Applying for probate

Comerman

Hi folks, my wife and sibling were left the parents house 3 months ago and set things in motion to sell it. The solicitor was given the auctioneers valuation etc and they thought that the whole process was moving forward. Now there's a buyer for the house and a deposit has been paid but they've been informed by the solicitor he's just applied for the probate and it can take up to 6 months to complete. They now are in a position where the sale can fall through. My question is why did/would the solicitor wait until now to start the process? His excuse was he was waiting for the revenue to come back to him.

hullaballoo

Without sight of what he was doing up to now, it's impossible to know for sure whether he sat on it or not. However, it does take time to organise everything for probate and quite often there is a delay getting the necessary documents from Revenue.

That said, what's more bizarre here is that the solicitor wasn't aware the siblings had the house on the market and indeed had advanced the sales process as far as deposit being taken. Obviously the solicitor in question isn't looking after the sale. If s/he had been aware what the siblings were doing s/he would have advised immediately that it is not possible to sell the house until probate is out.

It's one thing doing DIY probate/DIY conveyancing but it's a whole other kettle of fish actually using a solicitor and keeping them in the dark about matters central to what they are doing.

Comerman

hullaballoo wrote: »

Without sight of what he was doing up to now, it's impossible to know for sure whether he sat on it or not. However, it does take time to organise everything for probate and quite often there is a delay getting the necessary documents from Revenue.

That said, what's more bizarre here is that the solicitor wasn't aware the siblings had the house on the market and indeed had advanced the sales process as far as deposit being taken. Obviously the solicitor in question isn't looking after the sale. If s/he had been aware what the siblings were doing s/he would have advised immediately that it is not possible to sell the house until probate is out.

It's one thing doing DIY probate/DIY conveyancing but it's a whole other kettle of fish actually using a solicitor and keeping them in the dark about matters central to what they are doing.

The solicitor was aware of the being up for sale as the auctioneer had sent him the valuation required for the probate application

Comerman

Comerman wrote: »

The solicitor was aware of the being up for sale as the auctioneer had sent him the valuation required for the probate application

That’s not the same as instructing him to act in the sale. Valuations are necessary for probate, tax compliance etc.

Comerman

And he's had the majority of the stuff for the last 3 months, whether he is involved in the sale or not. I'm a real novice her a bear with

hullaballoo

It doesn't follow that because the solicitor had a valuation report that s/he knew there was a sales process underway. The valuation is required for tax purposes.

I'd suggest the interested parties have a sit down talk with the solicitor about what's going on because frankly it looks like a mess.

Comerman

They are meeting him tomorrow

Peregrinus

Yeah, there has clearly been a breakdown in communications. The beneficiaries put the house on the market before they had obtained a grant of probate; did it not occur to them to think about what might happen if they agreed a sale before probate was obtained? This is obviously something they could have asked their solicitor, but clearly they didn't. Equally, they didn't think to tell him that they were putting the house on the market, even though it was obviously something he needed to know (and might have had relevant advice to offer). They were always going to need a solicitor to complete the sale; were they intending to use a different solicitor? If not, why keep schtumm about the sale when talking to the solicitor who was likely to be handling it? They seem to have operated on a "tell-him-as-little-as-possible-as-late-as-possible" principle, which never works out well. Though he, for his part, should probably have asked a few more questions than he seems to have done. Equally, the beneficiaries should have told the auctioneer that they didn't have probate for the house yet and, if they didn't volunteer this information, he should have asked them.

But "how did we get into this mess?" is not the most important question at this point; the important question is "how do we get out of it?" The solicitor needs to accelerate the application for a grant of probate as much as possible. The auctioneer needs to sweet-talk the intending purchasers to keep them on side for as long as possible.

Comerman

Peregrinus wrote: »

Yeah, there has clearly been a breakdown in communications. The beneficiaries put the house on the market before they had obtained a grant of probate; did it not occur to them to think about what might happen if they agreed a sale before probate was obtained? This is obviously something they could have asked their solicitor, but clearly they didn't. Equally, they didn't think to tell him that they were putting the house on the market, even though it was obviously something he needed to know (and might have had relevant advice to offer). They were always going to need a solicitor to complete the sale; were they intending to use a different solicitor? If not, why keep schtumm about the sale when talking to the solicitor who was likely to be handling it? They seem to have operated on a "tell-him-as-little-as-possible-as-late-as-possible" principle, which never works out well. Though he, for his part, should probably have asked a few more questions than he seems to have done. Equally, the beneficiaries should have told the auctioneer that they didn't have probate for the house yet and, if they didn't volunteer this information, he should have asked them.

But "how did we get into this mess?" is not the most important question at this point; the important question is "how do we get out of it?" The solicitor needs to accelerate the application for a grant of probate as much as possible. The auctioneer needs to sweet-talk the intending purchasers to keep them on side for as long as possible.

Thanks for your advice,
From day one the solicitor knew the house had to be sold for reasons I won't say. No one kept secrets from him at any time (he was the deceased solicitor handling the will also) and everyone believed he had started the application when he was given bank details, death cert, will, list of assets and evidence of value etc. But now it seems he didn't.

Peregrinus

I think he needed to know when it was to be sold.

Look, as I say there has clearly been a breakdown in communications here. I'm not close enough to the situation to say whose fault it is that there has been a breakdown. I just observe that (1) in general, when there has been a breakdown in communications, usually the fault is shared, with responsibility on both sides, and (2) maybe the more important question is not, who's at fault here and in what proportions?, but rather, how do we solve the problem we now have?

JustAThought

Sounds like your solicitor is dragging his/her heals or being a prick . Id put it in writing how unhappy you are so that s/he knows there might be financial comaint or comeback if the sale falls through. They are paid to manage and advise - sounds like they did neither here.

In the solicitors defense, 3 months isn’t very long. They need be sure that everything is in order. From bills paid, Taxes, bank accounts, insurance policies, investments etc., settled. This can take time, not necessarily from his side but from the organization he is dealing with.

coylemj

OP, when you said that your wife and her sibling 'were left the parents house 3 months ago', do you mean that the parent died three months ago? You don't yet have probate sorted so I assume that's what you mean. In which case you had no business putting the house on the market straight away.

Never mind the solicitor, even the auctioneer handling the sale should have told you that you can't sell a house in those circumstances before the executor gets the grant of probate. And I can't undersand why someone would put down a deposit in those circumstances either. If a prospective buyer asked a few basic questions, they would have discovered that the timing of the sale is dependent on your solicitor sorting out the probate. And not knowing if there was a family dispute about the will or a long backlog in the local probate office or there was an incompetent solicitor involved, most propspective buyers would do no more than make a tentative offer but I'd say that you'd need your head examined before handing over a deposit in those circumstances.

Comerman

coylemj wrote: »

OP, when you said that your wife and her sibling 'were left the parents house 3 months ago', do you mean that the parent died three months ago? You don't yet have probate sorted so I assume that's what you mean. In which case you had no business putting the house on the market straight away.

Never mind the solicitor, even the auctioneer handling the sale should have told you that you can't sell a house in those circumstances before the executor gets the grant of probate. And I can't undersand why someone would put down a deposit in those circumstances either. If a prospective buyer asked a few basic questions, they would have discovered that the timing of the sale is dependent on your solicitor sorting out the probate. And not knowing if there was a family dispute about the will or a long backlog in the local probate office or there was an incompetent solicitor involved, most propspective buyers would do no more than make a tentative offer but I'd say that you'd need your head examined before handing over a deposit in those circumstances.

Father passed away 5 months ago but reading your Point now I get it (I'm not involved it's wife and two sisters) and as said everyone involved are novices who went on the advice of both the solicitors and auctioneer. The girls lost their mother and father within two years of each other, father was sick for 10 years and mother died before him from a massive stroke. The bank are owed money (equity release ****e years ago) and they just wanted to get things over and done with to be honest.

randomrb

3 months is not a long time to submit a probate application. There can be a lot of back and forth with various banks etc and if revenue was involved that can take a lot of time.

In saying that contracts can be issued with the proviso that the sale will close after receipt of the grant of probate, that isn't uncommon. What is concerning is that either you or the auctioneer clearly failed to inform the buyers that you were not registered owners yet.

P2C

Gathering all the relevant information and account details takes a lot time ? Did you present the solicitor with all the information in detail such as statements or did he have to write to all the financial institutions. If he had to write you are talking weeks minimum. I just completed a personal probate application. Wrote to revenue about a property tax liability and got a response two months later. That was a delay. I got a quicker response from pensions office. I lodged the personal application in the probate office at the start of March and I have not secured a date yet for interview. I have rang a few times and being fobbed off. The court service moves at their own pace.