Legal question - house sale and severe ill-health
Discussion
I know that when you sell a house binding contracts are signed at "exchange" and then a few weeks later official transfer documents are signed at "completion" when the money is paid and keys handed over.
Question: What happens if you die between exchange and completion?
Question: What happens if you die between exchange and completion?
- Does the contract fall away because it's impossible to complete?
- Does the contract remain in place and eventually get completed by the executors?
- Would the executors have to wait for a grant of Probate before completing the sale?
- What if there's a long delay before Probate is granted so completion is delayed? Is the seller's estate liable for any costs/expenses which the buyer suffers due to breach of contract?
Speed, plod and the law http://pistonheads.com/gassing/forum.asp?h=0&f...
Ozzie Osmond said:
I know that when you sell a house binding contracts are signed at "exchange" and then a few weeks later official transfer documents are signed at "completion" when the money is paid and keys handed over.
Question: What happens if you die between exchange and completion?
My guess as a manufacturing engineer. Exchange means the deal is DONE. Completion Means the documents and money are handed over. Question: What happens if you die between exchange and completion?
- Does the contract fall away because it's impossible to complete?
- Does the contract remain in place and eventually get completed by the executors?
- Would the executors have to wait for a grant of Probate before completing the sale?
- What if there's a long delay before Probate is granted so completion is delayed? Is the seller's estate liable for any costs/expenses which the buyer suffers due to breach of contract?
If the deal is done, the dead person has made a bidding contract and it should go through.
But I'm guessing.
The estate would lose the 10% deposit and be open to being sued for breach of contract and the damages/loss incurred by the vendor.
I would also think that the illness and potential to default on the transaction would be a material fact which should be disclosed to all parties at the outset.
I would also think that the illness and potential to default on the transaction would be a material fact which should be disclosed to all parties at the outset.
New POD said:
My guess as a manufacturing engineer. Exchange means the deal is DONE. Completion Means the documents and money are handed over.
If the deal is done, the dead person has made a bidding contract and it should go through.
But I'm guessing.
Would a mortgage company agree to transfer funds knowing that their customer was dead? Without the transfer of funds the deal couldn't go ahead, surely? It's been a long while since I took out a mortgage, but would life assurance be an integral part of a mortgage deal and would it be in place from exchange of contracts?If the deal is done, the dead person has made a bidding contract and it should go through.
But I'm guessing.
I guess that this situation arises fairly often given the number of houses bought and sold per annum, someone will know the answer.
Thanks for the input guys. The position seems to be this,
"The practical problem may be that the buyers have contracted to sell their own property and they can be compelled to complete the sale by their buyers even though they are unable to complete their purchase due to the death of the seller. So a practical step which may be taken is for the executors to allow the buyers to move into occupation of the property while waiting for probate.
"The buyer may not be prepared to wait. He is entitled to terminate the contract, which he can do after service of a notice. The notice is to make "time of the essence" of the contract. The normal arrangement is that although a completion date is written in the contract, time is not of the essence of it. This means that the contract cannot be terminated just because the seller (or the buyer for that matter) fails to complete on the day. The aggrieved party has to serve notice making time of the essence. The contract normally states that that time will become of the essence at the end of a two-week period, or less if stipulated in the contract. At the end of that period, the aggrieved party can terminate the contract. If the buyer serves the notice, then the deposit must be returned to him."
- Seller and seller's estate are bound by the signed and exchanged contract so there is an obligation to complete in 28 days.
- At the supposed completion date there's no-one who CAN complete so it can't happen. It will be some months before a grant of Probate is given to the executors.
- Once the executors have a grant of Probate they can go ahead and complete, if the buyer is still around.
"The practical problem may be that the buyers have contracted to sell their own property and they can be compelled to complete the sale by their buyers even though they are unable to complete their purchase due to the death of the seller. So a practical step which may be taken is for the executors to allow the buyers to move into occupation of the property while waiting for probate.
"The buyer may not be prepared to wait. He is entitled to terminate the contract, which he can do after service of a notice. The notice is to make "time of the essence" of the contract. The normal arrangement is that although a completion date is written in the contract, time is not of the essence of it. This means that the contract cannot be terminated just because the seller (or the buyer for that matter) fails to complete on the day. The aggrieved party has to serve notice making time of the essence. The contract normally states that that time will become of the essence at the end of a two-week period, or less if stipulated in the contract. At the end of that period, the aggrieved party can terminate the contract. If the buyer serves the notice, then the deposit must be returned to him."
What you suggest implies that it is impossible for an "estate" to own property at all after death - in other words that death frustrates the whole concept of ownership. That doesn't sound right to me. Contracts will surely survive death (like the gas bill) unless frustrated by impossibility of performance -for instance it would be no good Michael Jackson's executor turning up on stage to do the concerts!
A contract for the sale of property is an interest in land, so it does of course survive death. Whether it can be complied with by the seller is a different problem. The buyer's solicitor should protect the contract by registering a notice of it at the Land Registry, just in case the executors aren't aware of it.
I've never actually dealt with this situation in practice but an old colleague did, and managed to push through completion on the contractual completion date. However, I think that is the exception rather than the rule because completing a house sale is generally not a massive priority for the family of the deceased, and there are really few penalties for a seller breaching the contract. Communication between the parties and between lawyers is key.
I've never actually dealt with this situation in practice but an old colleague did, and managed to push through completion on the contractual completion date. However, I think that is the exception rather than the rule because completing a house sale is generally not a massive priority for the family of the deceased, and there are really few penalties for a seller breaching the contract. Communication between the parties and between lawyers is key.
I don't see what the problem is here.
Normally the house would be sold by an estate agent who has the keys. When it comes to completion day the buyer's lawyers pay the seller's lawyers the remainder of the money and the estate agent hands over the keys to the buyer on the instruction of the seller's lawyers - the seller is not involved whether dead or alive.
Normally the house would be sold by an estate agent who has the keys. When it comes to completion day the buyer's lawyers pay the seller's lawyers the remainder of the money and the estate agent hands over the keys to the buyer on the instruction of the seller's lawyers - the seller is not involved whether dead or alive.
JR said:
I don't see what the problem is here.
Normally the house would be sold by an estate agent who has the keys. When it comes to completion day the buyer's lawyers pay the seller's lawyers the remainder of the money and the estate agent hands over the keys to the buyer on the instruction of the seller's lawyers - the seller is not involved whether dead or alive.
The seller has to sign the transfer deed. If they don't, the buyer doesn't acquire legal title to the property. If the buyer is buying with a mortgage, the mortgagee won't be protected if they're not on the title - in which case they won't advance the money.Normally the house would be sold by an estate agent who has the keys. When it comes to completion day the buyer's lawyers pay the seller's lawyers the remainder of the money and the estate agent hands over the keys to the buyer on the instruction of the seller's lawyers - the seller is not involved whether dead or alive.
I am confused as to who has died here-
If you're talking the seller, then if the seller dies between X & C then the contract is frustrated as it cannot complete.
Probate would then need to be established to move forward in either direction.
If the buyer still wanted to buy, probate would need to be established to prove that the seller (the beneficiary(ies)/ Crown in the case of no beneficiaries) had legal entitlement to sell. The presence/ otherwise of a will setting out what is to happen may have an impact on the time to achieve this.
If the Probate Registry is made aware of the real possibility that damages could be awarded against the estate (because of delayed completion), they can issue an expedited grant (i.e. one which is processed more quickly than normal). It may be the case that once the other side (and possibly others in a chain if applicable) know of the seller's death they may be willing to postpone completion in the knowledge that an expedited grant is forthcoming and everything will still fall in to place.
It is also possible to be creative, I have heard of the Probate Reg letting a buyer take possession on the planned completion date under licence whilst postponing actual completion until probate is complete, meaning if there are others in a chain who are 100% reliant on retaining the previously agreed dates, moves can still happen. Naturally this is complex and may require co-operation up & down a chain and from lenders.
If you're talking the seller, then if the seller dies between X & C then the contract is frustrated as it cannot complete.
Probate would then need to be established to move forward in either direction.
If the buyer still wanted to buy, probate would need to be established to prove that the seller (the beneficiary(ies)/ Crown in the case of no beneficiaries) had legal entitlement to sell. The presence/ otherwise of a will setting out what is to happen may have an impact on the time to achieve this.
If the Probate Registry is made aware of the real possibility that damages could be awarded against the estate (because of delayed completion), they can issue an expedited grant (i.e. one which is processed more quickly than normal). It may be the case that once the other side (and possibly others in a chain if applicable) know of the seller's death they may be willing to postpone completion in the knowledge that an expedited grant is forthcoming and everything will still fall in to place.
It is also possible to be creative, I have heard of the Probate Reg letting a buyer take possession on the planned completion date under licence whilst postponing actual completion until probate is complete, meaning if there are others in a chain who are 100% reliant on retaining the previously agreed dates, moves can still happen. Naturally this is complex and may require co-operation up & down a chain and from lenders.
In the case of a chain it is most likely (but not certain) that no onward purchase would be made. The parties "above" expecting the chain to have moved and not being able to make their purchases without funds from the deceased would have had a claim on the deposit, wouldn't they? In that case, were the cahin to continue with further links above, would each of those parties not all try to claim the deposit from the partyy below? Quite a nice earner by the time you get to the top of that chain, no?
Further the party that expected to be moving into the now deceased person's home, would they not be in danger of failing to compy with their own contract to sell if they did not complete on their own sale (on the basis they were unable to complete on their purchase)?
Messy.
It's never happened on my watch. Long may that continue.
Further the party that expected to be moving into the now deceased person's home, would they not be in danger of failing to compy with their own contract to sell if they did not complete on their own sale (on the basis they were unable to complete on their purchase)?
Messy.
It's never happened on my watch. Long may that continue.
DS3R said:
If you're talking the seller, then if the seller dies between X & C then the contract is frustrated as it cannot complete.
The seller being unable to complete does not frustrate the contract in the legal sense of frustration; if the administrators do not apply for an expedited grant of probate in order to complete in accordance with the contract, then it is breached by the estate but not frustrated.Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff