3 siblings and an inheritance.

RedPlanet

inheritance question.

Hi i'm just going to post this here.
It could be a "legal discussion", and maybe it's better suited to that forum; however, this scenerio is only hypothetical, as these events have not occured (yet).
I'm just looking for other persons views.

Scenario:
After both parents die, 3 children inherit the family home.
They all get equal share of the estate.
It's a modest family home on about 1/2 acre so it's not some huge mansion or anything grand.

The children are as follows:
1- Brother: eldest child in his 40's has never lived outside the family home, not working, not married, no children.
2- Sister: in her 30's, has left the family home years ago, professional, married, no children.
3- Sister: in her 30's, left the family home years ago, not married with 5 kids, not working.

After the parents both die, the children inherit the estate.
The brother believes he should be entitled to continue living in the house and just be left alone.
The sisters both want to sell.
The brother has no interest in selling and simply refuses to engage.

Other factors that may be worth considering:
3-Sister: she has a council house, doesn't own it yet but intends to.
1-Brother: he has a startup valleting "company" operating in the driveway of the family home, it's just a cash-in-hand operation (not above board).

What can the sisters do?
Can they buy the brother out (but can they legally force him to sell?)

Nevyn

Depends on the will, in some cases the will sill state the house goes to the kid but can't be sold while one of them is living in it.

TheInquisitor

Don't quote me on this but i think because he has been living there he may have more rights towards the property that the two sisters that have left as he is dependent on it for shelter. Technically he should have to buy ye out if the sisters want to leave and he wants to stay. Whether he has the money available is another matter. This could get very messy in court!

oil painting

Do you know who the executor to the will is going to be, the executor and a solicitor could tell you the score in a minute.

I would have thought that it had to be sold because there are 3 owners and three equal rights, Last year i inherited a house with my sister, she was living there i was not, i was told that she would be forced to sell but maybe that was also because we had to pay inheritance tax, dont ask how much i paid!! it would make your eyes bleed!!! but we only had 4 months to pay it and had to sell the house other wise we uncured interest!. I was a granddaughter though- as a child you can inherit nearly half a mil without having to pay tax, but because there are 2 people in the same boat you might be able to work together to sell the house, if you have rights over a room you could threaten to rent out your room if he refuses to sell,

I know this is a common situation because many family homes that have people living in them cause very stressful situations, but if your parents wanted him to have it on his own surely they would have just leave it to him.

CDfm

This is my understanding that without a will each child is entitled to an equal share after any other claims on the estate.

Children do not have an automatic legal right to inherit anything so the parents can leave everything to one child.

There is provision in the law in respect of adult carers or dependent adult children and they can challenge a will or lack of a will on the basis that they have not been provided for- especially if they are or have been the carer.The courts would place a value on this contribution and it could include things like upkeep and maintenance of a property over the years.

So in the event of a dispute it would go to court and a court would place a value on the "carers" worth and reasonable expectation of continuing occupation in the house.

I cannot see a court shifting him and the sisters could well have to wait for their share indefinately in his lifetime or he could be awarded the property in its entirety.

tbh

morally - MORALLY ONLY - my take is this.

The brother should buy the sisters out if he wants to live in the house.

PirateShampoo

Sounds like the only way ur gonna get ur brother out of the house is to sell it when he goes down the shop.

CDfm

tbh wrote: »

morally - MORALLY ONLY - my take is this.

The brother should buy the sisters out if he wants to live in the house.

I suppose we need to hear from someone who has knowledge of a similar situation and what the court has done.

You cant imagine anyone buying anyone out at the moment as it would be nearly impossible without an income to get a loan.

tbh

yeah I appreciate that, but I get the feeling the OP is one of the three, and kind of knows what they want to do. Sometimes, in that situation, it's good to know what others would do so you know you're not being unreasonable - that's just my interpretation of the op

CDfm

tbh wrote: »

yeah I appreciate that, but I get the feeling the OP is one of the three, and kind of knows what they want to do. Sometimes, in that situation, it's good to know what others would do so you know you're not being unreasonable - that's just my interpretation of the op

Mine too but if its hypothetical the assumption is that there will not be a will. Its kind of like what will I do when I get the money or how much can I expect to get.

RedPlanet

You're right, i am not one of the 3.
I've been asked by one of the sisters for my opinion and so i thought i'd ask folks here as well.
There is a will, and insofar as the sisters are concerned, the estate is divided equally.
The brother is not an adult carer, all the children take turns minding the ol folks.
The brother is in reality, a lazy bollix whom still gets his dinner cooked for him everyday by his mammy.
The ol folks are enablers.
Personally, i think he'll just plomp is arse down and refuse to budge, i doubt the sisters can force him to sell.
They only options are to rent out a couple rooms despite his protest, or move 3-Sister in, along with all her kids. That should make him consider his options.

oil painting

I know of this happening in my BF's family with regards to his mother's family. Basically the house was left to one daughter out of 8 children, but if the property is sold all the money gets split between all 8......

3 of the brothers are still living in the house and the parents have passed over 5 years now, the brothers are all alcoholics and are on the dole, the property is in an area where property is very expensive in dublin, like an old dublin village area,

The sister who has the control has not lived in the property in 15 years the brothers all have, none of them were carers for the parents,

she told me not so long ago that she could force them out legally and force a sale but the brothers got very angry and one even threatened to kill himself should the house be sold, they are quite a traditional family and she has decided to do nothing for the moment because she knows they are incapable of looking after themselves or getting themselves a new home and i think she then feels she will be responsible for what would happen next!

I do not have the exact legal answer to the OP's query i think a solicitor who is appointed to deal with the will, will be able to clarify, but i wanted to show that this situation is happening in different families.

philologos

OP: Couldn't you just arrange to sell the shares in the estate to the eldest, or have him rent the rest of the land from the rest of you? Just a thought.

Jo King

CDfm wrote: »

This is my understanding that without a will each child is entitled to an equal share after any other claims on the estate.

Children do not have an automatic legal right to inherit anything so the parents can leave everything to one child.

There is provision in the law in respect of adult carers or dependent adult children and they can challenge a will or lack of a will on the basis that they have not been provided for- especially if they are or have been the carer.The courts would place a value on this contribution and it could include things like upkeep and maintenance of a property over the years.

So in the event of a dispute it would go to court and a court would place a value on the "carers" worth and reasonable expectation of continuing occupation in the house.

I cannot see a court shifting him and the sisters could well have to wait for their share indefinately in his lifetime or he could be awarded the property in its entirety.

The fact that he has been living there does not give him more rights to possession. It might have a tax advantage only for him. This kind of thing happens all the time.
It is a matter for the brother to challenge the will if he feels proper provision has not been made for him. He has to do this within six months of the grant of probate being take out. If he has not made a challenge the the executor of the will can bring an action to eject him from the home and then it will be sold and the proceeds divided equally, less the costs of the ejection action from the brother's share.

CDfm

RedPlanet wrote: »

You're right, i am not one of the 3.
I've been asked by one of the sisters for my opinion and so i thought i'd ask folks here as well.
There is a will, and insofar as the sisters are concerned, the estate is divided equally.
The brother is not an adult carer, all the children take turns minding the ol folks.
The brother is in reality, a lazy bollix whom still gets his dinner cooked for him everyday by his mammy.
The ol folks are enablers.
Personally, i think he'll just plomp is arse down and refuse to budge, i doubt the sisters can force him to sell.
They only options are to rent out a couple rooms despite his protest, or move 3-Sister in, along with all her kids. That should make him consider his options.

Well she would loose her council house if she moved in but renting out rooms would seem to be an option which he could potentially fraustrate.

Its half an acre which is fairly substantial so potentially would getting planning permission for a small one bedroom house on the site adequete for his needs be possible for him to move into should be possible.

It is a serviced site so you really are only talking the building cost which is not really expensive especially if you looked at a timber frame house.So the options on planning for this option should be assessed.

If they could finance it the sisters could potentially be left with an investment property for better times.

oil painting

CDfm wrote: »

Well she would loose her council house if she moved in but renting out rooms would seem to be an option which he could potentially fraustrate.

Its half an acre which is fairly substantial so potentially would getting planning permission for a small one bedroom house on the site adequete for his needs be possible for him to move into should be possible.

It is a serviced site so you really are only talking the building cost which is not really expensive especially if you looked at a timber frame house.So the options on planning for this option should be assessed.

If they could finance it the sisters could potentially be left with an investment property for better times.

Always tricky for family to go into business together though, and sharing property could be a recipe for disaster, It is difficult to know where he can go next but when something has to be dealt with there are always solutions that present themselves,

he If he has the deposit for his own home he may get an affordable home or social housing depending on his situation, but i would see what he can do for himself before the others suggest anything, he is probably very scared at loosing the only home he has ever known,

but it sounds like some of the other sisters could equally be in financially stressed situations with families too. He could end up with a 50k sum after the sale- im speculating but he could get himself on his feet with that and he could rent for a while, He is currently running his own valeting job, so he is able bodied and may find work that would enable to buy his own home, If he is unemployed he may qualify for rent allowance but all these options could be explored.

CDfm

Its a bit rough when family are left with these impossible situations.

oil painting

CDfm wrote: »

Its a bit rough when family are left with these impossible situations.

So true, isnt it.... for something so important it always seems to be the one thing never discussed, I would not dare bring it up with my Grandparents who were like my parents, it would have been very disrespectful, but the family were left in a right mess after they died it has taken 5 years to sort out for us, and my sister who i inherited with never speaks to me anymore, we were not very close but this really ended our relationship. There is so much hurt and pain and anger floating around it can be a very sensitive time.

Jo King

CDfm wrote: »

Its a bit rough when family are left with these impossible situations.

What is impossible? They are each getting a windfall from the death of a parent. Many people are never left anything.

CDfm

Jo King wrote: »

What is impossible? They are each getting a windfall from the death of a parent. Many people are never left anything.

but to get it involves confrontation with a brother or sister which is forseeable given the circumstances of the bequest ie anyone with sence could see.

silvervixen84

It might be wise if the parents updated their Wills specifically stating what is to be done with the house after they die. They can put in a provision that the house not be sold for 5 (or however long they wish) after they die, thus giving the son a chance to sort himself out, whether it be buying out his sisters' shares or simply finding somewhere else to live so that the property can be sold and the proceeds split 3 ways.

i work in a solicitor's office and we have a similar probate case at the moment, and it can get awkward when siblings differ in opinions. At the end of the day, the Executor is charged with distributing the estate, so if the son is named as Executor, he could make things difficult for the sisters.

Perhaps the sisters should speak with their parents about the Will - without influencing their decisions - so that they know where they'll stand in the future.

Jo King

CDfm wrote: »

but to get it involves confrontation with a brother or sister which is forseeable given the circumstances of the bequest ie anyone with sence could see.

there is only potential confrontation. If they all behaved like responsible adults there would be no difficulty. The way the parents could deal with this is to throw the son out of the house before they die. He can go out and stand on his own two feet and wait. If, there is an inheritance he can regard it as a bonus. Sometimes a family home has to be sold to pay for nursing home care and there may be nothing left when the parents die.
A colleague of mine lived with his mother. When she died he got a quarter share of the house and had to move to a flat. There was no big bust up with his siblings. He just accepted it as being his mother's wishes that the estate be divided equally.
I have a cousin who was left a right of residence for life in the house after his mother died with the house to go to his nieces and nephews after his death. None of his siblings are speaking to him.
Go figure!

Kidchameleon

Hi,

The brother max be a "lazy bollix", but where would he live if the house was sold? Seems the sisters care more about material things than their bro...

oil painting

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Hi,

The brother max be a "lazy bollix", but where would he live if the house was sold? Seems the sisters care more about material things than their bro...

Well you could say the same about the brother, Who knows how dire the situation is for the sisters, living in a council house with children may not be the easiest situation either, why should the brother have the whole family home to himself after the others went out and became independent after being treated differently to their brother because he was a man, if the parents leave it 3 ways its their entitlement and the brother will have to handle his own life for the first time which might actually help him grow up, granted the parents should not have raised a son to be so dependent on them but the sisters deserve a share if the parents leave it to all 3.

Jo King

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Hi,

The brother max be a "lazy bollix", but where would he live if the house was sold? Seems the sisters care more about material things than their bro...

What is to stop him renting a flat? At his age many people have moved out, bought a house and paid off the mortgage. He is not a child or a retard. Why should his sisters have to forego what is rightfully theirs because he has the mental development of an eight year old.

CDfm

Jo King wrote: »

What is to stop him renting a flat? At his age many people have moved out, bought a house and paid off the mortgage. He is not a child or a retard. Why should his sisters have to forego what is rightfully theirs because he has the mental development of an eight year old.

what is wrong with the parents leaving instructions that the property be sold and split 3 ways and ending the uncertainty

Jo King

CDfm wrote: »

what is wrong with the parents leaving instructions that the property be sold and split 3 ways and ending the uncertainty

That is pretty much what they are doing. They leave the estate between the three of them . The only way to divide it is to sell the house or have one buy out the others' interests.

CDfm

Jo King wrote: »

That is pretty much what they are doing. They leave the estate between the three of them . The only way to divide it is to sell the house or have one buy out the others' interests.

Not really they are leaving a situation knowing thru experience that there is potential to end up in court. The events havent happened yet and a sister is discussing it and preparing.

Jo King

CDfm wrote: »

Not really they are leaving a situation knowing thru experience that there is potential to end up in court. The events havent happened yet and a sister is discussing it and preparing.

There can be a challenge in court to any will under Section 117 of the Succession Act no matter what the will says.
Even if the will stipulates a sale the brother could refuse to move out forcing ejectment proceedings in court.
The only way of avoiding litigation is if the three of them behave like adults.

The_Conductor

CDfm wrote: »

what is wrong with the parents leaving instructions that the property be sold and split 3 ways and ending the uncertainty

By rights- they really should sell the property *now*. In addition to liquidating the asset- they will have the cash from the sale to put towards any needs they might have themselves- and when they do eventually go- their assets are in a nice liquid form for dividing among the kids.

skooterblue

I think the solicitors will have the fat the house. This Lazy bollocks want the whole house to live in himself. He wont shift without a court order and a visit from the sherrif's. WTF's a 40 year old man doing living at home when he is not a carer?

situation impossible. If I were the Parents suggest that they are down grading to a 2 bedroom house for the pair of them and this waste of space should get his own council house. Not likely in this day and age. This guy wont buy the sisters out.

Lesson for Parents: 24 out the door!

CDfm

smccarrick wrote: »

By rights- they really should sell the property *now*. In addition to liquidating the asset- they will have the cash from the sale to put towards any needs they might have themselves- and when they do eventually go- their assets are in a nice liquid form for dividing among the kids.

LOL - I see what you mean. If a will is an instruction they should be clear about what behavior the expect from their heirs.

Jo King

smccarrick wrote: »

By rights- they really should sell the property *now*. In addition to liquidating the asset- they will have the cash from the sale to put towards any needs they might have themselves- and when they do eventually go- their assets are in a nice liquid form for dividing among the kids.

They will have to find somewhere to live until they die. Why should they endure the discomfort of moving house and the uncertainties of renting accomodation just because
a. They have a lazy son and
b. They want to make things easy for the daughters.

They should throw the son out and leave the property on a trust for sale.

LegacyUser

I am aware of a similar situation and in the end all three will benefit. Although the OP sees the brother as benefiting, they've all had some input or connection to the house. In the interests of fairness I would have thought equal distribution is the only answer but allow the brother the option to buy the others out within a reasonable period of time. I also imagine that this what the parents would want.

The_Conductor

Jo King wrote: »

They will have to find somewhere to live until they die. Why should they endure the discomfort of moving house and the uncertainties of renting accomodation just because
a. They have a lazy son and
b. They want to make things easy for the daughters.

They should throw the son out and leave the property on a trust for sale.

To be honest- if I were they- I'd sell the house- take a long term lease (not buy) on a nice ground floor apartment in a European country with good healthcare- France sounds good- but maybe Spain or even Portugal- and live a lovely retirement in a nice warm sunny clime. Its not a case of making things easy for their kids- they are retired now- they should enjoy their twilight years, whatever is over the kids can split between them- but at this stage they should be thinking of themselves- not the three kids.

Kipperhell

Legally the parents can do what they like. If they feel the son needs the house they may leave it to him. Without a will all three get an equal share. Had to look in to this recently and it is very straight forward.
I know of family members being written out of inheritance because the parents felt hey didn't need the money or would spend it unwisely. In my cousins' case my aunt and uncle have left everything to the eldest as they think the youngest's wife will inherit so much that he will not need anything from them.

The bottom line is it is up to the parents if they are still alive. After the fact and no will it is legally a split 3 ways and nobody can claim residency rights to prevent a sale.

oil painting

I think the suggestion from the original post was that there is a will and the house would be split 3 ways, the sisters were wondering that if they did inherit it would they have any rights to sell the home and split it in 3 or would the brother have rights to stay.

So if there is a will provided and the brother has been residing there all his life would he have more rights to the home?

If there is no will and it just goes to the three of them it seems he would not.

Shewhomustbe...

I don't think that the brother lives in the house offers him any more rights than that of the sisters. If there's a will and each sibling gets an equal share of the house he could contest it but probably wouldn't win (unless he had an ace up his sleeve)
A similar situation happened in my family, my uncle lived with his widowed mother. She died intestate and his sister, a lovely woman :rolleyes: didn't give a stuff that he'd never lived any where else, the house was sold and the three siblings got their share. (The arguement being that he could buy somewhere to live out of the proceeds)