Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
No will and unregistered land.
Mrs A owned a property. She has two children Mrs B & Mr C. Whilst Mrs A left no will, it was agreed at the time that Mr C could continue living in the house but the house would be left to Mrs B & Mr C.
Mrs B died in 2000 leaving her estate to her three children (X, Y & Z). No mention was made of the house in the will and I have checked with land registry and the original house owned by Mrs A currently lived in by Mr C is unregiseired.
Can Mr C leave the house to whoever he wants, or is there any way that Mrs B's children can get their 1/6 of the house when Mr C dies? Mr C has no spouse or dependents or children. His only relatives the late Mrs B's kids (X,Y & Z).
Anyone with any legal knowledge care to comment?
Answers
No best answer has yet been selected by Oneeyedvic. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.On the face of it I would have thought that Mrs B's children are entitled to their one sixth now and have been entitled to it since 2000.
It does depend on whether Mrs B and Mr C owned the house as joint tenants or tenants in common; if this is undefined (it being unregistered) I'm not sure what the default is. Was the agreement following Mrs A's death formalised? If so it may be defined in that agreement.
Here's how I see it:
When A died, B and C each inherited a 50% interest in the house. When B died, if the terms of her will divided her estate equally between X, Y, and Z then (irrespective of whether the property was specifically mentioned or not) X, Y and Z each gained a one sixth share in the property.
X, Y and Z do not have to wait until C dies. Any one of them has an immediate right to demand the monetary equivalent of his/her one sixth share in the value of house. If C is living in the house (and effectively claiming ownership) then each of X, Y and Z has the legal right to demand that C pays them one sixth of the value of the house to 'buy out' their stake in the house. If C refuses to do so (or is unable to do so) any one of X, Y or Z has the right to force the sale of the house (with half of the proceeds going to C and one sixth each to X, Y and Z).
I've got a feeling that this might not be the news that you wanted to hear but it's my honest opinion. Time for Mr C to consult a solicitor, perhaps?
Chris
Just to let you know - in this example, I am married to Mrs Z. We were discussing this with Mr X (my brother in law) over Christmas. We are just concerned that Mr C may leave the whole house to a 'friend' of his. He is now in his late 70s and is very easily influenced. He is of course free to leave his half of the house to whoever he wants, but I know that my wifes mother (Mrs B) would turn in her grave if her kids didn't get her share.
Thanks for advice.
I think Buenchico's answer shows the correct legal position except for one minor point, which is that nowadays X, Y and Z can no longer force a sale on the uncle. The right to force a sale was abolished by the Trusts of Land and Appointments of Trustee Act 1996. X, Y and Z can go to court and ask a judge for an order to sell. The judge can give the order but does not have to. Another point - but I am not sure how this affects the situation: C has legal and beneficial ownership of the property, whereas X, Y and Z have legal ownership only. C can purport to make a will in favour of a friend but such a will would very likely not be valid as he cannot validly leave to someone something which someone else owns. (Nemo dat quod non habet). Hopefully this situation will not arise. If it did, your wife and her siblings will need to instruct a solicitor.