Writing will, how to treat timing of sale of house

C

clipper

Registered User
Messages
46
My query is quite similar to Michael3's in that my mother wishes to leave her house to 3 siblings to be divided equally. At present, she has stipulated that the house be sold and proceeds divided equally, however, she now wishes to change this to avoid us being forced to sell if we do not wish to do so straight away.
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=139062

What could she say in her will that could take this into account. From the post above, I take it that the house can't stay in the estates name for very long so needs to be transferred to the beneficiary’s names. If there were some sort of cashless sale to the beneficiaries, would there be stamp duty implications as we'd all be 2nd time buyers?
If her will stated that ownership to be transferred to 3 beneficiaries, then there would be no sale as such. Would revenue still want stamp duty for such a transfer?
Can you then say something like, house to be sold on agreement of 2 out of 3 beneficiaries? Would it be simpler, if the market value is really low, to give the beneficiaries first option to buy the house at the low value so if 2 want to keep it and 1 sell, then 2 can buy at low value - is this simpler than needing agreement to sell. (Again, is there any tax benefits to doing it one way than another)
Sorry, not sure if my query is confusing
 
Isnt the simplist was to say that the house must be sold within the usual 12 month period and the proceeds divided?

If any of the beneficiaries really want the house, they can buy it via the estate agent.
 
I'd assume they would then have to pay stamp duty to buy it back and legal costs of buying etc., its an expensive way for them to keep the house especially if all are in agreement to hold onto it for another while
 
To me, it looks as if the simplest thing is to have the will say nothing about the sale of the house, and to appoint an executor that she trusts would work co-operatively with the beneficiaries (or possibly appoint all three beneficiaries as joint executors, but I think that could be a bit cumbersome).
 
I have found that it is relatively easy to anticipate those estates when there will be trouble on the death of the disponer. Thankfully, most estates are trouble free. Those that are troublesome would be troublesome if people were fighting over tuppence, let alone a house!

By and large, the key is to keep it simple and don't try and rule from the grave.

There is a lot to be said for selling quickly and disbursing the cash - different beneficiaries can have differing needs at differing times and what suits one at one stage may not always suit all. There is no stamp duty on the vesting of the property in the beneficiaries. There is a stamp duty implication if one or more beneficiary wants to buy from others but it is only on the share being acquired and would be at half the normal rate.

mf
 
I won't attempt to gainsay mf1 on the general point, but there does seem to be an extra matter in play for many people: uncertainty about property values. It has arisen in a couple of threads in this forum, and I am aware of it as an issue in two estates of which I have current knowledge. In the cases of which I have direct knowledge, there is no conflict between beneficiaries, but there is the hope of being able to time the sale of the house to best advantage. The problem is, of course, that nobody actually knows when it is the best time to put the house on the market, but most people seem to have an opinion about it (generally optimism about short-to-medium term property values). It is possible that such optimism is misplaced, that people will be disappointed with outcomes, and there might be a danger that bad feeling could ensue.
 
Thanks guys, mf1, thas great info. regarding the stamp duty, I didn't realise there'd be a reduction,
As the other thread did mention, the estate shouldn't be in the business of property speculation,
Cheers
 
Again, just on timing the sale.

One big issue with trying to keep the property is responsibility for insuring and maintaining. In one case I have, the majority of the family want to hold on to the house "for a while" (unspecified) but the executor ( one of the offspring) knows darn well that she will be the one looking after it, finding tenants, dealing with any problems while the rest of the beneficiaries count their imaginary money!

mf
 
I suppose the worry in relation to the house value is that whilst an estate agent could give a value for a house, if no one views or offers anything for a year, it is in theory worth nothing. In such a scenario, would it be better that the will doesn't force the executer to sell in that year, could you end up in a bizarre situation where the 3 beneficiaries are buying it off the market from themselves with the legal costs added in. Again though, it does ask the question how do you word the will to enable the beneficiaries time the sale to the best advantage - I guess thats impossible to answer.
 
I'm always suspicious of beneficiaries who want to keep the estate intact for a long period of time. There is usually some sort of alterior motive behind it e.g. tax issues.

An estate is supposed to be a temporary state of affairs. The executor is obliged to disperse the estate ASAP and generally it should all be done within 12 months unless there is a very good reason. Waiting for the property market to change or a beneficiaries tax issues are not a good reason. Any house will sell if the price is right, so I cant conceive of a situation whereby no offers are received within 12 months. The executor can also put it up for auction with no reserve price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top