Joint tenants v Tenants in common.
Discussion
We are seriously considering changing our wills, so we are "tenants in common".
I have thought about this for a few years, so we are going seeing a specialist solicitor in a week or so, who will hopefully explain the pros & cons.
For every advantage, there has to be a disadvantage right?
We are of "advancing years"
and have three lads, 41,39 and 37,
Anybody on PH done this?
I have thought about this for a few years, so we are going seeing a specialist solicitor in a week or so, who will hopefully explain the pros & cons.
For every advantage, there has to be a disadvantage right?
We are of "advancing years"
and have three lads, 41,39 and 37,Anybody on PH done this?
craig1912 said:
We ve always been tenants in common.
Not sure of any disadvantages.
Likewise think we are a 70/30 split to me, as I put down the majority of the equity (240k Vs 20k) and at the time weren't married (but are now). The sale was very rushed, with offer accepted to getting the keys in under 5 weeks. In hindsight may have dropped the ball on this aspect!Not sure of any disadvantages.
Would be interested to know, with regards financial planning and inheritance for the lad (hopefully we've got a few more years left).
I've gone for Joint Tenants as I want the ownership of the house to pass wholly to the surviving spouse so the survivor gets the £1m allowance before IHT kicks in. My thoughts are with tenants on common the first death will use up some of the IHT allowance with no/less to carry over?
We've only one dependent so it all passes to our daughter at some point and for me this seems the simplest method.
We've only one dependent so it all passes to our daughter at some point and for me this seems the simplest method.
Armitage.Shanks said:
I've gone for Joint Tenants as I want the ownership of the house to pass wholly to the surviving spouse so the survivor gets the £1m allowance before IHT kicks in. My thoughts are with tenants on common the first death will use up some of the IHT allowance with no/less to carry over?
We've only one dependent so it all passes to our daughter at some point and for me this seems the simplest method.
If a share of the house is left via an interest in possession trust with a lineal descendant as final beneficiary the residential NRB is still claimable so a married couple will still retain the full allowances unless the £2m+ value taper applies.We've only one dependent so it all passes to our daughter at some point and for me this seems the simplest method.
If you and your spouse are tenants in common and one of you dies, what happens to the others share?
Reason for asking is that I'm selling my dad's flat at the moment. Mum and dad were tenants in common with equal share. She died in 2014. My worry is that he probably did nothing at the time and the flat is most likely still in both names. Do I have anything to worry about and/or is there anything I need to do or check?
Edit. I have just bought a copy of the title deeds from Land registry and it appears the flat is still in both their names.
Anybody know what the implications of this are please?
Reason for asking is that I'm selling my dad's flat at the moment. Mum and dad were tenants in common with equal share. She died in 2014. My worry is that he probably did nothing at the time and the flat is most likely still in both names. Do I have anything to worry about and/or is there anything I need to do or check?
Edit. I have just bought a copy of the title deeds from Land registry and it appears the flat is still in both their names.
Anybody know what the implications of this are please?
Edited by ChrisH72 on Monday 13th July 21:56
My understanding is that if you're married, and don't have any complications such as children from a previous / different relationship then joint tenants is absolutely the way to go.
My logic is as follows (assuming you die first and your will is pretty much along the lines of spouse gets everything, but if they're dead, kids get everything)
When you die, your spouse inherits everything, including all of your IHT allowances.
When your spouse dies, your kids get everything including 2 sets of IHT allowances.
The net result from an IHT perspective is no different from them getting 1/2 the house when you died and the other 1/2 of the house when your spouse dies. The only difference is the impact of any increase in the house value between the two deaths.
My view is that tenants in common is only really of any value if the two of you want to do different things with your share of the house when you die.
My logic is as follows (assuming you die first and your will is pretty much along the lines of spouse gets everything, but if they're dead, kids get everything)
When you die, your spouse inherits everything, including all of your IHT allowances.
When your spouse dies, your kids get everything including 2 sets of IHT allowances.
The net result from an IHT perspective is no different from them getting 1/2 the house when you died and the other 1/2 of the house when your spouse dies. The only difference is the impact of any increase in the house value between the two deaths.
My view is that tenants in common is only really of any value if the two of you want to do different things with your share of the house when you die.
omniflow said:
My understanding is that if you're married, and don't have any complications such as children from a previous / different relationship then joint tenants is absolutely the way to go.
My logic is as follows (assuming you die first and your will is pretty much along the lines of spouse gets everything, but if they're dead, kids get everything)
When you die, your spouse inherits everything, including all of your IHT allowances.
When your spouse dies, your kids get everything including 2 sets of IHT allowances.
The net result from an IHT perspective is no different from them getting 1/2 the house when you died and the other 1/2 of the house when your spouse dies. The only difference is the impact of any increase in the house value between the two deaths.
My view is that tenants in common is only really of any value if the two of you want to do different things with your share of the house when you die.
I largely agree with this. In my parents case they wanted Tenants in Common and then set their will so that upon the death of the first parent a trust was created so that their portion of the house went to the children but that the remaining parent retained full control whilst living there. The idea being that if the remaining parent re-married (or needed long term care) then half the house was already effectively inherited by the children and therefore excluded from the estate. To me that makes a lot of sense and is a big benefit of tenants in common over joint tenants.My logic is as follows (assuming you die first and your will is pretty much along the lines of spouse gets everything, but if they're dead, kids get everything)
When you die, your spouse inherits everything, including all of your IHT allowances.
When your spouse dies, your kids get everything including 2 sets of IHT allowances.
The net result from an IHT perspective is no different from them getting 1/2 the house when you died and the other 1/2 of the house when your spouse dies. The only difference is the impact of any increase in the house value between the two deaths.
My view is that tenants in common is only really of any value if the two of you want to do different things with your share of the house when you die.
We were - are still are - married when we bought our house some 22 years ago and the title was held as Tenants in common.
Some years later we bought some land attaching to the house and this too is held as Tic.
We are about to purchase some more land and under both titles for this we will also hold as Tic.
In all 4 cases we hold the Tic 50/50.
Our wills leave everything to each other ( and then our 3 children in the event of both deaths ).
The solicitors have always said that registering as Tic gives more flexibility potentially and makes no adverse impact on any of the IHT allowances.
Some years later we bought some land attaching to the house and this too is held as Tic.
We are about to purchase some more land and under both titles for this we will also hold as Tic.
In all 4 cases we hold the Tic 50/50.
Our wills leave everything to each other ( and then our 3 children in the event of both deaths ).
The solicitors have always said that registering as Tic gives more flexibility potentially and makes no adverse impact on any of the IHT allowances.
alscar said:
We were - are still are - married when we bought our house some 22 years ago and the title was held as Tenants in common.
Some years later we bought some land attaching to the house and this too is held as Tic.
We are about to purchase some more land and under both titles for this we will also hold as Tic.
In all 4 cases we hold the Tic 50/50.
Our wills leave everything to each other ( and then our 3 children in the event of both deaths ).
The solicitors have always said that registering as Tic gives more flexibility potentially and makes no adverse impact on any of the IHT allowances.
Alscar, do you have any knowledge of my situation above please?Some years later we bought some land attaching to the house and this too is held as Tic.
We are about to purchase some more land and under both titles for this we will also hold as Tic.
In all 4 cases we hold the Tic 50/50.
Our wills leave everything to each other ( and then our 3 children in the event of both deaths ).
The solicitors have always said that registering as Tic gives more flexibility potentially and makes no adverse impact on any of the IHT allowances.
Mum and Dad were TIC with equal share. Mum died in 2014 but I don't believe Dad did anything in terms of probate etc. The title deed still lists them both as owners.
I don't have Mums will but believe it may be with the solicitor that held Dad's. I have no idea what is in it.
I'm now very worried that I am going to have to get probate for Mum before we can sell the flat.
Any insight greatly appreciated.
ChrisH72 said:
Alscar, do you have any knowledge of my situation above please?
Mum and Dad were TIC with equal share. Mum died in 2014 but I don't believe Dad did anything in terms of probate etc. The title deed still lists them both as owners.
I don't have Mums will but believe it may be with the solicitor that held Dad's. I have no idea what is in it.
I'm now very worried that I am going to have to get probate for Mum before we can sell the flat.
Any insight greatly appreciated.
Chris , aiui when your Mum died she presumably left everything to Dad including the share of their house under the provisions of the will - that's I think the biggest difference of holding under Joint tenancy which in effect leaves the house on death as opposed to the will then doing the same ?Mum and Dad were TIC with equal share. Mum died in 2014 but I don't believe Dad did anything in terms of probate etc. The title deed still lists them both as owners.
I don't have Mums will but believe it may be with the solicitor that held Dad's. I have no idea what is in it.
I'm now very worried that I am going to have to get probate for Mum before we can sell the flat.
Any insight greatly appreciated.
At the time probate clearly wasn't required to be done.
As such I don't think the title registry itself dictates the answer.
I had to sell a relatives house whose own husband didn't leave a will and had died some 45 years prior - I had no idea how the title was held but it seemed to make no difference whatsoever to the sale itself.
However on something like this ,I'm no Solicitor and I wouldn't want to rely on anyone here telling you the answer ( unless they are a Solicitor obviously ) and would suggest a call to a solicitor nearby might be very worthwhile - the one that held your Dads will for starters.
Fwiw my gut would suggest that you don't have to obtain probate for your Mum.
ChrisH72 said:
Thanks for the reply Alscar.
I have emailed the solicitor who held dad's will as I believe they also did mum's.
Also emailed the solicitor dealing with conveyancing for the flat to ask if there could be any issue.
Hopefully one or both will give you the assurances - obvs report back with any answers !I have emailed the solicitor who held dad's will as I believe they also did mum's.
Also emailed the solicitor dealing with conveyancing for the flat to ask if there could be any issue.
omniflow said:
My understanding is that if you're married, and don't have any complications such as children from a previous / different relationship then joint tenants is absolutely the way to go.
My logic is as follows (assuming you die first and your will is pretty much along the lines of spouse gets everything, but if they're dead, kids get everything)
When you die, your spouse inherits everything, including all of your IHT allowances.
When your spouse dies, your kids get everything including 2 sets of IHT allowances.
The net result from an IHT perspective is no different from them getting 1/2 the house when you died and the other 1/2 of the house when your spouse dies. The only difference is the impact of any increase in the house value between the two deaths.
My view is that tenants in common is only really of any value if the two of you want to do different things with your share of the house when you die.
I read recently that tenants in common has advantages over joint tenancy in the event of one of you needing to go into council funded care, and the amounts they can claim back. But I can't recall the details of why, which isn't much use I'm afraid. My logic is as follows (assuming you die first and your will is pretty much along the lines of spouse gets everything, but if they're dead, kids get everything)
When you die, your spouse inherits everything, including all of your IHT allowances.
When your spouse dies, your kids get everything including 2 sets of IHT allowances.
The net result from an IHT perspective is no different from them getting 1/2 the house when you died and the other 1/2 of the house when your spouse dies. The only difference is the impact of any increase in the house value between the two deaths.
My view is that tenants in common is only really of any value if the two of you want to do different things with your share of the house when you die.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I read recently that tenants in common has advantages over joint tenancy in the event of one of you needing to go into council funded care, and the amounts they can claim back. But I can't recall the details of why, which isn't much use I'm afraid.
The house is disregarded for costs if one of you is living in it. If the person living in the house dies and the other is still in care then if house is TIC and on death of the first spouse the share of the house goes straight to a dependent then I think this is protected. But my understanding is that with TIC death of the first spouse leaves their share to the surviving spouse which can then be included in any assessment for care? As TIC you could leave the share to a dependent(s) and use up some allowance and it sitting outside care assessment costs but then it needs consideration for example if the dependent(s) want their money and you're still living there.
I just went for the simple approach, ignoring complicated trusts etc. I'm not saying I'm right and actually I need to review everything because IHT is going to be a problem for the survivor
Armitage.Shanks said:
The house is disregarded for costs if one of you is living in it. If the person living in the house dies and the other is still in care then if house is TIC and on death of the first spouse the share of the house goes straight to a dependent then I think this is protected. But my understanding is that with TIC death of the first spouse leaves their share to the surviving spouse which can then be included in any assessment for care?
If the surviving spouse has inherited the property upon the death of the partner and irrespective of whether held previously as Tic or Jt then Councils will indeed take the house value in any means testing I believe.However irrespective of how currently held , Councils will also still look into recent transfer's in case of deprivation of assets.
alscar said:
ChrisH72 said:
Thanks for the reply Alscar.
I have emailed the solicitor who held dad's will as I believe they also did mum's.
Also emailed the solicitor dealing with conveyancing for the flat to ask if there could be any issue.
Hopefully one or both will give you the assurances - obvs report back with any answers !I have emailed the solicitor who held dad's will as I believe they also did mum's.
Also emailed the solicitor dealing with conveyancing for the flat to ask if there could be any issue.
The other solicitor said they are going to look for mums will.
Hopefully it'll all work out!
Thinking of my own house situation..
I owned our family home before my wife moved in so currently it is owned solely by me. She rents her old property out so that is owned solely by her.
We have mirrored wills leaving everything to each other if one of us dies and to our son if both die.
Does that sound okay or should we be thinking of making the property's joint?
I owned our family home before my wife moved in so currently it is owned solely by me. She rents her old property out so that is owned solely by her.
We have mirrored wills leaving everything to each other if one of us dies and to our son if both die.
Does that sound okay or should we be thinking of making the property's joint?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I read recently that tenants in common has advantages over joint tenancy in the event of one of you needing to go into council funded care, and the amounts they can claim back. But I can't recall the details of why, which isn't much use I'm afraid.
Exactly what I was going to post - I THINK TIC ring-fences half of the house away from grasping council mitts if the remaining party needs care....but I'm trying to remember a conversation from a decade ago - would be good for an expert to comment???
havoc said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I read recently that tenants in common has advantages over joint tenancy in the event of one of you needing to go into council funded care, and the amounts they can claim back. But I can't recall the details of why, which isn't much use I'm afraid.
Exactly what I was going to post - I THINK TIC ring-fences half of the house away from grasping council mitts if the remaining party needs care....but I'm trying to remember a conversation from a decade ago - would be good for an expert to comment???
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff