Parents Passing Away

[Leeroy1880]

If two parents pass away leaving a house to their children, one of those children moved into the home pays all the utility bills, insurance, taxes on the home but there is no Morgage to pay does the child who moved in have to pay the siblings something like rent while they live in that home that has all there names on it?

[ToraToraTora]

those who live in the house should share the bills.

[theshedman]

It would depend on how it was left in the will. It may have been left so it had to be sold after both parents had died. In which case none of the siblings are allowed to live in it.

[barry1010]

Yes, if one is living in it rent should be paid to the other siblings. Whilst he is living in it rent free he is gaining a benefit and depriving his siblings from either their share of the proceeds or their share of the rent if rented out privately.
He should pay all the bills in full and an equal share of maintenance costs. (The costs they would all pay as landlords if it were rented privately).

[Peter Pedant]

first of all
sorry for your loss Leroy

try to separate what is law and what is sensible
( like you know do you really want to sell NOW?)

it depends on the wills if any
let us suppose that the four kids inherit in equal part

first of all under what agreement did the occupier - er occupy? and is it written or oral and are they attempting to rely on it - or did you wake one day and find them there?

if they are living in the house and using it then they pay the bills. trying to get the other siblings to pay for their leccy is a bit - - ripe

they have the use of the house and should pay rent
divide by four and three parts go to the other three ( nb this is income to be taxed for the other three)

you should agree a start and stop date and a rent increase date.

the nuclear option is that any one of the other three without agreement can apply to a court for an order to sell
the judge will sign the transfer if one party decides not to

the only way to successfully fight off an order to sell is that the non selling party offers a market price for the property

clearly in todays atmosphere you should be looking to take a rent for a year or two - if the occupier has any brains she will offer now - am I repeating an old family quarrel - yes

and good luck - I am sorry if theothers dont see eye to eye. One of my sibs 'looked on the house as a pension, I can get an order to sell at any time I please at all and cash out' - we never really had a sensible conversation and sold.

[maggiebee]

Agree with theshedman. I'm sure that the house would have to be sold and the proceeds divided. On the other hand, it could be valued and the child who wanted it could buy out any siblings.

[gulliver1]

Yes , I think the one living in the house, should pay the others some sort of rent, after all the house was left to all of you , so why should one live there rent free, even though he is paying the utility bills,

[Jackdaw33]

It will become a tenancy in common so the sibling who wants to live there can offer to buy the other siblings out. Otherwise the others can force a sale. Depends what arrangements they come to.

[ToraToraTora]

for gawds sake ^^^^^ talk about complicating the issue, the correct answer is the first one above.

[jennyjoan]

unless stipulated the house belongs to all the siblings, better to sell the house and split the monies or if one of the siblings wants to stay there - he/she has to get the money and gave them their share.

[jennyjoan]

sorry JD - I wrote that too quickly but it is similar to your reply

[maggiebee]

No it's not TTT (12.25).You are simplifying the problem. Think it's more about ownership than who pays the bills. I could of course further complicate it by asking if this is English law or Scottish Law?Very different outcomes.

[Peter Pedant]

yup maggz old gurl
the first answer has nothing about rent

and about forcing a sale if one says no I am quite satisfied with the status quo thank you

otherwise er TTT is for gawds sake - completely right !

[Old_Geezer]

"Have to" is a little strong. If the siblings are ok with it they can agree what they like amongst themselves, surely.

[furrypusscat]

Depends what is in the will, is the property left to all siblings? If so does the sibling who is staying in the house want to stay there indefinitely. If this is the case the house should be valued, suggest by more than one agent to compare valuations and he/she should then buy the others out. This happened in my OH's case a number of years ago.

[gulliver1]

12,25 ,For gawds sake ^^^^^ Read the O/P Again, and again,

[bhg481]

exactly gulliver - TTT gets the prize for answering the question that wasn't asked and not answering the one that was.

[theshedman]

OG, not if it is written in the will that it has to be sold upon the death of the parents. None of the siblings then has the right to stay in the property or to rent it from the others.

[Peter Pedant]

// "Have to" is a little strong. If the siblings are ok with it they can agree what they like amongst themselves, surely//

we wdnt be here advising on this
if it were all peace and harmony in the garden of eden ?

[Old_Geezer]

It may be a hypothetical legal question PP. Or maybe interest in what a neighbour down the road has to do.

We know nothing of what's in the will, aside from the house having been left to the siblings.