Split of Deed after buying out sibling's share of inherited house

M

Mapleshamrock

New Member
Messages
4
Hi everyone!
I have a confusing situation. I have two siblings and some years ago we inherited my father's house. The split was 40% each for my brothers and 20% for me. One of my brothers and my mother live in the property, and I want them to be able to remain there. My second brother is a half brother and wants his share of the estate, as he is entitled to.

In order to settle the estate, through loans and savings I personally have come up with the funds to purchase the half brother out of his share. The solicitor for the executor is now drafting contracts, and has indicated that he will put on the title deeds that I will own one third of the property and my full brother will own two thirds.

This is bizarre to me - my understanding of the situation is that I am effectively purchasing my half brothers 40%, on top of my 20%, for a total share of 60%. The solicitor for the executor is adamant that the deeds must reflect the ratio of me and my brothers original entitlement in the will (20% and 40%, meaning a ratio of 1:2). He says "It is a matter of succession law and an obligation on the executors".

Is this right? Really in need of advice here, I'd like to know how much to push back on this!

Many thanks!
 
Last edited:
Mapleshamrock said:
One of my brothers and my mother live in the property, and I want them to be able to remain there.
Click to expand...

Mapleshamrock said:
He says "It is a matter of succession law and an obligation on the executors".
Click to expand...

Your brother would appear to be doing very well out of the situation. Gets to remain in the house and benefits without contributing to buy your half brother out. Seems mad and hard to believe.
 
Who is/was the executor and does the solicitor you mention represent the executor?

It seems like a crazy situation where a 40% purchase added to a 20% ownership = 50%. Get the solicitor to quote you chapter and verse on the relevant laws as he/she sees them.
 
One way to overcome this is to back out of the sale. Then allow the new title deeds where the three of you own the property reflect the 20:40:40 split.
Once that is in writing on the deeds write to the half brother offering to purchase his 40% share. The Conveyancing solicitor will then record that you own a further 40% of the property.

One other suggestion is that you only pay your half sibling 10% of the value of the property. If you are ending up with 30%, less your 20%, that means your half sibling inherited 10%?

And one final suggestion, did your mother inherit any part of the house. Were your parents married? Under the succession act her legal right share would be one third of the estate if she was currently married to your father. So even if not in the will she inherits 33%, and the remaining 66% is divided 20:40:40 among the three siblings. Now your mother might have gotten her 33% in other assets, I don’t know, but if that is what happened, your half sibling only inherited 26% of the house, and if you buy that plus your own 13% you will own 40%, your mum 33%, and your full brother 26%. If that is the case then only pay your half sibling 26% of the value of the house, not 40%.

There is some logic in the executor/solicitors thinking that is not clear to you and you should not pay 40% of the value of the house if you are not buying 40% of the house. Have you seen the will? Do you have your own solicitor to advise you on what you are purchasing? Best of luck in sorting it all out, let us know how you get on.
 
You mention your "father's" house but also that your "mother ' still lives there.
What is her status in relation to the house?
That may colour ownership.
For example if your father died without a will as opposed to leaving a will.
 
Bluefin said:
Is it possible to will the family home to your children when your spouse is still alive and living in the family home?
Click to expand...

BlackandBlue said:
You mention your "father's" house but also that your "mother ' still lives there.
What is her status in relation to the house?
That may colour ownership.
For example if your father died without a will as opposed to leaving a will.
Click to expand...
Mother and father were never married, mother has no legal right to the house afaik, father estranged from me and full brother.
This is obviously a pretty important piece I left out, sorry for the confusion to everyone who is asking about my mother's entitlement.

Thank you to everyone verifying that I'm not being daft, and that this really is a ludicrous suggestion by the solicitor for the executor!

How would this situation normally play out, in a sane way? I get the impression that the deeds haven't been assigned to anyone yet, so presumably it should be as simple as:

I pay half brother 40% of property values. That same day, deeds are assigned to me and full brother in 60:40 split?

(dangerous words, nothing's ever simple I know!)
 
Last edited:
Have you seen the will? How do you know the split is 20:40:40 of the full house? The solicitor will carry out the wishes according to the will and the law, and following the instructions of the executor. He would not, most solicitors being reasonable, law abiding people, do something daft and off the wall. So my conclusion is you are missing something key. My worry is you pay 40% of the value of the house to your half brother and you are not getting 40 %, you should only pay for the % you get.

You own solicitor should sort it out and explain it to you. Best of luck.
 
huskerdu said:
I would strongly advise you to get independent legal advice . You are spending a lot of money on a share of a house, you need it to know that everything has been done correctly before you sign anything.

You cant afford not to.
Click to expand...
I will absolutely, no doubt, just wanted to understand the situation before talking to my solicitor next.

DannyBoyD said:
Not necessarily.

Your mother should seek legal advice before you go any further.
Click to expand...
She has done, unfortunately the timeframe where she could have claimed some ownership has passed.

Clamball said:
Have you seen the will? How do you know the split is 20:40:40 of the full house? The solicitor will carry out the wishes according to the will and the law, and following the instructions of the executor. He would not, most solicitors being reasonable, law abiding people, do something daft and off the wall. So my conclusion is you are missing something key. My worry is you pay 40% of the value of the house to your half brother and you are not getting 40 %, you should only pay for the % you get.

You own solicitor should sort it out and explain it to you. Best of luck.
Click to expand...
The split is definitely 20:40:40, that is the share we would receive if sale of the property were to be forced.

Re-reading some emails, I'm gathering that the executor's solicitor sees the situation something like the following:
- The house is valued at, say, 400k, at a 20:40:40 split.
- I add 160k (40%) to the "pot" to pay the half brother and remove him from the situation. This is not a "sale" per se in the solicitor's view, just a way of him getting paid out?
- That leaves the rest of the estate to be split in a 20:40 ratio between me and my brother?

Seems like bizarre logic.
 
Is this a question about whether your half brother can disclaim his share in return for money? Because that is what it sounds like
 
MHoran379 said:
Is this a question about whether your half brother can disclaim his share in return for money? Because that is what it sounds like
Click to expand...
Maybe? I'm not clear exactly how it's usually structured, but looking in this forum, buying out a sibling's share of an inherited property seems relatively common.

What does not seem common or rational is the resulting split of the property's equity that is being proposed to me.
 
The solicitor for the executor is adamant that the deeds must reflect the ratio of me and my brothers original entitlement in the will
(20% and 40%, meaning a ratio of 1:2). He says "It is a matter of succession law and an obligation on the executors.
Click to expand...

Seems to me (and you) that the original ratio was 20/100, 40/100, 40/100. Or, in ratios: 1:2:2

And, as we all agree, the new ratio should be (20 + 40)/100, 40/100 [or, in ratios: 3:2]

Perhaps he is mathematically challenged! Why not gently suggest that he discusses this complex mathematical matter with an intelligent Junior Cert maths student, he may even have one in the family!
 
There's a difference between a disclaimer and a purchase.

Disclaimer means your half brother releases his share in return for money. That share will go possibly equally between the remaining siblings or by intestacy depending on the wording of the will- then the solicitor is right

A lot of people try to do it by disclaimer because no second solicitor, no conveyancing fee, no stamp duty, tax wise its efficient. But it doesnt always work.

So otherwise you have to buy his share just like any conveyancing transaction, two sets of solicitors, stamp duty etc. More costly but it will go in the right proportions then.
 
Last edited:
I think you are right MHoran. The half brother has disclaimed his right in return for 40% of the value of the house. This take it from a 40:40:20 split to a 40:20 split and then the brother gets 66% of the house and the poster gets 33%.

The only issue is the the poster is expected to pay the 40% value to the half-brother. The money should come from the estate, not the poster. I cannot reconcile how the poster gives the estate the money for the 40% and the half brother inherits the money from the father.

So the poster needs to go back to the solicitor and say this was not their understanding but that they would be willing to purchase the 40% of the house so they retain their original 20%, the full brother keeps his 40% and the poster buys the 40%. This may not suit the half brother or the solicitor (if they had already progressed the work) but the original poster need to be clear to the solicitor what he want to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top