Debt After Death
Discussion
PurpleMoonlight said:
No, your dads assets should have been utilised to settle his debts. You chose to pay them instead to avoid selling the assets.
That is not the same as the debt being passed on to a third party.
He didn’t have any assets to use. As I stated at the end of what I said, I didn’t HAVE to pay but I chose to in order to claim an inheritance. I recognised then and I recognise now that the debt wasn’t literally forced upon me but in certain situations when you’re in them it can feel that way.That is not the same as the debt being passed on to a third party.
Plus, if you’re alluding to selling his house to pay any debts, what about his partner? She wouldn’t have sold up to pay as they weren’t married she saw all his debts as mine as I was the only next of kin. She would have fought me all the way and as she was on benefits she would have had access to free legal aid to fight me in court, I was only 24 and had just spent my life savings on a house (just a month before the financial crash of 2008, losing £20k of value in the house).
Graunching_dave said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
No, your dads assets should have been utilised to settle his debts. You chose to pay them instead to avoid selling the assets.
That is not the same as the debt being passed on to a third party.
He didn’t have any assets to use. As I stated at the end of what I said, I didn’t HAVE to pay but I chose to in order to claim an inheritance. I recognised then and I recognise now that the debt wasn’t literally forced upon me but in certain situations when you’re in them it can feel that way.That is not the same as the debt being passed on to a third party.
Plus, if you’re alluding to selling his house to pay any debts, what about his partner? She wouldn’t have sold up to pay as they weren’t married she saw all his debts as mine as I was the only next of kin. She would have fought me all the way and as she was on benefits she would have had access to free legal aid to fight me in court, I was only 24 and had just spent my life savings on a house (just a month before the financial crash of 2008, losing £20k of value in the house).
Unusual circumstances. You didn’t HAVE to do it.
Graunching_dave said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
No, your dads assets should have been utilised to settle his debts. You chose to pay them instead to avoid selling the assets.
That is not the same as the debt being passed on to a third party.
He didn’t have any assets to use. As I stated at the end of what I said, I didn’t HAVE to pay but I chose to in order to claim an inheritance. I recognised then and I recognise now that the debt wasn’t literally forced upon me but in certain situations when you’re in them it can feel that way.That is not the same as the debt being passed on to a third party.
Plus, if you’re alluding to selling his house to pay any debts, what about his partner? She wouldn’t have sold up to pay as they weren’t married she saw all his debts as mine as I was the only next of kin. She would have fought me all the way and as she was on benefits she would have had access to free legal aid to fight me in court, I was only 24 and had just spent my life savings on a house (just a month before the financial crash of 2008, losing £20k of value in the house).
boyse7en said:
Whose house was it? If it was his, with a mortgage in his name, then without the life insurance and you paying it off then it would presumably have been sold off by the bank to recover the debt.
Wait, so you inherited part of a house that someone else lives in?Why would you even bother paying it off?
I presume you can't sell it unless the partner dies or moves out, which might be never. So you've paid £13k and are now £13k down stuck with equity in a house you can't do anything with or make money from...?
Unless I'm missing something you went about it completely the wrong way.
J2daG1990 said:
boyse7en said:
Whose house was it? If it was his, with a mortgage in his name, then without the life insurance and you paying it off then it would presumably have been sold off by the bank to recover the debt.
Wait, so you inherited part of a house that someone else lives in?Why wouldd you even bother paying it off?
I presume you can't sell it unless the partner dies or moves out, which might be never. So you've paid £13k and are now £13k down stuck with equity in a house you can't do anything with or make money from...?
Unless I'm missing something you went about it completely the wrong way.
His first words were, paraphrasing, effectively that he sorted out the shortfall, and the credit card debt, to stabilise a situation so that his dad's partner had somewhere familiar to live, which presumably he thought they couldn't do as they appeared to have no money. Which seems an honourable thing to do.
I suppose he could have just said to the partner, off you toddle then, and sat back for a fire sale by the bank and waited for whatever was left and screw everybody else. Which would have been the actions of a weapons grade git imo.
Graunching_dave said:
Wow, talk about a thread de- rail. I was much happier as a reader/ lurker on here as posting seems to bring out at the know it all types not to mention the c-unts.
The last poster hit the nail on the head but f
k it, I’m out.
the people that took the time to read all of your posts should understand perfectly what you said. if i managed, they must have been clear and concise The last poster hit the nail on the head but f
k it, I’m out.
you made a choice to keep the partner in the house by paying his debt off.sore one at the time given your already stretched situation and the fact the partner got 25k cash that you didn't find out about until much later. now partner has passed you inherit house.
tony wright said:
Driving home tonight we got embroiled in a small discussion on above. Brother in Law said that if you were to die (Wife has already passed away) in debt and your remaining estate didn’t cover this, it would be passed on to your children. He was talking about mortgages, loans, taxes etc. I’d never heard of this but still said he was talking bks, am I wrong?
No.ks, am I wrong?7795 said:
The thinking, for whatever reason, and however badly advised was give it away before you die and not to HMRC. Hmmm...
Nothing inherenty wrong with that strategy to avoid/minimise IHT if you have sufficient remaning income/assets assets to support yourselHowever the catch is making sure you live for the required length of time. The problem is life is unpredictable.
I'm sure those killed by Tomasz Kroker weren't expecting to die when they got up that morning.
Red Devil said:
However the catch is making sure you live for the required length of time. The problem is life is unpredictable.
"Mum, can we move Dad to the shed? He's starting to smell really bad, there are flies everywhere and bits are starting to fall off him"."Just another six months and four days, darling, and we can tell everyone he's dead. Otherwise HMRC will want you to sell your bike and give them the money".
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff