025 12:34

Is there a will? Who is the executor?

There is a will - everything to be split equally

OP posts:
Original poster
Lanzarotelady · 06/04/2025 12:39

BlueMum16 · 06/04/2025 12:32

Would 1 buy 2 and 3 out of the house by getting a mortgage.?

If not then they find a house pending the sale of the family home. Same way anyone else does.

I'm not sure why they need the £60k now as a deposit.

I don't either! He doesn't want a large mortgage! Yes I am rolling my eyes

OP posts:
Jamfirstest · 06/04/2025 12:39

Doesn't the whole lot have to go through probate anyway? Then the cash/cash after sale will be split 3 ways assuming there's no other claimants.
The one wanting the cash sooner for a deposit would be best cracking in with getting the house cleared for sale and other probate admin and get it done asap. I'm not sure about now but I got grant f probate about a year ago and it too 5 months from the solicitor submitting it to getting the cert and that was with one heir and no contest so an easy one.

Psychoticbreak · 06/04/2025 12:39

The only way to fairly do anything with an inheritance is to split it evenly. Why people who work and previously had struggled possibly have to lose out because others 'need' the money more has always baffled me. Split everything three ways. Cash and whatever is gotten from sale of house. Everyone then can do what they want with that.

MrsMoastyToasty · 06/04/2025 12:40

Sell house. Add proceeds to the money in the bank. Divide by 3. Done.

The other 2 siblings are not responsible for Child 1's lifestyle choices.

jeaux90 · 06/04/2025 12:40

Who is the executor on the Will? And if it says three ways then that’s what needs to happen.

Jamfirstest · 06/04/2025 12:41

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.

Cosyblankets · 06/04/2025 12:43

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

ARichtGoodDram · 06/04/2025 12:45

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.

mindutopia · 06/04/2025 12:46

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.

JojoM1981 · 06/04/2025 12:47

Everything equally split 3 ways.

AirborneElephant · 06/04/2025 12:49

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.

ThinWomansBrain · 06/04/2025 12:49

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.

Original poster
Lanzarotelady · 06/04/2025 12:50

ARichtGoodDram · 06/04/2025 12:45

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.

I have said this, that if this is the option that is agreed on then it needs drawing up properly with a solicitor.

OP posts:
Original poster
Lanzarotelady · 06/04/2025 12:54

Nomad is 58 and part of the reason him not wanting a large mortgage is that he knows he probably only has 10 years left that he could work

OP posts:
CoffeeBeansGalore · 06/04/2025 12:57

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.

gattocattivo · 06/04/2025 12:59

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?

Swipe left for the next trending thread