Page 8 | Inheritence and house sale

Lanzarotelady · 2025-04-06T11:28:56+00:00

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

Original poster

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:14

Lifestooshort71 · 07/04/2025 08:26

The house may take a year to sell (my sister's did) and in that time running expenses and repairs will need to be paid and reclaimed from the estate. Does Nomad need to buy a property - at 58 he could rent without the worry of paying off a mortgage or having to work into his 70s? He could live off his inheritance for years (sensibly without spunking it) and then look into pension credit etc - will he have a state pension?

His mum didn't want him to be homeless and that should be the family's first concern, her money/her wishes. I think it would be a mistake to give him a cash sum now as there'd be no incentive for him to move on and I'd be surprised if a solicitor would go for it tbh - you do need a solicitor to deal with it so Nomad accepts it's a legal process that needs to be followed: liquidate assets, pay legal expenses and outstanding bills and then divide what's left by 3.

However.....it is down to the siblings to sort out.

He could rent, but what happens when he stops working or the money has run out

OP posts:

godmum56 · 07/04/2025 09:17

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:14

He could rent, but what happens when he stops working or the money has run out

Show quote history

he finds another job.

Lifestooshort71 · 07/04/2025 09:18

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:14

He could rent, but what happens when he stops working or the money has run out

Show quote history

I suppose the same as anyone else does? Apply for benefits/pension credits? It won't be easy for him to pay off a mortgage, however small, and keep a property in good repair - for me, the clue is in his nickname tbh.

rollon22now · 07/04/2025 09:27

Surely the house needs to be sold first. Solicitors/estate agent fees etc etc must be taken out of the profits before you can even begin to work out what is left of the estate. Then whatever is left is to be divided in three. You may have other costs as well.

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 09:27

@Lanzaroteladyyour dh sounds like he’s lumbered with two problem siblings: one freeloader and one hoarder. If sibling 2 wants her bike from when she was 8 years old, she can have it - in her house, not the house which belongs to all 3 of you.
As for sibling 1, it’s no one else’s problem if he ends up renting. He’ll have a nice wodge of cash when distributions are made. Like any other reasonable grown-up, if his money is in danger of running out, he’ll need to keep working. His state pension should kick in in about 10 years anyway. I wonder if he’s fully paid up with NI contributions or if he was too busy enjoying his care free lifestyle to think about his future….

Anyway, none of this is anyone else’s concern. Sibling 1 ought to recognise he’s been living off other people for most of his adult life and that now he needs to start being a grown-up. Sibling 2 needs to go pick up her bike!

Original poster

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:31

godmum56 · 07/04/2025 09:17

he finds another job.

Show quote history

at 65/70 who is going to employ him

OP posts:

Original poster

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:33

rollon22now · 07/04/2025 09:27

Surely the house needs to be sold first. Solicitors/estate agent fees etc etc must be taken out of the profits before you can even begin to work out what is left of the estate. Then whatever is left is to be divided in three. You may have other costs as well.

I agree I think they are all being very naïve and quite stupid if I am honest!

OP posts:

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 09:35

@Lanzaroteladyhe can keep doing his delivery job he already has. If he chooses to stop working to be a nomad again, he may find it tricky to re-start again in the job market, but that’s his problem, not yours.

Original poster

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:36

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 09:27

@Lanzaroteladyyour dh sounds like he’s lumbered with two problem siblings: one freeloader and one hoarder. If sibling 2 wants her bike from when she was 8 years old, she can have it - in her house, not the house which belongs to all 3 of you.
As for sibling 1, it’s no one else’s problem if he ends up renting. He’ll have a nice wodge of cash when distributions are made. Like any other reasonable grown-up, if his money is in danger of running out, he’ll need to keep working. His state pension should kick in in about 10 years anyway. I wonder if he’s fully paid up with NI contributions or if he was too busy enjoying his care free lifestyle to think about his future….

Anyway, none of this is anyone else’s concern. Sibling 1 ought to recognise he’s been living off other people for most of his adult life and that now he needs to start being a grown-up. Sibling 2 needs to go pick up her bike!

I have absolutely no idea about his NI contributions it wouldn't surprise me if the hasn't paid enough to qualify for a pension

OP posts:

LovedFedAndNoonesDead · 07/04/2025 09:42

AnnieMaud · 06/04/2025 20:51

I think it’s a little different if you’re a married couple with an onward purchase than a tenant with nowhere to go. My buyer’s solicitors insisted on a tenancy agreement so that my family member would be given notice 4 weeks before exchange and completion.

Show quote history

We weren’t buying; it was a single house sale being bought as an investment property without the buyer needing to sell. We did have a property we had rented 6 weeks before the completion date but not one person concerned with the sale of the house asked to see any proof of where we were going on completion day; we just confirmed vacant possession.

godmum56 · 07/04/2025 09:45

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 09:31

at 65/70 who is going to employ him

Show quote history

its either going to be covering his mortgage or his rent and either way he is going to need money.

Scuttlebut · 07/04/2025 09:46

I'm not brilliant at maths, but:
160+60=220k total
220/3=73.33k each
Just over 73,000 each, using a simple round figure.

Let him have the 60 in 'cash' now, and when everything has gone through just knock the 60k he's already received off his inheritance of 73k
He gets his remaining 13k, and you and your sibling have just had to wait a little longer for your full 73k.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 07/04/2025 09:54

Let him have the 60 in 'cash' now, and when everything has gone through just knock the 60k he's already received off his inheritance of 73k
He gets his remaining 13k, and you and your sibling have just had to wait a little longer for your full 73k

Slight problem with that, @Scuttlebut, if he blows the £60k and is still living in the house, then goes on to say he can no longer afford to move

Add on the cries of "Mum didn't want him to be homeless!!" and this is why distributing the money only after the house is sold may be a better idea

viques · 07/04/2025 09:57

Scuttlebut · 07/04/2025 09:46

I'm not brilliant at maths, but:
160+60=220k total
220/3=73.33k each
Just over 73,000 each, using a simple round figure.

Let him have the 60 in 'cash' now, and when everything has gone through just knock the 60k he's already received off his inheritance of 73k
He gets his remaining 13k, and you and your sibling have just had to wait a little longer for your full 73k.

No to this. He gets his share of the available cash ( remember to take off money for marketing the house, cleaning and clearing it for sale, insurance etc) then gets his share of the proceeds when the house is sold. Why should he be treated differently to the other siblings?

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 09:59

@Scuttlebutyeap nothing could possibly go wrong!!!
-house needs major work before sale
-house sells for less than expected
-siblings 2 and 3 no longer receiving interest on the 60k which belongs to all of them. sibling 1 sticks it in savings and gets all the interest
-sibling 1 blows the 60k on more of his nomadic lifestyle

… to make a few scenarios. I can see how your suggestion is exactly what sibling 1 would want - because it favours only them!

Scuttlebut · 07/04/2025 10:02

Puzzledandpissedoff · 07/04/2025 09:54

Let him have the 60 in 'cash' now, and when everything has gone through just knock the 60k he's already received off his inheritance of 73k
He gets his remaining 13k, and you and your sibling have just had to wait a little longer for your full 73k

Slight problem with that, @Scuttlebut, if he blows the £60k and is still living in the house, then goes on to say he can no longer afford to move

Add on the cries of "Mum didn't want him to be homeless!!" and this is why distributing the money only after the house is sold may be a better idea

and @viques and @gattocattivo Yes, I don't disagree with any of you, I was just trying to do the maths in my head. I do know however, that money and inheritances can bring out the worst in people.

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 10:20

aint that the truth! I guess sibling 1 favours this suggestion because it benefits him, and sod the other two who’ve been paying rent and mortgages while he prefers the nomadic, no-strings lifestyle

Original poster

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 10:24

@gattocattivo I get it, you and I are on the same page
I can't believe sibling 2 & 3 are considering this with no legal advice or a proper contract drawn up - I am actually aghast at their stupidity

There seems to be a lot of trust between the three of them when previously none of them would lend him £10 as they knew they wouldn't get it back

OP posts:

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 10:33

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 10:24

@gattocattivo I get it, you and I are on the same page
I can't believe sibling 2 & 3 are considering this with no legal advice or a proper contract drawn up - I am actually aghast at their stupidity

There seems to be a lot of trust between the three of them when previously none of them would lend him £10 as they knew they wouldn't get it back

So he’s already got form for screwing other people around… not being trusted to pay back even a tenner, living rent free until nearly 60…

Incidentally, if it’s been 2 years since probate, why has he not been saving some of his earnings in preparation to move out and rent?

unfortunately, some people don’t want to own their choices. He’s preferred to have a particular lifestyle, without the pressure of a regular permanent job and a mortgage. He now needs to own that choice and accept the rough with the smooth. I expect siblings 2 and 3 have had their share of days when they’d rather be a free spirit and swan off on another adventure rather than get up and do another day in the office to pay the bills! Every choice has upsides and downsides - sibling 1 has had plenty of years of the good times, now he needs to accept the consequences of his choices.

Original poster

Lanzarotelady · 07/04/2025 10:39

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 10:33

So he’s already got form for screwing other people around… not being trusted to pay back even a tenner, living rent free until nearly 60…

Incidentally, if it’s been 2 years since probate, why has he not been saving some of his earnings in preparation to move out and rent?

unfortunately, some people don’t want to own their choices. He’s preferred to have a particular lifestyle, without the pressure of a regular permanent job and a mortgage. He now needs to own that choice and accept the rough with the smooth. I expect siblings 2 and 3 have had their share of days when they’d rather be a free spirit and swan off on another adventure rather than get up and do another day in the office to pay the bills! Every choice has upsides and downsides - sibling 1 has had plenty of years of the good times, now he needs to accept the consequences of his choices.

Show quote history

I agree with you, I said all along he is living rent free and he should be saving up or paying rent ( he couldn't' afford to do both and pay all the bills ) but it doesn't appear that he has saved anything.....bloody great for some isn't it!
But I keep getting told its nothing to do with me ( which it isn't - we don't "need" the money - it will be going in savings )

I can just see it going tits up

OP posts:

gattocattivo · 07/04/2025 10:51

It’s technically correct that it’s nothing to do with you because you aren’t an executor. But your dh is, and one would hope that he’d at least listen to your concerns.

And actually, on the issue of trust, I don’t think this has anything to do with it. Regardless of whether you trust other executors/beneficiaries, a will should be distributed as written. It’s about honouring the wishes of the person who wrote it (as well as the legal duties of executors to act in accordance with the will without undue delay.)

I have been a joint executor with my sister. It would not have occurred to either of us to do anything other than act as the will instructed. It’s actually quite worrying that some posters seem to think you can just make the rules up!

JojoM1981 · 07/04/2025 11:09

Sounds like nothing you can do until they threaten bailiffs. They are all pussyfooting around him. I can imagine how frustrating it is...

AnnieMaud · 07/04/2025 12:07

LovedFedAndNoonesDead · 07/04/2025 09:42

We weren’t buying; it was a single house sale being bought as an investment property without the buyer needing to sell. We did have a property we had rented 6 weeks before the completion date but not one person concerned with the sale of the house asked to see any proof of where we were going on completion day; we just confirmed vacant possession.

Show quote history

My buyers were concerned that a family member (not me, a relative) had been living in the house for years on an assured shorthold tenancy and I had to provide evidence that the tenancy agreement had to be changed to one with a month’s notice. I also had to provide proof of landlord insurance. As a buyer I would be wary of a house where a tenant was living rent-free in case there were problems with them moving out.

mondaytosunday · 07/04/2025 12:42

Sure why not - they need to write up a legal agreement saying explicitly how this works. My lawyer did something where I got an advance on a sale and I had to pay my siblings interest on what I ‘borrowed’.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 07/04/2025 12:50

As a buyer I would be wary of a house where a tenant was living rent-free in case there were problems with them moving out

TBH, @AnnieMaud, as a buyer I've always avoided tenanted houses like the plague even if they were paying full rent

No offence to you personally because it sounds as if you handled it all properly, but it's only too easy for sellers to coo "Oh it'll be no problem at all", only to find after spending ££££ that it's a very big problem indeed

Each to their own, but to my mind - unless selling to another landlord - tenants need to move out before a place is marketed so there can be no "misunderstandings"