Inheritance vs helping out

[FizzyPopLove]

My mother died and left her five children her house in her will.

She said for one year, her eldest son, my brother, could continue living in the house. He lived with her when she was alive for a bit of rent. After that one year, it was to be agreed between us five siblings what should be done about the house.

It’s now been seven years. He still lives there rent free. We have not pressured him to leave the house so we can realise our inheritance. Perhaps we should. He has bought out one sibling so he now own 2/5s of the house.

The house is really not looked after. He doesn’t seem to see what needs doing. He is resistant to finding a smaller property that is more suitable for him living alone.

My ds has found a job in the same city as the house and I thought it might be a good idea for him to stay in the house too for six months whilst he passes his probation period, saves up some money etc. My brother is reluctant to enable this. He’s worried ds will stay for longer than 6 months. It’s a 3 bed house.

AIBU to be cheesed off? He’s saved up thousands of pounds by not paying rent or a mortgage and the rest of us siblings have all paid mortgages or rent for all of our working lives.

We have been really not pushy about realising our inheritance but I feel he could be open to helping out ds1 in this way?

"I'd have to say the wording of the will seems particularly stupid to me. I'm surprised the OP's mother's solicitor didn't point it out whan drafting the will."

I totally agree.

However, I suspect that the will may actually have said something like the son was given a licence to occupy for 12 months or it was an interest in possession trust which gave the son the right to occupy the home for 12 months.

Either way, at the end of the 12 months, the licence or the trust ended and the siblings became able to sell the property.

I believe that if DB no longer has the right to occupy the property then any one of the five owners can bring a claim for an Order for Sale of the property.

He starts paying rent then. Or he sells up. Or he lets him stay. Simple.

OP, as your brother is 69, you should not waste time in getting him out. Otherwise he becomes too old to move and then you have to wait until he dies.

Try to persuade your other siblings first on the basis you need the money, then try to persuade him. If you cannot get all 5 siblings to agree, you may have to convince one or more of them to buy out your share and as a last resort, get a court order to force the sale and distribution of the proceeds.

Best to consult a solicitor about your rights as 1/5th owner of the property.

I should also say, if you go through the trouble and expense of getting a court order, ask the court to make an order about the amount of occupation rent that your brother should pay for the 6 years that he overstayed.

That fact that he refused to let your ds stay supports the argument that your brother enjoyed exclusive occupation of the property and that the siblings were deprived of the benefit of their ownership as a result. Hence the brother should pay occupation rent over those 6 years.

Obviously, do consult a solicitor.

The siblings haven’t been denied the benefit. All have agreed for the brother to reside in the house, and none have attempted to live there as well.

OP’s son is a third party that, unlike OP, has no right to live there.

Id agree with this. The OP owns a share of this property and her brother is not a tenant with the rights of a tenant because he is paying no rent and im guessing has no contract to live there as a tenant.

As such i see no reason at all why the OP should get to use her share of the house just as her brother has used his for the last 7 years.

And OP stop all this and put your foot down and demand the house is sold or you are bought out, its not fair that 7 years on you still have not received your inheritance

Sorry I voted YABU for getting to this point. I have now read your follow up posts.

I agree your son should be able to live there for 6 months (or longer!). What do other siblings say?

How old is your son and does he want to live with a pensioner? Does he know his uncle well and do they get on?

I think one owner can force the sale. Get legal advice. Unless you foresee any issues, tell your brother that he will have a housemate soon. Your brother has cost you all a LOT of money in lost rent. Calculate the amount and share it with everyone. People change their minds when facts and figures come in to play.

Can also write to him and explain that your son is embarking on his life and needs the same advantages he had. Either to be able to save or to get the funds from sale. He's being selfish and unreasonable. Kids are supposed to leave the nest, and he's had long enough to sort his finances while living rent free. 40 years!

Yes it might be his home, but he is not the sole owner and the fact he owns 2/5 doesn’t mean he can trump your son staying there as you own your share of it. He has benefited for years and about time you enforced the sale now, as he is clearly not grateful that he hasn’t been forced to sell. A friend lived with her mother and siblings (4 of them) agreed 1yr roughly to sell and its now a year and she’s started looking. Dragging it out is unfair to everyone else.

Any one owner can force a sale. If any owner refuses or even if all bar one refuses any one owner can apply to the court to order it. In Scotland it's an action of division and sale. It's a brilliant way of wasting money. And no us greedy, grasping solicitors would be happy not to touch it with a barge pole.

So far as loss of rent, no chance. All the owners are entitled to use the property. Owners can agree that some of them won't use it and they can agree the owner who is using it will compensate the non users. But as the other owners simply chose to let him be the sole user they can't retrospectively change that.

I’d say your Ds is allowed to live in the house and if your brother refuses say you need the money to support your Ds so will start proceedings to force a sale.

Then, come what may, tell your brother and two other siblings that you want / need your share now and either they buy you out (today’s prices) or you force a sale,

This is ridiculous!

I’d say in that case it needs to be sold so you can use your share to help your son.

This issue is only going to worse as more adult children don’t leave home. Even if the will was clear that he moves out after a year if the executors aren’t minded to enforce it as they should out of inertia / guilt / kindness you end up here. Really difficult op.

It doesn’t matter who the executor was - the requirements of the will were put into place and the 5 siblings became owners, and the brother living there was able to stay for a year which has now passed. OP has been clear that this isn’t anything to do with the will any more. There isn’t anything else for the executor to do now.

I agree. The executor has long left the building. One or more of the siblings may have been the executor but that role is finished and they would just be a co-owner at this point.

I don't think he can really refuse DS to be able to stay there- the 5 siblings had equal rights in the house- I can understand not pressuring him to sell the house- but clearly he has no intention of moving,selling or downsizing as he has bought one sibling out.
The 4 of you have equal rights in the house and if you and your 2 unbought out siblings decided they want to live there that isyour right. Your brother living there will stop you realising your inheritance for the foreseeable future- I would say that the other 2 bedrooms should be rented out so you and your siblings see some income from your asset, or he could let DS stay there while he saves up, I'm guessing he will go for that option- really he has no grounds or right to refuse.Otherwise he needs to buy the rest of you out.

Wow this is a messy situation and as others have said one that should have been sorted out one year after your mothers passing.
At this stage id just inform DB that husband will be staying as it'll be convenient for you all and not go into details about selling etc, your brother is 69 and been living there 7 years? The likelihood is he will remain there until he dies or goes to a care home/supported living, id make peace with that, your siblings will not force DB out at this age or stage in life.

I'm kind of in a similar situation. We are quite a laid back family that seems similar to the OP. Our sibling is living with our surviving parent. The sibling has a lot of health issues, although he thinks he is the carer of our parent. I do most of the organising for the house and also health issues. The will of the parent states that all assets should be divided equally between the siblings but I can foresee issues due to one sibling living in the home. He has never paid a penny in rent. Our parents did everything for him. It is such a mess but we are all burying our heads.

I think the best think to do is execute the will quickly. You can still all agree he can stay but on clear terms. I understand the head in the sand approach is the easiest but it’s the worst thing to do as the cohabiting child digs in. The longer it’s left the harder it is to act.

I would recommend legal advice.

There is something about if a person can prove they were a ‘dependent’ in the family home..

In addition, I would be concerned about the length of time now that your brother is there.. each year builds a stronger case in his favour.

Despite being asked several times, OP has not said who the executor of the will is. This makes me think that OP does not actually want advice relating to the will or the property.

Either he lets your son live there, or he buys you out so you can support your son.

As someone said upthread, it doesn’t matter any more. The will was executed, the five siblings are part-owners of the property. The executor has done their part.

It doesn't matter who the executor was. The role of the executor was to distribute the estate according to the will.

That was done seven years ago. It is now just a property dispute between the joint owners of the house.