Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Siblings left family home

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Bass Reeves
    Registered Users Posts: 18,212 ✭✭✭✭Bass Reeves


    The executor needs to sit the two beneficiaries down and give it hem limited options. As they cannot agree that either bits the other out. Then it's down to the he executor to give them the options. Sealed biding is not an option as it's too risky for sour grapes.

    Option 1 a closed sale/auction, both beneficiaries put up a bidding deposit of 10k. A solicitor accepts bids and highest bidder gets the house and the sale is completed.

    Option 2 an open sale/auction where both can bid but so can other bidders

    Option 3 an open sale/auction where neither can bid. However it would be virtually impossible for to police as one beneficiary could still buy the house through another party and transfer it into to his own name after.

    Give them Option 1&2 and state in case of no agreement Option two will happem

    Slava Ukrainii



  • Options
    #33
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,355 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    twowheelsonly wrote: »
    A house (or anything !!) is worth what you are willing to pay for it.

    Disagree, it's worth what the market is prepared to pay for it. 'You' is just one person. Who is constrained by how much he has to spend.
    twowheelsonly wrote: »
    By submitting a lower bid this brother is saying that in his opinion the house is worth X.

    What you bid for something is what you hope you can get it for, it is not a declaration of it's true value.


  • Options
    #34
    Buddy Bubs
    Registered Users Posts: 3,527 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    coylemj wrote: »
    First thread, second sentence .....

    I'm not buying the theory that either of them won't sell for any price....it's worth more to one than the other.

    If its just being deliberately difficult and they are not behaving rationally then there's very little that can be done except make legal people rich and put themselves in the poor house.


  • Options
    #35
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,355 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    Buddy Bubs wrote: »
    I'm not buying the theory that either of them won't sell for any price....it's worth more to one than the other.

    Or, as I speculated in post #14 …
    coylemj wrote: »
    It's worth bearing in mind that the motives of each of the siblings could be less 'I want the house' and more that 'he doesn't get it'.
    Buddy Bubs wrote: »
    If its just being deliberately difficult and they are not behaving rationally then there's very little that can be done except make legal people rich and put themselves in the poor house.

    Not true. The executor can give them a deadline to agree a price and one sells his half to the other, failing which the executor can sell the house by public auction and split the money between them.


  • Options
    #36
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,163 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    the executor is only required to take account of the views of the beneficiaries, not take orders from them. It appears to me that the only reason either of them wants the house is so the other doesn't have it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,843 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    Can the house be conveyed into both their names, the remaining monies distributed equally and leave them to it?


  • Options
    #38
    3DataModem
    Registered Users Posts: 3,957 ✭✭✭3DataModem


    athlone573 wrote: »

    If Ben wants the property (or wants it sold) how can he force this? High Court? Who pays the legal costs?

    By having the executor removed from his position, on the basis that he is failing in his duties to execute the will. This is hard and expensive: https://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/arid-40208186.html

    Once a year has passed (the grace period that applies in most cases) the executor becomes personally liable for any loss incurred by the beneficiaries due to his wilful mishandling of the estate. For example, if the housing market crashes 18 months after the death and the executor has clearly been delaying for no reason other than spite/malice/laziness despite the beneficiaries chasing them, they could be sued for the "loss" in value by the other beneficiary.

    (Shaughnessy v Shaughnessy (2016) IEHC 303)


  • Options
    #39
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,144 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    CoBo55 wrote: »
    Can the house be conveyed into both their names, the remaining monies distributed equally and leave them to it?
    Even if possible, this isn't a good solution because it leaves the two beneficiaries, who cannot agree, tied to one another and each dependent on the other in order to preserve/enhance/make use of the inheritance they have received. The stand-off will likely continue, the house will continue to deteriorate, and both will continue to lose value. There's a sporting chance that, sooner or later, it will occur to one or other of them to blame the executor for this state of affairs, which was easily avoidable.

    Whereas if you sell the house and divvy up the money, each sibling gets a capital payment that he can deal with as he pleases, without needing the agreement, approval or co-operation of the other. No guarantee that they will be happy about that, but at least it avoids needless destruction of value and draws a line under the whole sorry business.


  • Options
    #40
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    karmafi wrote: »
    2 siblings have been left their family home, which neither have lived in for some time but both have expressed an interest in buying the other out. Both are adamant they want they house and are not reaching an agreement as to who buys who out.
    What is usually the situation in cases like this?

    Tia

    I’m curious to know would one sibling be in a much stronger position than the other to buy the property?

    If so then it’s likely a forgone conclusion if house went for auction or sale. Depending on the property location it could go for much more than asking price due to current market and possibly neither of them would be in a position to buy it. If both have considerable means then it sounds like the property will go for silly money way over asking price as the two play auction chicken with each other.
    They might need to take all this into account and decide is it worth it. IMHO, it’s best it’s sold on to someone else and proceeds divided equally- that’s if they want to remain on good terms in the future.


  • Options
    #41
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,163 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    CoBo55 wrote: »
    Can the house be conveyed into both their names, the remaining monies distributed equally and leave them to it?

    The executor could do that if were were no debts in the estate but each would have to be willing to accept being a joint owner, at least at the start. As joint owners either could force the sale. Most likely, in such a scenario, the executor would put the house on the open market. Either of them could bid in the knowledge that they will only have to pay half the amount of money they bid, thus giving them an advantage over other potential purchasers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    karmafi
    Registered Users Posts: 16 ✭karmafi


    Hi all ,
    just to clarify both siblings are executors and the estate is to be split equally between them.
    Thanks again for all the input ��


  • Options
    #43
    coylemj
    Registered Users Posts: 25,355 ✭✭✭✭coylemj


    karmafi wrote: »
    Hi all ,
    just to clarify both siblings are executors and the estate is to be split equally between them.

    That sounds like it could get very messy. A lot of us assumed that the executor was a third person. Who would legally be in a position to make a decision to sell the house and divide the proceeds.

    Is each of them still holding out to buy out the other sibling's half? If so, looks like the legal profession will be the eventual winner of the standoff.


  • Options
    #44
    antoinolachtnai
    Registered Users Posts: 9,776 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    coylemj wrote: »
    That sounds like it could get very messy. A lot of us assumed that the executor was a third person. Who would legally be in a position to make a decision to sell the house and divide the proceeds.

    Is each of them still holding out to buy out the other sibling's half? If so, looks like the legal profession will be the eventual winner of the standoff.

    This is not really a problem that legal advice or even a judge can properly solve. What is really needed is skilled and thoughtful mediation.

    Won’t be cheap but cheaper and likely to have a better outcome than any alternative.


  • Options
    #45
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,843 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    karmafi wrote: »
    Hi all ,
    just to clarify both siblings are executors and the estate is to be split equally between them.
    Thanks again for all the input ��

    Oh Lord that's a tricky one, where do you stand in all of this, are you related?


  • Options
    #46
    athlone573
    Registered Users Posts: 726 ✭✭✭athlone573


    At least and if I'm not wrong, you can't sue yourself so the potential for protracted and expensive litigation is diminished.


  • Options
    #47
    CoBo55
    Registered Users Posts: 8,843 ✭✭✭CoBo55


    Does the Will state that specifically? It's unusual that a clear directive isn't made regarding the house, house sold and everything divided equally etc.


  • Options
    #48
    karmafi
    Registered Users Posts: 16 ✭karmafi


    Unfortunately no other directions other than everything split equally.
    Realistically though a bitter battle will only lead to a sibling split and a costly lesson learned.
    Sitting down for mediation would definitely help get both to lay their cards on the table and hopefully a resolve can be found.


  • Options
    #49
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,144 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    athlone573 wrote: »
    At least and if I'm not wrong, you can't sue yourself so the potential for protracted and expensive litigation is diminished.
    Not at all; it's enhanced. If the siblings are unable to agree and there is no separate executor who can break the deadlock by, e.g., selling the house then really the only way this gets resolved is in court.

    You can't sue yourself but if the executors are deadlocked either of them can apply to court looking for directions on the administration of the estate that will lead, by an amazing coincidence, to the estate being administered the way they want. And the co-executor can oppose that application, and cross-apply for the directions they want. And it all kicks off.


  • Options
    #50
    athlone573
    Registered Users Posts: 726 ✭✭✭athlone573


    Amnt I glad this is the legal discussion forum and not the legal advice forum so.


  • Options
    #51
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,163 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    athlone573 wrote: »
    At least and if I'm not wrong, you can't sue yourself so the potential for protracted and expensive litigation is diminished.

    You can't sue yourself but that doesn't mean there can't be acrimonious litigation concerning the estate. They may be joint executors but they are separate legal personalities as beneficiaries.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement