# sign over house now as opposed to leave it in will?



## snuffle (22 Jul 2009)

Apologies if this has been asked ad nauseum before - 
A family member is looking into signing over her house to her (adult) child now, rather than just leaving the house to her child in her will. 

Situation as it stands is that the house is to be left solely to this child in the will anyway, but would there be any benefits (or drawbacks) in signing it over now? 

It is a given at the moment that no other children of this person would try to lay claim to the house or dispute the will, all are agreed that the house will pass to this particular child, but of course we all know how these things could change in years to come. I think the person in question would like to a) ensure there is no wrangling after her death over the house and her will, and b) that the inheritor won't be hit with some legal roadblocks/inheritance taxes/prolonged length of time trying to sort out deeds etc.

Would it be an easier/quicker/less cumbersome process to sign the house over now rather than wait and leave it pass on via the will or are there negative implications to doing so now - i.e. a second property being in the name of the child (possible second property taxes, it being seen as an 
"asset" of the child, when it's really not an asset they could be tapping into until it's actually theirs after the passing away of the person in question, etc). 

The house would to all intents and purposes remain in the possession of the person, and they will continue to live there for the rest of their lives, but the legal end of things would see the house being put into the child's name now. If the situation arose where the sale of the house was neccessitated to fund healthcare/nursing home fees etc, it would of course be sold to fund it, but what implications would there be then, given that the house would be in the name of the child rather than the parent who needs the funds? As it stands, the plan is for this house to remain in the family and be passed from this child in question down to her own (adult) child when the time comes etc, and we don't forsee a situation barring some catastrophe as mentioned above (funding of healthcare) where the house will ever leave the possession of the family.

They will of course be consulting a solicitor, but they'd like to get an idea of what the postives and negatives to the idea are before they go in.

Any advice or thoughts much appreciated.


----------



## mathepac (22 Jul 2009)

This precise question was already asked and answered very thoroughly (IMHO) recently on the site. Try a search.


----------



## snuffle (22 Jul 2009)

Apologies, I did search back through quite a few pages, and the search function itself turned up nothing for me, hence the "apology in advance" conatained in the first line of my initial post asking for advice. 

I will search again in the hopes of turning up something, meanwhile if anyone has any advice to hand I'd really appreciate being pointed in the right direction. Thanks


----------



## DavyJones (22 Jul 2009)

mathepac said:


> This precise question was already asked and answered very thoroughly (IMHO) recently on the site. Try a search.




Yeah, it's been around a few times lately and generally people think it's a very bad idea, just wait a few years and it will be yours.


----------



## snuffle (22 Jul 2009)

DavyJones said:


> Yeah, it's been around a few times lately and generally people think it's a very bad idea, just wait a few years and it will be yours.



Ok, so it's generally seen as a bad idea then? Thanks for that, will keep searching for further info as suggested (at page 10 of this forum at this stage and no luck so far ).

Oh and the house is nothing to do with me whatsoever, it's an enquiry on behalf of a distant aged relative and her child who cares for her, they just want to tidy things up if possible and I said I'd see if I could find out some info for them before they approach their solicitor.


----------



## DavyJones (23 Jul 2009)

I can never find stuff I want to find, so I hear you.

Did find these though.

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=889528

http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?t=112772


----------



## helllohello (23 Jul 2009)

a lot of the problems seem to arise if this child were to get married - then seperated -the house may no longer remain in the family. sensible option is to leave clear instructions in their will.


----------



## snuffle (23 Jul 2009)

Thanks a mil for the links, DavyJones, much appreciated! Am having trouble digging up relevant threads on my own for some reason (currently having a very dimwitted day ).

Hellohello, very sensible suggestion, thanks - might suggest to the woman to leave very clear instructions above and beyond the typical "this goes to x, that goes to y" that's seems to be currently in her will.

Situation as it stands is the child who stands to inherit the house is in her 60s and married (and very unlikely at this stage to divorce!), with only one adult child of her own (who is also married and very unlikely to get divorced), the thinking is that the 60 yr old in question who is currently caring fulltime for her parent will inherit the house, and the house will then pass onto her own only child in time.

Perhaps it would be as well to leave the will as it stands so, and forget about transferring the house into her name at this time, and hope that things don't change between the siblings in the future and continue to remain amicable. Thanks for the help!


----------



## mathepac (23 Jul 2009)

snuffle said:


> ... (currently having a very dimwitted day ) ...


I'm glad I'm not on my own.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (23 Jul 2009)

I have made the main thread on this a Key Post in the taxation forum if anyone is looking for it again.


----------



## csirl (23 Jul 2009)

> If the situation arose where the sale of the house was neccessitated to fund healthcare/nursing home fees etc, it would of course be sold to fund it, but what implications would there be then, given that the house would be in the name of the child rather than the parent who needs the funds?


 
The implications would be that the child would have no obligation to sell the house and so the elderly person may miss out on necessary care. Dont under estimate the capacity of people to go back on verbal agreements when they stand to lose €100ks. You also cant see into the future. The recipient child may need to sell the house to raise funds for themselves at some stage in the future.


----------



## snuffle (23 Jul 2009)

thanks for all the help guys 
Sorry once again for asking a Q that must crop up very often here, appreciate the patience.


----------



## froggy (24 Jul 2009)

Not a good idea from what i have seen in the past. Leave it to the will would be my advice.


----------

