U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-27-2018, 04:49 PM
 
5,235 posts, read 2,386,359 times
Reputation: 5119

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenkay View Post
It makes me believe he probably had intentions to leave her something but just never got around to updating his will. From the sound of it he was healthy and died suddenly, so it's not as though his will was likely at the top of his list of things to do.

What is it that makes you believe the highlighted portion above?


At 70 years old, making his wishes known would more likely have been high on his list. That he had a will shows this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-27-2018, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
16,499 posts, read 15,961,355 times
Reputation: 38888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenkay View Post
It makes me believe he probably had intentions to leave her something but just never got around to updating his will. From the sound of it he was healthy and died suddenly, so it's not as though his will was likely at the top of his list of things to do.
If his wife died ten years earlier, he obviously knows that death can strike at anytime. His GF was 70 years old so I would bet that he was at least 70 as well, possibly even much older. Even if you are only 70 or 75 (IMHO fairly young) and in good heath, it is still common knowledge that you always need an up to date will. And, if his GF felt that she should be included in that will (provided for after his death) she should have encouraged him to put that "on the top of the list".

BTW, he had a will which he had updated after the death of his wife.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 05:22 PM
 
Location: 5,400 feet
2,209 posts, read 2,278,381 times
Reputation: 2865
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jenkay View Post
It makes me believe he probably had intentions to leave her something but just never got around to updating his will. From the sound of it he was healthy and died suddenly, so it's not as though his will was likely at the top of his list of things to do.

As I've stated before, the will states the decedent's intention. Anything else is pure speculation and neither the trust document nor the probate court deal in speculation. If the will or trust is deemed invalid, then the law of intestacy applies (which will leave nothing to the LIG. Unless there is another statute that gives the LIG some property interest in the decedents, the LIG is currently just a tenant getting a free ride and likely soon to be a trespasser.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 05:40 PM
 
Location: N of citrus, S of decent corn
34,633 posts, read 42,792,739 times
Reputation: 57347
I’m no lawyer, but the LIG has no legal standing here. The house was left to the 2 children and they should have the right to dispose of it. If they chose to be nice, they could let her pay rent, but it should be the market rate.

In theory, she could stay there for the next 30 years, and I dont think any court would find this a reasonable arrangement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 05:51 PM
 
459 posts, read 261,059 times
Reputation: 1697
So...let's see if I have this right...LIG's not paying a cent to live there, and heir #1 is living with heir #2 because heir #1 is in financial difficulties. Heir #1 is the one that wants LIG to stay. Heir #2, who is supporting their own family PLUS heir #1, wants to sell the house and have LIG move back with her own child.


If I understand this correctly, essentially heir #1 wants to let the LIG stay in the house at no cost to LIG (i.e. she has no income and is not paying any bills right now), while heir #2 pays all the expenses for LIG, heir #1, and their own family!


Of course heir #1 can afford to be magnanimous! It's not his/her money that's paying for everyone! Poor heir #2. I venture to say that heir #1 has little to no grasp of how to handle financial matters, hence why they have already screwed their own finances up. I would pay attention to the person who would be footing the bill for this fiasco - heir #2. When/if heir #1 is able to start footing half of the bill for LIG and all of the bill for themselves, then they can have an equal opinion. Why is heir #1 selling their own sibling down the river in favor of some woman their dad met a few years ago and let move in with him?


Give LIG a set time period to move out, and a small portion of the sales profit if they feel like being generous. The longer it takes to get her out, the harder it will be, especially since she's already making remarks. 5-6 years is nothing in the larger picture of things, and they don't owe her anything more than that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 06:00 PM
 
1,778 posts, read 879,544 times
Reputation: 3812
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kgryfon View Post
So...let's see if I have this right...LIG's not paying a cent to live there, and heir #1 is living with heir #2 because heir #1 is in financial difficulties. Heir #1 is the one that wants LIG to stay. Heir #2, who is supporting their own family PLUS heir #1, wants to sell the house and have LIG move back with her own child.


If I understand this correctly, essentially heir #1 wants to let the LIG stay in the house at no cost to LIG (i.e. she has no income and is not paying any bills right now), while heir #2 pays all the expenses for LIG, heir #1, and their own family!


Of course heir #1 can afford to be magnanimous! It's not his/her money that's paying for everyone! Poor heir #2. I venture to say that heir #1 has little to no grasp of how to handle financial matters, hence why they have already screwed their own finances up. I would pay attention to the person who would be footing the bill for this fiasco - heir #2. When/if heir #1 is able to start footing half of the bill for LIG and all of the bill for themselves, then they can have an equal opinion. Why is heir #1 selling their own sibling down the river in favor of some woman their dad met a few years ago and let move in with him?


Give LIG a set time period to move out, and a small portion of the sales profit if they feel like being generous. The longer it takes to get her out, the harder it will be, especially since she's already making remarks. 5-6 years is nothing in the larger picture of things, and they don't owe her anything more than that.
I think you have it backwards. Heir one wants granny to hit the road and heir #2 has the family and the feels about granny staying in gramps' old crib. That is the way I read it. Heir #1 needs the cash to move out of heir #2's house with heir 2s kids. I think the "poor" down on their luck heir is the only one who makes sense and he/she is not selling anyone down the river.

Granny may be sweet but time for her to pack her bags and get to the casita. OP I would tell her that if I were you. It may open up the conversation that the others don't want to have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 08:18 PM
 
Location: Raleigh
7,036 posts, read 5,215,367 times
Reputation: 9503
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
If I was talking about rent, that's what I would have said. I was talking about two people sharing a mortgage.
But she wasn’t on the mortgage if there was one. If there was, she’d have a legal ownership interest. And would be on the deed. “Sharing” the mortgage when you don’t have an ownership interest is renting. Whether or not the landlord is your romantic companion or can afford to keep the place without you is irrelevant. I dare say most landlords can’t keep a place for long without rental income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 09:44 PM
 
5,235 posts, read 2,386,359 times
Reputation: 5119
Quote:
Originally Posted by JONOV View Post
But she wasn’t on the mortgage if there was one. If there was, she’d have a legal ownership interest. And would be on the deed. “Sharing” the mortgage when you don’t have an ownership interest is renting. Whether or not the landlord is your romantic companion or can afford to keep the place without you is irrelevant. I dare say most landlords can’t keep a place for long without rental income.
There are circumstances where two people can each pay towards a mortgage even though only one name is on it, and both have rights to the property. Think domestic partnership or cohabitation agreement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 10:18 PM
 
33,059 posts, read 12,540,920 times
Reputation: 20951
OP posted that LIG does not have an income. Therefore, staying in the house (taxes, insurance, utilities, repairs, ...), let alone buying it outright is out of the question.

Allow the executor of the will to carry out the man's stated and signed wishes. Sell the house. Split the proceeds between the two heirs.

If the soft-hearted heir wishes to provide a home for the dear woman, sounds like he/she will have $400K to do so.

If she moves to the casita in Arizona as previously planned, perhaps offering to help her move with a promise of a portion of the proceeds as soon as the house is sold will satisfy her "something to remember him by" desires.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2018, 11:59 PM
 
438 posts, read 414,367 times
Reputation: 762
Quote:
Originally Posted by desperatedogadvice View Post
There is no mortgage. Paid off years ago. House is worth in the $800K range based on comps.

The heirs have been paying utilities, taxes, etc., as their legal responsibility (they own the house now.) This money has come out of the estate. LIG has not contributed one cent to anything, nor funeral expenses, nothing. Again, she has a very limited income.
I suspect the deceased knew his new Love could not afford to stay in the house on her own after he died, and that is why he did not write a will allowing her to stay. It’s time to help her move on, and allow the heirs the money they apparently need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top