Interim Payment By Executor to Will Beneficiary; Delay Marketing Property.

[Trevor Smith]

A firm of solicitors is executing my mother's estate. Approximate Timeline ...

5th February 2017 - Death of mother; 28th March - I suggested her now-clean flat be placed on the market with the estate agent; May 2017 - Probate granted; 1st May - Estate agent supplied marketing prospectus to executors ready to receive sale instructions; 5th June - Solicitors still not authorised sale by estate agent.

Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate? It appears the executing solicitors have been foot-dragging over the past month, potentially losing offers to purchase. As part of the Law Society's directive to maximise returns to beneficiaries, surely the executors must market the property (mum's major asset) in a timely fashion to draw-in as many prospective purchasers as possible? The estate agent has suggested the sale, based on similar properties they have dealt with in the same complex, might go to 'sealed bids' to realise the best price. Additionally, I have informed the executors that I am on a very low income and mum intended that her bequest help me live out my remaining years (I am 62).

My questions:

1) How should I deal with a solicitor who appears to be egregiously stalling over putting mum's flat on the market?

2) What are the Law Society guidelines on releasing interim payments to beneficiaries in need? Can the beneficiary make a request for a modest payment (say £4,000) from an estate with known multiples of that figure in bank accounts with immediate access?

Thank you again friends.

[Roland Perry]

In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>, at
02:16:59 on Mon, 5 Jun 2017, Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com>
remarked:

Picking the bits I can answer off the cuff:

>The estate agent has suggested the sale, based on similar properties
>they have dealt with in the same complex, might go to 'sealed bids' to
>realise the best price.

Cambridge, wasn't it? Quite common in the overheated property market
there for some time now (at least since the late 90's).

It shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks to find a buyer, in such
circumstances; many of the agents will already have lists of people
desperate to view within a day or two of it going on the market.

>1) How should I deal with a solicitor who appears to be egregiously
>stalling over putting mum's flat on the market?

They should have a complaints procedure.
--
Roland Perry

[Robin]

On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:
> A firm of solicitors is executing my mother's estate. Approximate Timeline ...
>
> 5th February 2017 - Death of mother; 28th March - I suggested her now-clean flat be placed on the market with the estate agent; May 2017 - Probate granted; 1st May - Estate agent supplied marketing prospectus to executors ready to receive sale instructions; 5th June - Solicitors still not authorised sale by estate agent.
>
> Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate? It appears the executing solicitors have been foot-dragging over the past month, potentially losing offers to purchase. As part of the Law Society's directive to maximise returns to beneficiaries, surely the executors must market the property (mum's major asset) in a timely fashion to draw-in as many prospective purchasers as possible? The estate agent has suggested the sale, based on similar properties they have dealt with in the same complex, might go to 'sealed bids' to realise the best price. Additionally, I have informed the executors that I am on a very low income and mum intended that her bequest help me live out my remaining years (I am 62).
>
> My questions:
>
> 1) How should I deal with a solicitor who appears to be egregiously stalling over putting mum's flat on the market?

I am not sure the solicitor has been slow to act. You do not say just
when probate was granted and I would not think a professional executor
could be criticised for waiting for grant before engaging an estate agent.

If you are unhappy you could ask the executor why there has not been
earlier progress on the sale.

IIRC whether or not you have a right to complain formally about their
handling of the estate depends on whether or not you are a residuary
beneficiary under the will. But I suggest doing so would not assist you
wish to gain an interim payment.

> 2) What are the Law Society guidelines on releasing interim payments to beneficiaries in need? Can the beneficiary make a request for a modest payment (say £4,000) from an estate with known multiples of that figure in bank accounts with immediate access?
>

You can ask but:

a. I don't know of any guidelines on the matter, although that counts
for little as I am not now and have never been a solicitor; but

b. I do know that solicitors may well wait - and advise other executors
to wait - 6 months from the date of probate before making payments just
in case there is a family provision claim - that is, a child or someone
else asking for more than the will gives them.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

[GB]

On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:

> 1) How should I deal with a solicitor who appears to be egregiously stalling over putting mum's flat on the market?

You want the executors to keep costs down. Yet, you want them to start
marketing the property before they have probate. You can't have both. At
the moment, they have no legal basis on which to sell the property.

On a purely practical basis, suppose they find a buyer tomorrow but
don't get probate for 3 months. Do you suppose the buyer will hang on?
In the meantime, the property is taken off the market, then put back on.
All at the solicitor's hourly rate.

It's early days, so I suggest you calm down. We know you are upset about
the solicitors being appointed in the first place, but a frivolous
complaint will have no effect except putting their backs up and
increasing costs.

[GB]

On 05/06/2017 12:49, Robin wrote:

> b. I do know that solicitors may well wait - and advise other executors
> to wait - 6 months from the date of probate before making payments just
> in case there is a family provision claim - that is, a child or someone
> else asking for more than the will gives them.

I'm somewhat surprised that the OP has not raised this point. From what
I recall, he was living with his mum when she died and somewhat
dependent on her.

[Graeme]

In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>,
Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com> writes

>
>Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst
>probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate?

Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron Walden)
before probate, although could not complete the sale until probate had
been granted. The buyer was happy to wait, although her son in law,
with whom she was living, was not quite so enthusiastic :-)

This was a retirement flat, and the situation was far from uncommon,
according to local agents.
--
Graeme

[PLC]

On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:

> 2) What are the Law Society guidelines on releasing interim payments to beneficiaries in need? Can the beneficiary make a request for a modest payment (say £4,000) from an estate with known multiples of that figure in bank accounts with immediate access?

A professional executor will wait a minimum of six months from the date
of death to make sure there is no claim for dependent relatives. They
will also wait until the date for claims for any debts after they have
published the statutory notices. They may also have to wait if the DWP
mak a claim. So it seems the solicitor is doing nothing wrong


--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

[Trevor Smith]

(OP) I always lived at my own place, 3 miles away, and continue to receive benefits for a long-term medical condition.

Roland Perry was likely correct in asserting mum's ex-show flat would sell quite quickly. These premium flats only come up for sale once every 12-15 years and it only takes one well-heeled prospect to make a good offer. The previous occupant, up to 2005, was the last governor-general of Fiji.

Coincidentally one of the executors phoned me today confirming that probate has been received. However he admitted that lack of probate would not have prevented the property being marketed, as I suspected; it's only an invitation to view and make bids. I challenged him on the month's delay in marketing. They always have excuses: very flimsy in his case, such as the estate agent advising a mobility scooter and power chair in the lounge detracting from the impression of space. Fine ... so why doesn't somebody tell me, so I can put them elsewhere like the rear patio under cover? Buyers of such sheltered accommodation may well be glad of mobility aids to hand. The executor was also dithering by sending emails to the estate agent about a kitchen tube I replaced and a faulty kick-board heater in the kitchen -- both of which the estate agent knew about and were completely irrelevant to marketing the flat.

I regaled the executor with my health, housing (homeless end of July) and financial problems, without eliciting any response. I then hit him on the head with the suggestion of a small interim payment. "Oh, yes, it's possible but I have to check the estate's records first." These solicitors would let beneficiaries go out on the street with a begging bowl prior to proffering any assistance off their own bat. Oxford professor Dr Kevin Dutton was entirely correct in labelling the law the profession with the highest number of psychopaths. The folk here are kind and generous but -- in the hard, cold world of solicitors -- greed and selfishness rules.

[GB]

On 05/06/2017 18:06, Trevor Smith wrote:
> They always have excuses: very flimsy in his case, such as the estate agent advising a mobility scooter and power chair in the lounge detracting from the impression of space. Fine ... so why doesn't somebody tell me

One more letter for the solicitor to send out - £30. Plus probably
another £30 if you reply.

[PLC]

As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
cannot do if you don't mind the risks. They are obliged to follow the
rules carefully and not cut corners. Six months after the probate grant
is usually the bare minimum before an estate can be distributed by a
professional execitor. An interim distribution may be be possible but
the executor needs to be sure that there will be no unfortunate
consequences.

[Norman Wells]

On 05/06/2017 18:06, Trevor Smith wrote:

Executors have a responsible and sometimes complex job to do, and it has
to be done properly in accordance with the law while safeguarding the
estate against various eventualities. Your problems are not their
problems and they should not bow to pressure to act unwisely or with
undue haste because of your special pleading.

It's worth noting too that they are not acting for you but for your mum,
who saw fit to appoint them, and her estate. It was her money, and it
does not become yours until they distribute it and you receive it.
Harrassing them at every turn will not speed things up and may well cost
you more eventually.

[Handsome Jack]

GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> posted

>On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:
>
>> 1) How should I deal with a solicitor who appears to be egregiously
>>stalling over putting mum's flat on the market?
>
>You want the executors to keep costs down. Yet, you want them to start
>marketing the property before they have probate. You can't have both.

Of course he can have both. Why not?

>At the moment, they have no legal basis on which to sell the property.

But they do have a basis to *offer* it for sale.

>
>On a purely practical basis, suppose they find a buyer tomorrow but
>don't get probate for 3 months. Do you suppose the buyer will hang on?

Quite possibly, since he knew the situation when he made his offer.

>In the meantime, the property is taken off the market, then put back
>on. All at the solicitor's hourly rate.

Why would the property be taken off the market?

--
Jack

[Handsome Jack]

Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> posted

>On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:
>> A firm of solicitors is executing my mother's estate. Approximate
>>Timeline ...
>>
>> 5th February 2017 - Death of mother; 28th March - I suggested her
>>now-clean flat be placed on the market with the estate agent; May 2017
>>- Probate granted; 1st May - Estate agent supplied marketing
>>prospectus to executors ready to receive sale instructions; 5th June -
>>Solicitors still not authorised sale by estate agent.
>>
>> Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst
>>probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate? It
>

>I am not sure the solicitor has been slow to act. You do not say just
>when probate was granted and I would not think a professional executor
>could be criticised for waiting for grant before engaging an estate agent.

Of course he can be criticised. It costs nothing to appoint an estate
agent and there was nothing stopping the solicitor doing it.

--
Jack

[Handsome Jack]

Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net> posted

>In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>,
>Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com> writes
>>
>>Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst
>>probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate?
>
>Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron Walden)
>before probate, although could not complete the sale until probate had
>been granted. The buyer was happy to wait,

Same here.

--
Jack

[Handsome Jack]

PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted

>On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:
>> In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>,
>>Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com> writes
>>>
>>> Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst
>>>probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate?
>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>probate had been granted. The buyer was happy to wait, although her
>>son in law, with whom she was living, was not quite so enthusiastic :-)
>> This was a retirement flat, and the situation was far from uncommon,
>>according to local agents.
>
>As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>cannot do if you don't mind the risks. They are obliged to follow the
>rules carefully and not cut corners.

There is no rule saying that the deceased's property cannot be offered
for sale before probate, and no risks in doing it.

>Six months after the probate grant is usually the bare minimum before
>an estate can be distributed by a professional execitor.

We're not talking about distributing the estate in this sub-thread,
we're talking about selling the house, which is going to have to be done
whoever the beneficiaries are.

--
Jack

[Pelican]

No, they don't act for a deceased person. They act for those who are
entitled to the net estate.

> who saw fit to appoint them, and her estate. It was her money, and it
> does not become yours until they distribute it and you receive it.
> Harrassing them at every turn will not speed things up and may well cost
> you more eventually.

According to the above, there was no reason why the executors could not
have put the property up for sale, other than "we do things as we do them".

[Graeme]

In message <orudnRnhQc0-TajE...@brightview.co.uk>, PLC
<g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> writes

>On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:

>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>probate had been granted.
>

>As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>cannot do if you don't mind the risks.

Not much by way of risk. We were the only children of the deceased. We
were also trustees, executors and main beneficiaries. Had a major
problem occurred after distribution or partial distribution of the
estate, we could have returned whatever was necessary.

--
Graeme

[Chris R]

On 06/06/2017 06:44, Handsome Jack wrote:
> PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted
>> On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:
>>> In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com> writes

>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>> cannot do if you don't mind the risks. They are obliged to follow the
>> rules carefully and not cut corners.
>
> There is no rule saying that the deceased's property cannot be offered
> for sale before probate, and no risks in doing it.
>

Except:
- You may waste the initial impact of marketing if you're not in a
position to proceed with the sale, and you will certainly upset buyers
and waste a lot of everyone's time and upset business relationships, eg
with the agents.
- To keep solicitors' costs down you don't want to risk having to repeat
tasks.
- Agent's fees may be incurred, and advertising costs; and agents may
want to be satisfied that the seller has the ability to proceed.
- You probably impliedly represent your authority to sell if you
instruct an agent.

Whilst you could put the property on the market in anticipation of
probate, as a professional executor I doubt if you normally would.
--
Chris R

[Chris R]

On 05/06/2017 23:52, Pelican wrote:
> On 6/06/2017 07:30, Norman Wells wrote:
>> On 05/06/2017 18:06, Trevor Smith wrote:
>>> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 1:04:37 PM UTC+1, GB wrote:
>>>> On 05/06/2017 12:49, Robin wrote:
>> Executors have a responsible and sometimes complex job to do, and it
>> has to be done properly in accordance with the law while safeguarding
>> the estate against various eventualities. Your problems are not their
>> problems and they should not bow to pressure to act unwisely or with
>> undue haste because of your special pleading.
>>
>> It's worth noting too that they are not acting for you but for your mum,
>
> No, they don't act for a deceased person. They act for those who are
> entitled to the net estate.

Solicitors acting as executors do not act for the beneficiaries. they
act for themselves as executors, subject to their duties to the court
and the beneficiaries, but the beneficiaries are not their clients.
--
Chris R

========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======

[Pelican]

That implies that a professional executor is normally slow, or very
slow, on their feet.

[PLC]

With respect you are missing the point. Lay executors in a position such
as yours are not taking much of a risk. The position with a professional
executor is very different. They are bound by their professional conduct
rules and as such have to do it by the book. If they get it wrong they
not only get hit in the pocket but they can also be subject to
discipliary action. I accept that it does take longer and the OP clearly
does not understand the process. There is not much that can be done
about the former and arguing witht the solicitor will simply mean his
bill will be larger.

[Pelican]

On 6/06/2017 17:11, Chris R wrote:
> On 05/06/2017 23:52, Pelican wrote:
>> On 6/06/2017 07:30, Norman Wells wrote:
>>> On 05/06/2017 18:06, Trevor Smith wrote:
>>>> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 1:04:37 PM UTC+1, GB wrote:
>>>>> On 05/06/2017 12:49, Robin wrote:
>>> Executors have a responsible and sometimes complex job to do, and it
>>> has to be done properly in accordance with the law while safeguarding
>>> the estate against various eventualities. Your problems are not
>>> their problems and they should not bow to pressure to act unwisely or
>>> with undue haste because of your special pleading.
>>>
>>> It's worth noting too that they are not acting for you but for your mum,
>>
>> No, they don't act for a deceased person. They act for those who are
>> entitled to the net estate.
>
> Solicitors acting as executors do not act for the beneficiaries. they
> act for themselves as executors, subject to their duties to the court
> and the beneficiaries, but the beneficiaries are not their clients.

It seems agreed that an executor doesn't act for a deceased person.

An executor has a curious status in law, for historical reasons. I doubt
if there is much difference between me saying that executors act for the
beneficiaries and you saying that they act for themselves as executors,
subject to their duties to the beneficiaries. Anyone with a particular
legal status acts as someone with that legal status, subject to the
rights of these involved.

In that context, the duty of an executor to the court barely rates a
mention, and there is no suggestion that the beneficiaries are the
clients of the executor.

[PLC]

On 06/06/2017 06:44, Handsome Jack wrote:

>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>> cannot do if you don't mind the risks. They are obliged to follow the
>> rules carefully and not cut corners.
>
> There is no rule saying that the deceased's property cannot be offered
> for sale before probate, and no risks in doing it.
>
>> Six months after the probate grant is usually the bare minimum before
>> an estate can be distributed by a professional execitor.
>
> We're not talking about distributing the estate in this sub-thread,
> we're talking about selling the house, which is going to have to be done
> whoever the beneficiaries are.

Au contraire! The OP is complaining about the delay in putting the house
on the market because he wrongly believes he will get his inheritance
quicker that way. In the real world estate agents don't want to put
properties on their books until the seller is actually able to complete
contracts without reasonable delay. Few people buying a property will be
willing to wait an open ended time before the property is actually
available. The second thing the OP is seeking is an interim payment that
may, or may not be possible. The solicitor, quite rightly, needs to
check what funds are available and make a judgement as to the risk
involved. Taking a, ill judged, hard line approach with the solicitor is
not going to further the OP's case much. "Agree with your adversary
early" from the Semon on th Mount" comes to mind.

[Robin]

Perhaps I should have written "...could *usefully* be criticised
for...". Professional executors are unlikely to be working on only the
one case. It costs time to appoint an estate agent. They may have given
priority to other, more pressing matters. For all we know they may have
done so in the knowledge that the property will sell so easily that it
was most unlikely to affect when they distribute the estate - ie 6
months after probate.

[Martin Harran]

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 06:37:00 +0100, Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net>
wrote:

>In message <orudnRnhQc0-TajE...@brightview.co.uk>, PLC
><g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> writes
>>On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:
>
>>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>>Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>>probate had been granted.
>>
>>As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>>cannot do if you don't mind the risks.
>
>Not much by way of risk. We were the only children of the deceased.

How did you know that for sure? What would have been the position if
Holly Willoughby had turned up on your doorstep with a sister that
your mum had before marriage and had to give up for adoption?

[Robin]

Same question to you and Graeme:

FTAOD by "sold" do you mean you exchanged contracts or that you accepted
offers subject to contract?

IMHO doing the former before probate would be bold - and possibly
courageous as well ;)

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 09:35, Martin Harran wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 06:37:00 +0100, Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <orudnRnhQc0-TajE...@brightview.co.uk>, PLC
>> <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> writes
>>> On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:
>>
>>>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>>> Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>>> probate had been granted.
>>>
>>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>>> cannot do if you don't mind the risks.
>>
>> Not much by way of risk. We were the only children of the deceased.
>
>
> How did you know that for sure? What would have been the position if
> Holly Willoughby had turned up on your doorstep with a sister that
> your mum had before marriage and had to give up for adoption?
>

Actually that's not really an issue where the executor and sole (or near
enough sole) beneficiary are one and the same. If a claim under the
1975 Act succeeds they end up losing out either way.

With 2 executors and beneficiaries - as with Graeme - there is the risk
that by the time of the award one has spent the inheritance leaving the
other to bear the costs. But that's a risk which a sibling ought at
least to be able to assess on the basis of prior knowledge.

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 06:42, Handsome Jack wrote:

> GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> posted
>> On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:
>>
>>> 1) How should I deal with a solicitor who appears to be egregiously
>>> stalling over putting mum's flat on the market?
>>
>> You want the executors to keep costs down. Yet, you want them to start
>> marketing the property before they have probate. You can't have both.
>
> Of course he can have both. Why not?
>
>> At the moment, they have no legal basis on which to sell the property.
>
> But they do have a basis to *offer* it for sale.

Agreed. I am just making the point that getting their ducks in a row
first will probably save costs. Do you really disagree with that?

[Roland Perry]

In message <ku2dneqV9M2lzqvE...@brightview.co.uk>, at
08:01:13 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> remarked:

>Few people buying a property will be willing to wait an open ended time
>before the property is actually available.

That depends a lot on the circumstances. If there's something especially
attractive about the property (and in this instance the OP has confirmed
there is) there will be what amounts to a "waiting list". And people
therefore prepared to wait.
--
Roland Perry

[Norman Wells]

On 06/06/2017 08:45, Pelican wrote:
> On 6/06/2017 17:11, Chris R wrote:
>> On 05/06/2017 23:52, Pelican wrote:
>>> On 6/06/2017 07:30, Norman Wells wrote:
>>>> On 05/06/2017 18:06, Trevor Smith wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 1:04:37 PM UTC+1, GB wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/06/2017 12:49, Robin wrote:
>>>> Executors have a responsible and sometimes complex job to do, and it
>>>> has to be done properly in accordance with the law while
>>>> safeguarding the estate against various eventualities. Your
>>>> problems are not their problems and they should not bow to pressure
>>>> to act unwisely or with undue haste because of your special pleading.
>>>>
>>>> It's worth noting too that they are not acting for you but for your
>>>> mum,
>>>
>>> No, they don't act for a deceased person. They act for those who are
>>> entitled to the net estate.
>>
>> Solicitors acting as executors do not act for the beneficiaries. they
>> act for themselves as executors, subject to their duties to the court
>> and the beneficiaries, but the beneficiaries are not their clients.
>
> It seems agreed that an executor doesn't act for a deceased person.

He acts in accordance with the deceased's instructions. He is given the
authority to do so by the Court through the grant of Probate.

He is responsible only to the Court. The beneficiaries are not his
principals and cannot control or instruct him.

> An executor has a curious status in law, for historical reasons. I doubt
> if there is much difference between me saying that executors act for the
> beneficiaries and you saying that they act for themselves as executors,
> subject to their duties to the beneficiaries.

There is. If they act for the beneficiaries, that means the
beneficiaries would be able to instruct him, which of course they can't.
He is supposed to act in their best interests, but how he does that is
down to him and it's a matter of his judgement, not necessarily that of
the beneficiaries themselves or, especially, just one of several of
them. Above all, he has to comply with the law.

[PLC]

On 06/06/2017 09:35, Martin Harran wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 06:37:00 +0100, Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <orudnRnhQc0-TajE...@brightview.co.uk>, PLC
>> <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> writes
>>> On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:
>>
>>>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>>> Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>>> probate had been granted.
>>>
>>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>>> cannot do if you don't mind the risks.
>>
>> Not much by way of risk. We were the only children of the deceased.
>
>
> How did you know that for sure? What would have been the position if
> Holly Willoughby had turned up on your doorstep with a sister that
> your mum had before marriage and had to give up for adoption?

Adopted children cease to have any claim on their birth parentrs.

[PLC]

On 06/06/2017 08:52, Pelican wrote:

>> Except:
>> - You may waste the initial impact of marketing if you're not in a
>> position to proceed with the sale, and you will certainly upset
>> buyers and waste a lot of everyone's time and upset business
>> relationships, eg with the agents.
>> - To keep solicitors' costs down you don't want to risk having to
>> repeat tasks.
>> - Agent's fees may be incurred, and advertising costs; and agents may
>> want to be satisfied that the seller has the ability to proceed.
>> - You probably impliedly represent your authority to sell if you
>> instruct an agent.
>>
>> Whilst you could put the property on the market in anticipation of
>> probate, as a professional executor I doubt if you normally would.
>
> That implies that a professional executor is normally slow, or very
> slow, on their feet.

Totally wrong conclusion. A solicitor executor is constrained by their
professional conduct rules and the need to wait until the time for any
potential claims to be made. Six months from probate date is quite
noraml and reasonable.

[Norman Wells]

On 06/06/2017 08:01, PLC wrote:
> On 06/06/2017 06:44, Handsome Jack wrote:
>
>>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional
>>> executor cannot do if you don't mind the risks. They are obliged to
>>> follow the rules carefully and not cut corners.
>>
>> There is no rule saying that the deceased's property cannot be offered
>> for sale before probate, and no risks in doing it.
>>
>>> Six months after the probate grant is usually the bare minimum before
>>> an estate can be distributed by a professional execitor.
>>
>> We're not talking about distributing the estate in this sub-thread,
>> we're talking about selling the house, which is going to have to be
>> done whoever the beneficiaries are.
>
> Au contraire! The OP is complaining about the delay in putting the house
> on the market because he wrongly believes he will get his inheritance
> quicker that way. In the real world estate agents don't want to put
> properties on their books until the seller is actually able to complete
> contracts without reasonable delay.

Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell. I
doubt if any professional would wish to be in that position.

[GB]

This is in any case a daft comparison. Beneficiaries acting as executors
can sensibly cut corners that independent executors cannot.

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 09:35, Martin Harran wrote:

> On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 06:37:00 +0100, Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <orudnRnhQc0-TajE...@brightview.co.uk>, PLC
>> <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> writes
>>> On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:
>>
>>>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>>> Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>>> probate had been granted.
>>>
>>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional executor
>>> cannot do if you don't mind the risks.
>>
>> Not much by way of risk. We were the only children of the deceased.
>
>
> How did you know that for sure? What would have been the position if
> Holly Willoughby had turned up on your doorstep with a sister that
> your mum had before marriage and had to give up for adoption?

They didn't need to know that. They were relying on themselves as
beneficiaries indemnifying themselves as executors. So, they weren't
taking any risk at all.

[Roland Perry]

In message <b97af24d-018d-e85f...@hotmail.com>, at
09:34:19 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>Professional executors are unlikely to be working on only the one case.
>It costs time to appoint an estate agent. They may have given priority
>to other, more pressing matters.

The elephant in the room being that in order to properly value the house
for probate, they'll already have contacted three estate agents.

"Appointing" one of those to start marketing, would take a matter of
minutes.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <epn8db...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:45:31 on Tue, 6 Jun
2017, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:

>>In the real world estate agents don't want to put properties on their
>>books until the seller is actually able to complete contracts without
>>reasonable delay.
>
>Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
>has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
>offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.

All of which makes me wonder why there are houses for sale "subject to
probate".

Meanwhile, here's a resource which explains a bit about the delays that
might occur for any sale of a probate house:

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/content/100719
--
Roland Perry

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 08:52, Pelican wrote:

>> Whilst you could put the property on the market in anticipation of
>> probate, as a professional executor I doubt if you normally would.
>
> That implies that a professional executor is normally slow, or very
> slow, on their feet.

I don't get that at all. I have already said that it's blindingly
obvious that putting the property on the market before probate will
probably run up extra costs and lose a potential buyer. Now Chris R has
reiterated the point (much more eloquently). There's no implication
there that professional executors are slow.

In fact, these particular executors have now got probate, just over 3
months after the death. Do you really think that's slow?

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 09:45, Norman Wells wrote:

> Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
> has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
> offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.

That's a somewhat extreme view!

[Norman Wells]

On 06/06/2017 10:18, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <epn8db...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:45:31 on Tue, 6 Jun
> 2017, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>
>>> In the real world estate agents don't want to put properties on
>>> their books until the seller is actually able to complete contracts
>>> without reasonable delay.
>>
>> Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
>> has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
>> offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.
>
> All of which makes me wonder why there are houses for sale "subject to
> probate".

I think you probably mean 'subject to contract'.

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 10:24, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <b97af24d-018d-e85f...@hotmail.com>, at
> 09:34:19 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>
>> Professional executors are unlikely to be working on only the one
>> case. It costs time to appoint an estate agent. They may have given
>> priority to other, more pressing matters.
>
> The elephant in the room being that in order to properly value the house
> for probate, they'll already have contacted three estate agents.
>

Do you have direct knowledge/evidence of this elephant - ie that
solicitors when acting as executors get valuations from 3 estate agents?

I am out of date but solicitors used to default to a professional valuer
for a "Red Book" figure the valuer was willing and able to defend with
the CTO/DV if necessary. (Of course if the estate was not taxable that
might be a figure the valuer provided by driving past but that's all
part of the professional's judgment - and liability insurance.) And I
know the Law Society still advise the use of qualified valuers.

[Roland Perry]

In message <epnckf...@mid.individual.net>, at 10:57:35 on Tue, 6 Jun

2017, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:

>> All of which makes me wonder why there are houses for sale "subject
>>to probate".
>
>I think you probably mean 'subject to contract'.

If I meant that, I wouldn't even have bothered posting (as it would be
off-topic).
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <85f40bc6-6fb1-4787...@hotmail.com>, at
11:14:13 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>On 06/06/2017 10:24, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <b97af24d-018d-e85f...@hotmail.com>, at
>>09:34:19 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> Professional executors are unlikely to be working on only the one
>>>case. It costs time to appoint an estate agent. They may have given
>>>priority to other, more pressing matters.
>> The elephant in the room being that in order to properly value the
>>house for probate, they'll already have contacted three estate agents.
>
>Do you have direct knowledge/evidence of this elephant - ie that
>solicitors when acting as executors get valuations from 3 estate agents?

I posted a link earlier.

>I am out of date but solicitors used to default to a professional
>valuer for a "Red Book" figure the valuer was willing and able to
>defend with the CTO/DV if necessary. (Of course if the estate was not
>taxable that might be a figure the valuer provided by driving past but
>that's all part of the professional's judgment - and liability
>insurance.) And I know the Law Society still advise the use of
>qualified valuers.

Yes, a valuer is mentioned as another option, but the estate agents will
be cheaper.
--
Roland Perry

[Pelican]

On 6/06/2017 18:38, Norman Wells wrote:
> On 06/06/2017 08:45, Pelican wrote:
>> On 6/06/2017 17:11, Chris R wrote:
>>> On 05/06/2017 23:52, Pelican wrote:
>>>> On 6/06/2017 07:30, Norman Wells wrote:
>>>>> On 05/06/2017 18:06, Trevor Smith wrote:
>>>>>> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 1:04:37 PM UTC+1, GB wrote:
>>>>>>> On 05/06/2017 12:49, Robin wrote:
>>>>> Executors have a responsible and sometimes complex job to do, and
>>>>> it has to be done properly in accordance with the law while
>>>>> safeguarding the estate against various eventualities. Your
>>>>> problems are not their problems and they should not bow to pressure
>>>>> to act unwisely or with undue haste because of your special pleading.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's worth noting too that they are not acting for you but for your
>>>>> mum,
>>>>
>>>> No, they don't act for a deceased person. They act for those who
>>>> are entitled to the net estate.
>>>
>>> Solicitors acting as executors do not act for the beneficiaries. they
>>> act for themselves as executors, subject to their duties to the court
>>> and the beneficiaries, but the beneficiaries are not their clients.
>>
>> It seems agreed that an executor doesn't act for a deceased person.
>
> He acts in accordance with the deceased's instructions. He is given the
> authority to do so by the Court through the grant of Probate.

That is not correct. An executor's authority comes from the will.
Probate gives third parties dealing with an executor statutory
protection, which means that third parties may insist upon an executor
getting probate - it doesn't "authorise" the executor to do anything.

An executor in a situation to administer an estate where third parties
are not so involved is free to administer the estate. I have previously
mentioned in this NG that it is often possible for people to arrange
their affairs to avoid probate completely. Indeed, my view is that
probate is an anachronism and could easily be abolished in its current
configuration. Some professionals would lose some of their livelihood
if that happened, of course.

> He is responsible only to the Court. The beneficiaries are not his
> principals and cannot control or instruct him.
>
>> An executor has a curious status in law, for historical reasons. I
>> doubt if there is much difference between me saying that executors act
>> for the beneficiaries and you saying that they act for themselves as
>> executors, subject to their duties to the beneficiaries.
>
> There is. If they act for the beneficiaries, that means the
> beneficiaries would be able to instruct him, which of course they can't.
> He is supposed to act in their best interests, but how he does that is
> down to him and it's a matter of his judgement, not necessarily that of
> the beneficiaries themselves or, especially, just one of several of
> them. Above all, he has to comply with the law.

What you are saying is that an executor need not give a rodent's
posterior for what the beneficiaries might want. Especially a
professional executor. It's a rather sad, and damning, comment on
professional executors.

[Pelican]

You might have a chat with the OP about these particular executors.

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 11:36, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <85f40bc6-6fb1-4787...@hotmail.com>, at
> 11:14:13 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>> On 06/06/2017 10:24, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <b97af24d-018d-e85f...@hotmail.com>, at
>>> 09:34:19 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> Professional executors are unlikely to be working on only the one
>>>> case. It costs time to appoint an estate agent. They may have given
>>>> priority to other, more pressing matters.
>>> The elephant in the room being that in order to properly value the
>>> house for probate, they'll already have contacted three estate agents.
>>
>> Do you have direct knowledge/evidence of this elephant - ie that
>> solicitors when acting as executors get valuations from 3 estate agents?
>
> I posted a link earlier.

Do you mean https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/content/100719? If
so that is advice given to executors at large. And, I suggest, from
context and style written with the lay executor in mind. Please note I
asked for evidence of *solicitors* using estate agents.

>> I am out of date but solicitors used to default to a professional
>> valuer for a "Red Book" figure the valuer was willing and able to
>> defend with the CTO/DV if necessary. (Of course if the estate was not
>> taxable that might be a figure the valuer provided by driving past but
>> that's all part of the professional's judgment - and liability
>> insurance.) And I know the Law Society still advise the use of
>> qualified valuers.
>
> Yes, a valuer is mentioned as another option, but the estate agents will
> be cheaper.

I assume you mean "mentioned as another option" in your link. It is not
just "another option" in the Law Society's advice (which is more than
just advice for members of their wills and inheritance quality scheme).

As for what's cheaper, do you have you evidence of how a professional
valuer's fee compares with the costs in the solicitor's time in
contacting 3 estate agents, arranging for them to collect keys,
considering their reports, deciding what to do when it turns out their
figures are inconsistent and - in some cases - then instructing a
professional valuer so as to get a figure which is more likely to pass
HMRC scrutiny - and so avoid an awful lot more cost?

Doing the job professionally ain't like DIY

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 11:49, Pelican wrote:


> What you are saying is that an executor need not give a rodent's
> posterior for what the beneficiaries might want. Especially a
> professional executor. It's a rather sad, and damning, comment on
> professional executors.

I don't see it as so stark. The fact is the OP is essentially asking
for a loan, having already told the executors that he has financial
problems. The latter may well give them pause for thought given a (if
not the) normal way for professional executors to meet a request for an
interim distribution would be to insist on the beneficiary indemnifying
them (ie promising to repay it if necessary) - and only doing that after
satisfying themselves that the beneficiary would be good for the money.
Remember, if he ain't when the need arises then they end up dipping into
their own pockets. So for all we know the executors are looking for ways
forward - including possibly an indemnity from someone else.

[Norman Wells]

On 06/06/2017 11:49, Pelican wrote:

His first priority will be to cover his own backside. To do that, he
needs to act completely within the law and according to the book in the
proper order.

He is the appointed guardian of the deceased's estate, and it's his job
not to put any of its assets at risk, for example by a premature
distribution. Of course he will be influenced by the beneficiaries if
they all agree on a certain course of action, but he may require certain
indemnities from them against any possible consequences. That involves
more chargeable work of course.

What he won't do is act on the instructions of one of the beneficiaries
alone unless he agrees it is safe to do so. He is not his client, and
he doesn't hold his interests above those of any of the other
beneficiaries who may disagree.

If all the beneficiaries think the executor is not acting in their
combined best joint interests, they are free to try to get the executor
removed for maladministration of the estate and get someone else
appointed in his place. If the matter is being handled in accordance
with normal practice, however, that's most unlikely to be achieved.

[Roland Perry]

In message <9686ffdd-edc9-d939...@hotmail.com>, at
12:04:17 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>do you have you evidence of how a professional valuer's fee compares
>with the costs in the solicitor's time in contacting 3 estate agents,
>arranging for them to collect keys, considering their reports, deciding
>what to do when it turns out their figures are inconsistent

The solicitor will have the local estate agents on speed-dial anyway.
They'll come round and pick up the keys.

A valuer, given the info we have from the OP, may charge around £400,
which is less than I was expecting.

As for balancing all the costs, I don't think we know if the solicitor
in question is working at an hourly rate, or a fixed percentage of the
estate.
--
Roland Perry

[Pelican]

On 6/06/2017 19:35, GB wrote:
> On 06/06/2017 09:45, Norman Wells wrote:
>
>> Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
>> has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
>> offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.
>
> That's a somewhat extreme view!

It's Norman's view.

[Norman Wells]

By a strange coincidence, I happen to have this bridge for sale. Yes,
the one on the postcards with the two towers and the road that parts in
the middle to let the ships through. It's a snip at £3 million if
you're interested.

[Norman Wells]

On 06/06/2017 12:23, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <9686ffdd-edc9-d939...@hotmail.com>, at
> 12:04:17 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>
>> do you have you evidence of how a professional valuer's fee compares
>> with the costs in the solicitor's time in contacting 3 estate agents,
>> arranging for them to collect keys, considering their reports, deciding
>> what to do when it turns out their figures are inconsistent
>
> The solicitor will have the local estate agents on speed-dial anyway.

How very modern! My solicitor has to wind the generator, speak very
loudly, and get the operator to connect him.

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 12:23, Roland Perry wrote:

May I refer back to my original question - viz. "Do you have direct

knowledge/evidence of this elephant - ie that solicitors when acting as

executors get valuations from 3 estate agents?" I ask as I am left
unclear whether you have evidence that they actually do so or whether
you think that is what they ought to do (notwithstanding the Law Society
Wills and Inheritance Protocol).

[Handsome Jack]

PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted

>On 06/06/2017 06:44, Handsome Jack wrote:
>> We're not talking about distributing the estate in this sub-thread,
>>we're talking about selling the house, which is going to have to be
>>done whoever the beneficiaries are.
>
>Au contraire! The OP is complaining about the delay in putting the
>house on the market because he wrongly believes he will get his

>inheritance quicker that way. In the real world estate agents don't

>want to put properties on their books until the seller is actually able
>to complete contracts without reasonable delay.

Quite wrong. Estate agents are very keen to get properties on their
books. And it is quite normal for (living) sellers to try to secure an
offer on their houses before even starting to look for one to buy,
because they know no seller will accept an offer from a someone who
hasn't sold his own house yet. These delays are endemic and accepted in
the English housing market.

>Few people buying a property will be willing to wait an open ended time
>before the property is actually available.

That wasn't my experience.

>The second thing the OP is seeking is an interim payment that may, or
>may not be possible. The solicitor, quite rightly, needs to check what
>funds are available and make a judgement as to the risk involved.

I agree with that part of it, it's the house sale business I am
disputing because I have personal experience of doing it.

--
Jack

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 14:47, Handsome Jack wrote:

> I agree with that part of it, it's the house sale business I am
> disputing because I have personal experience of doing it.
>

With due respect, I think most people in this newsgroup have done the same.

[Handsome Jack]

Chris R <invalid...@invalid.invalid.com> posted

>On 06/06/2017 06:44, Handsome Jack wrote:

>> PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted

>>> On 05/06/2017 14:16, Graeme wrote:

>>>> In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com> writes
>

>>> As lay executors you can take the chances that a professional

>>>executor cannot do if you don't mind the risks. They are obliged to
>>>follow the rules carefully and not cut corners.
>> There is no rule saying that the deceased's property cannot be
>>offered for sale before probate, and no risks in doing it.
>>

>Except:
>- You may waste the initial impact of marketing if you're not in a
>position to proceed with the sale, and you will certainly upset buyers
>and waste a lot of everyone's time and upset business relationships, eg
>with the agents.

Not if you tell them the situation from the start.

And anyway it is completely normal that a seller is not ready to proceed
at the time he puts his house on the market. That's usually because he
needs to find somewhere else to buy, and he can't do that until he's got
a buyer for his own house. It can take months, even years. Everybody
knows this and accepts it.

>- To keep solicitors' costs down you don't want to risk having to
>repeat tasks.

There is nothing to repeat.

>- Agent's fees may be incurred, and advertising costs;

You don't pay fees to estate agents until the sale is completed.

>and agents may want to be satisfied that the seller has the ability to
>proceed.

See above. And when I sold a deceased person's house subject to probate,
the estate agent didn't turn a hair.

>- You probably impliedly represent your authority to sell if you
>instruct an agent.

So what?

>
>Whilst you could put the property on the market in anticipation of
>probate, as a professional executor I doubt if you normally would.

--
Jack

[Janet]

In article <0+PONHv$qmNZ...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
>
> In message <ku2dneqV9M2lzqvE...@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 08:01:13 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> remarked:

>
> >Few people buying a property will be willing to wait an open ended time
> >before the property is actually available.
>

> That depends a lot on the circumstances. If there's something especially
> attractive about the property (and in this instance the OP has confirmed
> there is) there will be what amounts to a "waiting list". And people
> therefore prepared to wait.

Buyers who have their current property on the market, or its sale
already agreed, may find that an open ended purchase is an unwelcome
complication of their sale chain; involving themselves or others in an
open-ended bridging loan :-(


Janet.

[steve robinson]

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 06:40:20 +0100, Handsome Jack <Ja...@nowhere.com>
wrote:

>Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> posted
>>On 05/06/2017 10:16, Trevor Smith wrote:
>>> A firm of solicitors is executing my mother's estate. Approximate
>>>Timeline ...
>>>
>>> 5th February 2017 - Death of mother; 28th March - I suggested her
>>>now-clean flat be placed on the market with the estate agent; May 2017
>>>- Probate granted; 1st May - Estate agent supplied marketing
>>>prospectus to executors ready to receive sale instructions; 5th June -
>>>Solicitors still not authorised sale by estate agent.

>>>
>>> Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst

>>>probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate? It
>>
>>I am not sure the solicitor has been slow to act. You do not say just
>>when probate was granted and I would not think a professional executor
>>could be criticised for waiting for grant before engaging an estate agent.
>
>Of course he can be criticised. It costs nothing to appoint an estate
>agent and there was nothing stopping the solicitor doing it.

Only the fact the solicitor needed to verify that the flat was owned
by the deceased had no debts or mortgages registered against it, no
one else had any interests in the flat. Put a property on the market
without having verifying the above and you could end up in the
proverbial

[Handsome Jack]

GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> posted

I meant selling in the OP circumstances - when probate must be obtained
before the sale can complete.

--
Jack

[GB]

Were you acting as a professional executor?

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 14:51, Handsome Jack wrote:

>> - Agent's fees may be incurred, and advertising costs;
>
> You don't pay fees to estate agents until the sale is completed.

You'll need one of those energy efficiency certificates. Not a lot of
money for the executor to lay out of his own pocket, but I don't see how
he can pay it out of the estate prior to probate. Still, he can charge a
couple of hundred extra fees for sorting out the accountancy
ramifications of that.

[Mark Goodge]

But people who aren't in a chain are often more willing to be patient,
and/or put up with a bit more complexity, in order to get the property
they want at an attractive price.

Property purchases, by their nature being both very high value and
very uncommon (for most people), tend to be much more individually
considered than many other purchases. So, while there are typical
traits which appear more commonly, there is no such thing as a "one
size fits all" approach. And if you are a seller, sometimes it can be
advantageous to sell to a more niche purchaser market, particularly if
your own needs are non-standard.

Mark

[Pelican]

> the middle to let the ships through. It's a snip at £3 million if
> you're interested.

SPAM!

[PLC]

On 06/06/2017 10:31, GB wrote:
> On 06/06/2017 08:52, Pelican wrote:
>

>>> Whilst you could put the property on the market in anticipation of
>>> probate, as a professional executor I doubt if you normally would.
>>

>> That implies that a professional executor is normally slow, or very
>> slow, on their feet.
>
> I don't get that at all. I have already said that it's blindingly
> obvious that putting the property on the market before probate will
> probably run up extra costs and lose a potential buyer. Now Chris R has
> reiterated the point (much more eloquently). There's no implication
> there that professional executors are slow.
>
> In fact, these particular executors have now got probate, just over 3
> months after the death. Do you really think that's slow?

Far from slow I would say they have been quite quick. They will now have
to wait for the statutory notices etc. to expire.


--
Peter Crosland

Reply address is valid

[Handsome Jack]

Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> posted
>On 06/06/2017 06:42, Handsome Jack wrote:
>> Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net> posted

>>> In message <dffe12a7-885d-4f1b...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>Trevor Smith <trevo...@gmail.com> writes
>>>>

>>>> Can a property, as part of the estate, be put up for sale whilst
>>>>probate is being applied for, or only after the grant of probate?
>>>

>>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>>Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>>probate had been granted. The buyer was happy to wait,
>> Same here.
>>
>Same question to you and Graeme:
>
>FTAOD by "sold" do you mean you exchanged contracts or that you
>accepted offers subject to contract?
>
>IMHO doing the former before probate would be bold - and possibly
>courageous as well ;)

I exchanged contracts before probate was obtained. There was a clause in
the contract to the effect that if probate had not been granted by date
X, then either party could declare the contract void and the deposit
would be repaid.

Do you reckon that was a risk? I must admit I did think about it
carefully at the time, but in the event nothing went wrong. The grant
took longer than anyone expected, but it was well within the long-stop
date (which IIRC was six months).

--
Jack

[Mark Goodge]

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 10:18:30 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <epn8db...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:45:31 on Tue, 6 Jun
>2017, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:

>
>>>In the real world estate agents don't want to put properties on their
>>>books until the seller is actually able to complete contracts without
>>>reasonable delay.
>>

>>Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
>>has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
>>offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.
>

>All of which makes me wonder why there are houses for sale "subject to
>probate".

Houses (and other forms of real estate) are something of a special
case, as the lead time involved in selling a house can make it
advantageous to put it on the market before probate is granted. There
is nothing wrong with this provided both the agent and any potential
buyer are made fully aware that no legally binding contract of sale
can be concluded until probate has been granted.

It's not particularly common in the UK (it's more so in some other
countries), as if probate is likely to be straightforward there's not
necessarily a lot to gain while, if probate is likely to be
complicated, it risks spending money on marketing that may not be
recouped if the sale cannot complete. But it is by no means unknown,
as can be readily confirmed by use of any popular Internet search
engine :-)

Mark

[steve robinson]

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 10:06:13 -0700 (PDT), Trevor Smith
<trevo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 1:04:37 PM UTC+1, GB wrote:
>> On 05/06/2017 12:49, Robin wrote:
>>

>> > b. I do know that solicitors may well wait - and advise other executors
>> > to wait - 6 months from the date of probate before making payments just
>> > in case there is a family provision claim - that is, a child or someone
>> > else asking for more than the will gives them.
>>
>> I'm somewhat surprised that the OP has not raised this point. From what
>> I recall, he was living with his mum when she died and somewhat
>> dependent on her.
>
>(OP) I always lived at my own place, 3 miles away, and continue to receive benefits for a long-term medical condition.
>
>Roland Perry was likely correct in asserting mum's ex-show flat would sell quite quickly. These premium flats only come up for sale once every 12-15 years and it only takes one well-heeled prospect to make a good offer. The previous occupant, up to 2005, was the last governor-general of Fiji.
>
>Coincidentally one of the executors phoned me today confirming that probate has been received. However he admitted that lack of probate would not have prevented the property being marketed, as I suspected; it's only an invitation to view and make bids. I challenged him on the month's delay in marketing. They always have excuses: very flimsy in his case, such as the estate agent advising a mobility scooter and power chair in the lounge detracting from the impression of space. Fine ... so why doesn't somebody tell me, so I can put them elsewhere like the rear patio under cover? Buyers of such sheltered accommodation may well be glad of mobility aids to hand. The executor was also dithering by sending emails to the estate agent about a kitchen tube I replaced and a faulty kick-board heater in the kitchen -- both of which the estate agent knew about and were completely irrelevant to marketing the flat.
>
>I regaled the executor with my health, housing (homeless end of July) and financial problems, without eliciting any response. I then hit him on the head with the suggestion of a small interim payment. "Oh, yes, it's possible but I have to check the estate's records first." These solicitors would let beneficiaries go out on the street with a begging bowl prior to proffering any assistance off their own bat. Oxford professor Dr Kevin Dutton was entirely correct in labelling the law the profession with the highest number of psychopaths. The folk here are kind and generous but -- in the hard, cold world of solicitors -- greed and selfishness rules.

Before they distribute the estate they have to make sure all debts
owing are paid , ts not unkown for one of the government agencies to
suddenly come forward and lodge a claim against the estate for taxes
, overpayment of benefits and pensions so forth and so on . Plus of
course your mothers estate is probably one of several they are
dealing with . Whether you end up on the streets or not isn't of any
consequence to the solicitors unfortunately they are working for the
estate not you and if any other executors are inv loved before they
move forwards they will want the agreement of all

[Janet]

In article <JoZhouym...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...

>
> In message <epn8db...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:45:31 on Tue, 6 Jun
> 2017, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>
> >>In the real world estate agents don't want to put properties on their
> >>books until the seller is actually able to complete contracts without
> >>reasonable delay.
> >
> >Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
> >has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
> >offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.
>
> All of which makes me wonder why there are houses for sale "subject to
> probate".

Perhaps because the executor is a layman beneficiary family member
willing to take the personal risk of unsuspected creditors suddenly
turning up demanding settlement of Daddy's gigantic debts.

As opposed to a solicitor bound by professional rules of executor
conduct.

Janet

[Handsome Jack]

No; this was my mother's house.

--
Jack

[Handsome Jack]

GB <NOTso...@microsoft.com> posted

>On 06/06/2017 14:51, Handsome Jack wrote:
>
>>> - Agent's fees may be incurred, and advertising costs;
>> You don't pay fees to estate agents until the sale is completed.
>
>You'll need one of those energy efficiency certificates.

You'll need one anyway, whether the house is marketed before or after
probate.

Anyway (IIRC) the estate agent I used provided it for free as part of
the service. But I agree they don't all do that, it is a fair point.

>Not a lot of money for the executor to lay out of his own pocket, but I
>don't see how he can pay it out of the estate prior to probate. Still,
>he can charge a couple of hundred extra fees for sorting out the
>accountancy ramifications of that.
>

Oh, I'm sure he would. That would be small change for solicitors who
administer estates. He's probably billing the OP as we speak for the
cost of the time he's spent reading this thread.

--
Jack

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 14:55, Handsome Jack wrote:
<snip>

>
> I exchanged contracts before probate was obtained. There was a clause in
> the contract to the effect that if probate had not been granted by date
> X, then either party could declare the contract void and the deposit
> would be repaid.
>
> Do you reckon that was a risk? I must admit I did think about it
> carefully at the time, but in the event nothing went wrong. The grant
> took longer than anyone expected, but it was well within the long-stop
> date (which IIRC was six months).
>

No, I can see that would not leave you as executor exposed - but I'd
expect many buyers would be nervous about eg an uncertain completion
date, searches and mortgage offers becoming out of date and other things
I've not thought of.

[GB]

On 06/06/2017 17:24, Handsome Jack wrote:

> Oh, I'm sure he would. That would be small change for solicitors who
> administer estates. He's probably billing the OP as we speak for the
> cost of the time he's spent reading this thread.
>

From what the OP's said, they seem like quite a competent lot. I'm sure
they don't need to read usenet for tips on how to do their job.

[Janet]

In article <izyxERIq...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...

>
> PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted
> >On 06/06/2017 06:44, Handsome Jack wrote:
> >> We're not talking about distributing the estate in this sub-thread,
> >>we're talking about selling the house, which is going to have to be
> >>done whoever the beneficiaries are.
> >
> >Au contraire! The OP is complaining about the delay in putting the
> >house on the market because he wrongly believes he will get his
> >inheritance quicker that way. In the real world estate agents don't
> >want to put properties on their books until the seller is actually able
> >to complete contracts without reasonable delay.
>
> Quite wrong. Estate agents are very keen to get properties on their
> books. And it is quite normal for (living) sellers to try to secure an
> offer on their houses before even starting to look for one to buy,
> because they know no seller will accept an offer from a someone who
> hasn't sold his own house yet.

That's exactly why someone who already has a buyer lined up for their
own home, can't afford to hold up the entire chain of
completion dates waiting for a house that's in legal limbo, not
available to buy yet.

Janet

[Janet]

In article <uj$yQyIfN...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...

On the contrary, all sellers have to pay upfront for an EPC (or Home
Report and EPC in Scotland) before they can market the house.

Fixed-price agents may also require to be paid in full upfront; and
those working on a percentage commission sometimes want the press
advertising and brochure printing costs also paid up front.


Janet.

[Roland Perry]

In message <6becb593-5f21-d55c...@hotmail.com>, at
14:35:58 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> do you have you evidence of how a professional valuer's fee compares
>>> with the costs in the solicitor's time in contacting 3 estate agents,
>>> arranging for them to collect keys, considering their reports, deciding
>>> what to do when it turns out their figures are inconsistent
>>
>> The solicitor will have the local estate agents on speed-dial anyway.
>> They'll come round and pick up the keys.
>>
>> A valuer, given the info we have from the OP, may charge around £400,
>> which is less than I was expecting.
>
>> As for balancing all the costs, I don't think we know if the solicitor
>> in question is working at an hourly rate, or a fixed percentage of the
>> estate.
>
>May I refer back to my original question - viz. "Do you have direct
>knowledge/evidence of this elephant - ie that solicitors when acting as
>executors get valuations from 3 estate agents?" I ask as I am left
>unclear whether you have evidence that they actually do so or whether
>you think that is what they ought to do (notwithstanding the Law Society
>Wills and Inheritance Protocol).

You will remain unclear, as I won't rise to that kind of cross-examining
bait.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <MPG.33a0cf7...@news.individual.net>, at 15:41:35 on
Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Janet <nob...@home.com> remarked:

>> >Few people buying a property will be willing to wait an open ended time
>> >before the property is actually available.
>>
>> That depends a lot on the circumstances. If there's something especially
>> attractive about the property (and in this instance the OP has confirmed
>> there is) there will be what amounts to a "waiting list". And people
>> therefore prepared to wait.
>
> Buyers who have their current property on the market, or its sale
>already agreed, may find that an open ended purchase is an unwelcome
>complication of their sale chain; involving themselves or others in an
>open-ended bridging loan :-(

They might in a general case, but there will be plenty of buyers for the
OP's kind of property who won't be encumbered by that sort of thing.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <MPG.33a1112...@news.individual.net>, at 20:21:55 on

Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Janet <nob...@home.com> remarked:

>Fixed-price agents may also require to be paid in full upfront; and
>those working on a percentage commission sometimes want the press
>advertising and brochure printing costs also paid up front.

Is this more weird stuff on your Scottish island? I have never
encountered any English agents wanting the kind of payments you
describe.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <mshdjc1ep9t79dfvo...@4ax.com>, at 16:22:39 on
Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:

>But people who aren't in a chain are often more willing to be patient,
>and/or put up with a bit more complexity, in order to get the property
>they want at an attractive price.

In his sort of case, "to get the property at all".
--
Roland Perry

[Handsome Jack]

Janet <nob...@home.com> posted

That possibility means it would be unwise to *distribute* the estate
prematurely, but is totally irrelevant to the sale of the property,
which will have to happen anyway.

>
>As opposed to a solicitor bound by professional rules of executor
>conduct.

None of which say you can't put a house on the market before probate.

--
Jack

[Roland Perry]

In message <MPG.33a10ec...@news.individual.net>, at 20:11:44 on
Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Janet <nob...@home.com> remarked:

>> >> We're not talking about distributing the estate in this sub-thread,
>> >>we're talking about selling the house, which is going to have to be
>> >>done whoever the beneficiaries are.
>> >
>> >Au contraire! The OP is complaining about the delay in putting the
>> >house on the market because he wrongly believes he will get his
>> >inheritance quicker that way. In the real world estate agents don't
>> >want to put properties on their books until the seller is actually able
>> >to complete contracts without reasonable delay.
>>
>> Quite wrong. Estate agents are very keen to get properties on their
>> books. And it is quite normal for (living) sellers to try to secure an
>> offer on their houses before even starting to look for one to buy,
>> because they know no seller will accept an offer from a someone who
>> hasn't sold his own house yet.
>
> That's exactly why someone who already has a buyer lined up for their
>own home, can't afford to hold up the entire chain of
>completion dates waiting for a house that's in legal limbo, not
>available to buy yet.

Unless it's a prestige retirement home, when the rules change.
--
Roland Perry

[Robin]

On 06/06/2017 17:12, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <6becb593-5f21-d55c...@hotmail.com>, at
> 14:35:58 on Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>>> do you have you evidence of how a professional valuer's fee compares
>>>> with the costs in the solicitor's time in contacting 3 estate agents,
>>>> arranging for them to collect keys, considering their reports, deciding
>>>> what to do when it turns out their figures are inconsistent
>>>
>>> The solicitor will have the local estate agents on speed-dial anyway.
>>> They'll come round and pick up the keys.
>>>

>>> A valuer, given the info we have from the OP, may charge around £400,

>>> which is less than I was expecting.
>>
>>> As for balancing all the costs, I don't think we know if the solicitor
>>> in question is working at an hourly rate, or a fixed percentage of the
>>> estate.
>>
>> May I refer back to my original question - viz. "Do you have direct
>> knowledge/evidence of this elephant - ie that solicitors when acting as
>> executors get valuations from 3 estate agents?" I ask as I am left
>> unclear whether you have evidence that they actually do so or whether
>> you think that is what they ought to do (notwithstanding the Law Society
>> Wills and Inheritance Protocol).
>
> You will remain unclear, as I won't rise to that kind of cross-examining
> bait.
>

Sorry if you feel badgered. I did really want to know how you knew
"that in order to properly value the house for probate, they'll already
have contacted three estate agents". And you could simply have said
earlier that you can't or won't say.

[Janet]

In article <wCOPSrH5...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...

? Where do they live, while waiting for the prestige retirement home
to be available to buy and move into?

Janet

[Graeme]

In message <MPG.33a1609...@news.individual.net>, Janet
<nob...@home.com> writes

>>
>> Unless it's a prestige retirement home, when the rules change.
>
> ? Where do they live, while waiting for the prestige retirement home
>to be available to buy and move into?

In the case of my late mother's flat, the estate agent and eventual
buyer were very much aware that the sale could not be completed until
after probate. The buyer had sold her own house, so was a 'cash buyer',
and was temporarily living with her daughter and son-in-law.

We can argue the pros, cons and legalities forever, but so much depends
on circumstances and, taking Peter's point, the executors. We, as
executors, beneficiaries and sons of the deceased could do what we
thought best at the time, having assessed the risks, whereas a
professional executor may (would) have taken an alternative view. There
was no question of deceiving anyone. The solicitor dealing with the
actual probate process knew what we were doing, and the estate agent
fully understood that he was marketing a property that could not be sold
immediately. The buyer was aware, too. I suppose everything comes down
to trust. Once the sale was agreed, the agent and buyer trusted us not
to appoint another agent later, or accept a higher offer, and we trusted
the buyer not to buy an alternative property in the meantime. We were
lucky - everything worked out, and everyone was happy.
--
Graeme

[Graeme]

In message <fdc099cf-487e-a181...@hotmail.com>, Robin
<rb...@hotmail.com> writes

>On 06/06/2017 06:42, Handsome Jack wrote:
>> Graeme <Gra...@binnsroad.net> posted
>>>

>>> Yes, we (brother and self) sold our late mother's flat (Saffron
>>>Walden) before probate, although could not complete the sale until
>>>probate had been granted. The buyer was happy to wait,
>> Same here.
>>
>Same question to you and Graeme:
>
>FTAOD by "sold" do you mean you exchanged contracts or that you
>accepted offers subject to contract?

Robin, see other reply. We accepted an offer subject to contract.
After probate was granted, contracts were exchanged and the sale
completed within a few days. Mother died 1st June last year, and we
received the property proceeds 29th November. We finally received the
last of other cash (investments etc.) at the end of February this year.
--
Graeme

[Robin]

Thanks, that's what I think most executors would do.

[Handsome Jack]

Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> posted

>Sorry if you feel badgered. I did really want to know how you knew
>"that in order to properly value the house for probate, they'll already
>have contacted three estate agents".

This is not exactly authoritative, but probably reflects current
practice:
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/content/100719
"the executors should obtain two or three estate agents’ valuations
and take the average as the value of the property, or obtain a
surveyor’s valuation."

and

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140109143644/http://www.hmrc.
gov.uk/cto/newsletter-aug09.htm
"The feeling amongst many participants at the [Probate Section]
conference was that to be confident this approach can be demonstrated,
three valuations from different estate agents were preferable, or an
RICS valuation if a definitive figure is required [...] this will go a
long way in demonstrating that the liable persons exercised reasonable
care ... "

--
Jack

[Handsome Jack]

Janet <nob...@home.com> posted

They'll generally have to do that even if the owner of the house they
want to buy is still alive, because that person will (now he has found a
buyer) have to find a house to move to. Delays are built into the
system. At least if you're buying a probate house you don't have to
worry about an upwards chain.

--
Jack

[Roland Perry]

In message <b63fb2ce-8019-8f70...@hotmail.com>, at
09:01:49 on Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>>> FTAOD by "sold" do you mean you exchanged contracts or that you
>>>accepted offers subject to contract?
>> Robin, see other reply. We accepted an offer subject to contract.
>>After probate was granted, contracts were exchanged and the sale
>>completed within a few days. Mother died 1st June last year, and we
>>received the property proceeds 29th November. We finally received
>>the last of other cash (investments etc.) at the end of February this year.
>
>Thanks, that's what I think most executors would do.

Hurrah - agreement that properties *can* be, and are, marketed "subject
to probate".
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <MPG.33a1609...@news.individual.net>, at 02:00:48 on
Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Janet <nob...@home.com> remarked:

>> >>Estate agents are very keen to get properties on their
>> >> books. And it is quite normal for (living) sellers to try to secure an
>> >> offer on their houses before even starting to look for one to buy,
>> >> because they know no seller will accept an offer from a someone who
>> >> hasn't sold his own house yet.
>> >
>> > That's exactly why someone who already has a buyer lined up for their
>> >own home, can't afford to hold up the entire chain of
>> >completion dates waiting for a house that's in legal limbo, not
>> >available to buy yet.
>>
>> Unless it's a prestige retirement home, when the rules change.
>
> ? Where do they live, while waiting for the prestige retirement home
>to be available to buy and move into?

They continue living where they are at the moment.
--
Roland Perry

[Chris R]

All the more reason not to put the property on the market until the
seller is able to proceed. Plus, in a rising market, delay may result in
a higher price.
--
Chris R

[Robin]

On 07/06/2017 09:10, Handsome Jack wrote:
> Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> posted
>> Sorry if you feel badgered. I did really want to know how you knew
>> "that in order to properly value the house for probate, they'll already
>> have contacted three estate agents".
>
> This is not exactly authoritative, but probably reflects current
> practice:
> https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/content/100719

> "the executors should obtain two or three estate agents’ valuations

> and take the average as the value of the property, or obtain a

> surveyor’s valuation."

>
> and
>
> http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140109143644/http://www.hmrc.
> gov.uk/cto/newsletter-aug09.htm
> "The feeling amongst many participants at the [Probate Section]
> conference was that to be confident this approach can be demonstrated,
> three valuations from different estate agents were preferable, or an
> RICS valuation if a definitive figure is required [...] this will go a
> long way in demonstrating that the liable persons exercised reasonable
> care ... "
>

I have already pointed out in response to Roland, who also posted the
first link above, that I think it is aimed more at lay executors.

Thanks for the second link. I do not know the context of the discussion
at the conference. But please bear in mind solicitors and other
practitioners who attend those conferences don't only deal with estates
as executors. They also do a lot of probate work on instructions from
lay executors/administrators. Those clients often jib at a few for a
professional valuer, especially when "my mate told me we can just ask
the estate agents we've got coming round to look at mum's house to give
us a lower figure to use for tax". In those circumstances AIUI the
solicitor can advise them of the pros and cons of using a valuer but
then go with the clients' instructions to use the figure they get from
estate agents as it is the client, not the solicitor, who is accountable
for the value returned. In the OP's case, however, the solicitor is the
executor.

I also not that the context of the discussion was HMRC's increased
compliance activity and penalties for undervaluation.

PS

A lot of people fuss about the value for probate/IHT without realising
that if PRs sell the property within 4 years for less than the value
returned they can substitute that lower value and claim back the excess
IHT.

[Robin]

FTAOD (a) I never argued that they cannot be advertised that way if an
executor chooses to do so; and (b) by "most" I meant "most executors who
decide to advertise them before probate".

[Roger Hayter]

Despite a number of house purchases, I have never knowingly been
involved in a chain; or at least I have been one end of it and willing
to take it or leave it. Chains are not a law of nature. And any money
saved by avoiding bridging costs or rental costs is probably lost twice
of over by loss of flexibility of action in the market. Just don't do
it; the behaviour seems to be largely unique to the UK.



--

Roger Hayter

[Chris R]

On 06/06/2017 17:16, Handsome Jack wrote:

> Janet <nob...@home.com> posted
>> In article <JoZhouym...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk says...
>>>
>>> In message <epn8db...@mid.individual.net>, at 09:45:31 on Tue, 6 Jun
>>> 2017, Norman Wells <h...@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>
>>> >>In the real world estate agents don't want to put properties on their
>>> >>books until the seller is actually able to complete contracts without
>>> >>reasonable delay.
>>> >
>>> >Quite. Title to the deceased's property is only acquired when Probate
>>> >has been granted. Before then, it could well be construed as fraud to
>>> >offer it for sale because it is not legally the executors' to sell.
>>>
>>> All of which makes me wonder why there are houses for sale "subject to
>>> probate".
>>
>> Perhaps because the executor is a layman beneficiary family member
>> willing to take the personal risk of unsuspected creditors suddenly
>> turning up demanding settlement of Daddy's gigantic debts.
>>

>> As opposed to a solicitor bound by professional rules of executor
>> conduct.
>
> None of which say you can't put a house on the market before probate.
>

Nobody has said you can't put a property on the market before probate.
The point is that there are good reasons why an executor, particularly a
professional executor, might choose not to, or even might not even
consider doing so. Doing so incurs at least some level of risk, as
probate might not be granted or may be delayed. Bear in mind also that
if a professional executor does not get granted probate, he probably
does not get paid for an work done up to that point, so it would be
legitimate to minimise that exposure.

To have a complaint against the solicitor (who actually seems to be
moving quickly), the OP needs to show not that the executors could have
put the house on the market, but that they were under a duty to do so.
--
Chris R

========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======

[Janet]

In article <LhmbAID6...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...

Not in Scotland's conveyance system. Here it's common to commit to buy
first, and only then put the current home on the market.

Janet.

[Roland Perry]

In message <e724d25d-02e2-ddbd...@hotmail.com>, at
09:58:22 on Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:

>On 07/06/2017 09:27, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <b63fb2ce-8019-8f70...@hotmail.com>, at
>>09:01:49 on Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Robin <rb...@hotmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> FTAOD by "sold" do you mean you exchanged contracts or that you
>>>>>accepted offers subject to contract?
>>>> Robin, see other reply. We accepted an offer subject to contract.
>>>>After probate was granted, contracts were exchanged and the sale
>>>>completed within a few days. Mother died 1st June last year, and
>>>>we received the property proceeds 29th November. We finally
>>>>received the last of other cash (investments etc.) at the end of
>>>>February this year.
>>>
>>> Thanks, that's what I think most executors would do.
>> Hurrah - agreement that properties *can* be, and are, marketed
>>"subject to probate".
>
>FTAOD (a) I never argued that they cannot be advertised that way if an
>executor chooses to do so;

I didn't suggest you had. There are more then two people in this thread.

>and (b) by "most" I meant "most executors who decide to advertise them
>before probate".
>

--

Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <1n78tno.1qj6bv689h4q8N%ro...@hayter.org>, at 10:12:43 on
Wed, 7 Jun 2017, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:

>Despite a number of house purchases, I have never knowingly been
>involved in a chain; or at least I have been one end of it and willing
>to take it or leave it.

I don't think I've been in the middle of a chain, but that's because...

>Chains are not a law of nature. And any money saved by avoiding
>bridging costs or rental costs is probably lost twice of over by loss
>of flexibility of action in the market.

... a bridging loan is handy if you have sufficient status, and I've
three times ended up camping out" in a rental. But 4-5 bed family homes
to rent are like hens teeth in many areas. I once recall having a choice
of precisely two within a half hour radius.

--
Roland Perry

[Chris R]

On 07/06/2017 11:26, Janet wrote:
> In article <LhmbAID6...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...
>>
>> Janet <nob...@home.com> posted
>>> In article <izyxERIq...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...
>>>>
>>>> PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted

>>> That's exactly why someone who already has a buyer lined up for their
>>> own home, can't afford to hold up the entire chain of
>>> completion dates waiting for a house that's in legal limbo, not
>>> available to buy yet.
>>
>> They'll generally have to do that even if the owner of the house they
>> want to buy is still alive, because that person will (now he has found a
>> buyer) have to find a house to move to. Delays are built into the
>> system.
>
> Not in Scotland's conveyance system. Here it's common to commit to buy
> first, and only then put the current home on the market.

I am often intrigued by what must be myths about Scotland's supposedly
perfect conveyancing system. If you are committed to buy before putting
your existing house on the market, where does the money come from if you
haven't sold by the completion date of your purchase?

[Janet]

In article <oh8lut$6jd$1...@dont-email.me>,
invalid...@invalid.invalid.com says...

>
> On 07/06/2017 11:26, Janet wrote:
> > In article <LhmbAID6...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...
> >>
> >> Janet <nob...@home.com> posted
> >>> In article <izyxERIq...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted
>
> >>> That's exactly why someone who already has a buyer lined up for their
> >>> own home, can't afford to hold up the entire chain of
> >>> completion dates waiting for a house that's in legal limbo, not
> >>> available to buy yet.
> >>
> >> They'll generally have to do that even if the owner of the house they
> >> want to buy is still alive, because that person will (now he has found a
> >> buyer) have to find a house to move to. Delays are built into the
> >> system.
> >
> > Not in Scotland's conveyance system. Here it's common to commit to buy
> > first, and only then put the current home on the market.
>
> I am often intrigued by what must be myths about Scotland's supposedly
> perfect conveyancing system.

I never met anyone who described it as perfect :-) But having used
both the English and Scottish system, I prefer the Scottish one. Both
buyer and seller know where they stand, from the outset.

If you are committed to buy before putting
> your existing house on the market, where does the money come from if you
> haven't sold by the completion date of your purchase?

The buyer has already accepted a legally binding contract of his
assorted financial obligations to the seller if he fails to complete.
It's a standard part of the conveyance process.

https://grigor-young.co.uk/backing-out-of-a-house-purchase-or-sale-when-
is-it-too-late/

"A purchaser who does not proceed with the purchase will be charged
interest on the purchase price, in the first instance.

After 2 or 3 weeks (depending on the contract), the seller will be
entitled to withdraw from the contract and sell the house to somebody
else.

The purchaser?s liability does not end at that point, however.

They would be responsible for any difference in the sale prices, as well
as the seller?s additional costs and expenses. These could include re-
marketing fees, cancellation-of-removal costs and bridging loan costs.
It is not usually possible to quantify what payment would be due to the
seller until a later date.

Usually, the financial liability for a seller who does not wish to
proceed with the sale is much less. If that happened, the seller would
need to pay to the purchaser their reasonable losses which could
include, for example, additional accommodation costs, if a purchaser had
sold their existing house and needed rented accommodation."


Janet.

[Chris R]

On 07/06/2017 18:23, Janet wrote:
> In article <oh8lut$6jd$1...@dont-email.me>,
> invalid...@invalid.invalid.com says...
>>
>> On 07/06/2017 11:26, Janet wrote:
>>> In article <LhmbAID6...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...
>>>>
>>>> Janet <nob...@home.com> posted
>>>>> In article <izyxERIq...@none.demon.co.uk>, Ja...@nowhere.com says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PLC <g6...@iyahoo.co.uk> posted
>>

Quite. So you commit to buy, find you can't sell your existing house,
and get sued for thousands of pounds. Where's the fun in that?