Selling a house when one party doesn’t want to.
Discussion
Yes. My wife went through this. The sister that didn’t want to sell was also the executor of the will. The other two sisters took her to court, had her removed from the executor roll and subsequently evicted from the house to allow it to be sold, and the estate divided as per the will. All the costs for the court case and the eviction came from the recalcitrant sister’s third of the estate, ended up costing her just short of thirty thousand quid.
Edited to add, the two sisters also put a claim in for their share of the property rental value as mentioned earlier in the thread...
Edited to add, the two sisters also put a claim in for their share of the property rental value as mentioned earlier in the thread...
Edited by gazza285 on Wednesday 24th July 20:30
vonhosen said:
Alucidnation said:
This is the reason all our properties are split equally between the kids in our wills.
Never any arguments then.
They were split equally in the OP's case.Never any arguments then.
Me and the wife are about to redo our wills.
They currently suggest that her sister will.look after the kids. But as they are 23 and 26 they might not like that. We have 3 houses although 2 are mortgaged and will be for 15 years, but then 2 will be rented out, and it will be almost impossible to evict the tenants under the changes coming to Rental law. So not sure how to deal with that.
Give each a rental and insist that the executors sell the 3rd. And split the money ?
SydneyBridge said:
Is the person in the house willing to pay the full market rental for the property? Minus one third for their share
No they will not sell. They will buy the 2/3 out but under market value. He thinks the house is worth £180k market value is £210kEdited by sam.rog on Wednesday 24th July 23:02
Harpington said:
Ianal but I would have thought:
- no, but
- could deny usage of the other 2/3 or force some kind of rent to be paid?
Might also depends how long has been rent free (maybe sets a precedent?)
I also thought of this, as he is effectively blocking the 2/3 from receiving what they are entitled to. The will was clear that all children would receive 1/3 of the estate. - no, but
- could deny usage of the other 2/3 or force some kind of rent to be paid?
Might also depends how long has been rent free (maybe sets a precedent?)
sam.rog said:
No they will not sell. They will buy the 2/3 out but under market value. He thinks the house is worth £180k market value is £210k
Doesn't seem too much of a difference hence bridge to cross. Get 3x evaluations, average the three, bobs your father's brotherEdited by sam.rog on Wednesday 24th July 23:02
snake_oil said:
Doesn't seem too much of a difference hence bridge to cross. Get 3x evaluations, average the three, bobs your father's brother
For all rational human beings this would suffice. Unfortunately this person isn’t one of them. This person doesn’t trust estate agents and has picked the £180k out of his backside and won’t move from it. He has offered the 2/3 60k each to buy them out., but won’t accept 60k to sell. One of the 2/3 is the executor of the will. Does this carry any weight or is it just a fancy name?
Edited by sam.rog on Wednesday 24th July 23:30
sam.rog said:
Tell me about it. Even worse when the offending party has mental issues and doesn’t take their medication.
Throw in violent alcoholic as well and you have my sister-in-law. All attempts at reasonable negotiation failed, so the two sisters severed all ties and did everything through the courts. The rest of the extended family have followed suit, including my niece. The S-I-L has two younger children, who have now been with foster parents for just over three years, and are both now thriving. If the relationship has failed, then I definitely recommend the legal route, seeing her obstruction costing her thirty grand was most gratifying, as she is a horrible human being.
janesmith1950 said:
The 2 non occupiers might lose £10k each on the differing valuations, but it's not that much in the grand scheme of things. Is it really worth the stress and fall out of court proceedings to get £10k? Take the £60k and avoid the hassle.
And this is exactly why we have a society where bullies and chancers prey on folk with this attitude - They should not be allowed to get away with it.janesmith1950 said:
The 2 non occupiers might lose £10k each on the differing valuations, but it's not that much in the grand scheme of things. Is it really worth the stress and fall out of court proceedings to get £10k? Take the £60k and avoid the hassle.
Yes it is worth the hassle, it didn’t cost the wife a penny. The stress and fall out has already occurred due to the avarice of one party.Who is the executor of the will?
NormalWisdom said:
And this is exactly why we have a society where bullies and chancers prey on folk with this attitude - They should not be allowed to get away with it.
You only have one life. You can allow a year or more of your life run by with lawyers, courts, cost hearings and trying to force whatever outcome the court ordered. You might, if lucky, get all of your costs back from the losing party (assuming they lose).
All for what? £10k? Is time and enjoyment worth so little?
Not to mention there's no guarantee the house would sell for the supposed market value. Then there would typically be estate agent fees in normal, arms length sale.
The notional £30k difference in valuation could be eaten into considerably.
On the other side you have a willing buyer, offering a lower than ideal price, but also an opportunity for a quick sale and (by the sounds of it) a desired separation.
Taking people to court out of principle for small amounts of money is a great way to waste your life, time,.money and sanity. If they're all only worth £10k to you, go for it.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff