Access denied to estate property

[bbtsmile2]

We never came to an agreement and now I need it. I am in the process of getting a lawyer and prepared for the options ahead.

 

[Zigner]

I disagree about the bolded. The house is big enough for both of them and in the end they would both have an equal right to use the property.

Let's say I own a huge mansion and lease it out to a guy from out of state who is on assignment in my state and whom I got in contact with through Craigs List. Are you suggesting that, because it's only one guy, and because it's a huge mansion, I can just show up tomorrow and move in. I mean, it's big enough for both of us, right?

 

[Zigner]

We never came to an agreement and now I need it. I am in the process of getting a lawyer and prepared for the options ahead.

If you cannot come to an agreement, then the estate sell it and split the proceeds between the "heirs".

 

[LdiJ]

Let's say I own a huge mansion and lease it out to a guy from out of state who is on assignment in my state and whom I got in contact with through Craigs List. Are you suggesting that, because it's only one guy, and because it's a huge mansion, I can just show up tomorrow and move in. I mean, it's big enough for both of us, right?

Completely different scenario. There is no lease giving sis exclusive use of the house. This is more akin to a situation where two people own a house therefore those two people both have the right to use it than it is to a situation where there is a lease giving someone exclusive use. Yes, sis has become a tenant of the estate, but again, there is no lease giving her exclusive use.

 

[Zigner]

Completely different scenario. There is no lease giving sis exclusive use of the house. This is more akin to a situation where two people own a house therefore those two people both have the right to use it than it is to a situation where there is a lease giving someone exclusive use. Yes, sis has become a tenant of the estate, but again, there is no lease giving her exclusive use.

This is NOTHING "akin to a situation where two people own a house". Two people don't own this house. The ESTATE (as a separate legal entity) owns the house and the ESTATE is the landlord. One sister has established exclusive tenancy (you know there doesn't have to be a written document for this to occur). The landlord (the ESTATE) must follow the state's landlord/tenant laws. The ESTATE cannot just move additional tenants in willy-nilly.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not saying that the ESTATE can't change the terms of the tenancy, rather, I'm saying that the ESTATE must follow the law when making such changes.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Completely different scenario. There is no lease giving sis exclusive use of the house. This is more akin to a situation where two people own a house therefore those two people both have the right to use it than it is to a situation where there is a lease giving someone exclusive use. Yes, sis has become a tenant of the estate, but again, there is no lease giving her exclusive use.

Actually neither may have a right to it. There is a single entity now that owns the house and that is the estate that it is part of. Anyone's use of it at this point without paying something at least approaching fair market value is affecting the value of the estate. Since the OP has a duty to the estate as the executor she needs to be doing whatever is best for the estate and not herself.

 

[Zigner]

Actually neither may have a right to it. There is a single entity now that owns the house and that is the estate that it is part of. Anyone's use of it at this point without paying something at least approaching fair market value is affecting the value of the estate. Since the OP has a duty to the estate as the executor she needs to be doing whatever is best for the estate and not herself.

The only people affected by this are the two sisters, so who would complain about the impropriety of the matter? The tenant isn't going to make a stink, and the administrator (our OP) isn't going to take legal action against herself. Legally, the OP isn't properly administering the estate, but the reality is that the only person who can do anything about it is the recipient of the benefit of the impropriety.

If there are creditors of the estate who have not been paid, then, of course, they may challenge this as well.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

The only people affected by this are the two sisters, so who would complain about the impropriety of the matter? The tenant isn't going to make a stink, and the administrator (our OP) isn't going to take legal action against herself. Legally, the OP isn't properly administering the estate, but the reality is that the only person who can do anything about it is the recipient of the benefit of the impropriety.

If there are creditors of the estate who have not been paid, then, of course, they may challenge this as well.

That's who I was thinking of.

 

[zddoodah]

Are these the answers you were referring to?

No. Here are the questions that haven't been answered:

1. Whose estate? It would also be helpful if you told us when the person whose estate it is died.
2. You wrote that your "sister has been living in the property for 3 years," and I asked, "Has the property been owned by the estate all this time?" You responded with: "It has been owned by the estate for at least 2 yrs," and that's non-responsive to the question.
3. Why have you allowed this situation to persist?
4. How do the heirs/beneficiaries of the estate feel about your plan to use estate property for your personal benefit? Implicit in this question is you telling us who the heirs/beneficiaries are.
5. Do you intend to seek approval of the probate court for your plan to use estate property for your personal benefit?

 

[Zigner]

No. Here are the questions that haven't been answered:

1. Whose estate? It would also be helpful if you told us when the person whose estate it is died.
2. You wrote that your "sister has been living in the property for 3 years," and I asked, "Has the property been owned by the estate all this time?" You responded with: "It has been owned by the estate for at least 2 yrs," and that's non-responsive to the question.
3. Why have you allowed this situation to persist?
4. How do the heirs/beneficiaries of the estate feel about your plan to use estate property for your personal benefit? Implicit in this question is you telling us who the heirs/beneficiaries are.
5. Do you intend to seek approval of the probate court for your plan to use estate property for your personal benefit?

All (almost all?) of these questions are answered in the OP's other thread: https://forum.freeadvice.com/threads/lawyer-established-heirs-and-vanished.658389

It's unfortunate that the OP started another thread instead of posting to that one...but it is what it is now.

 

[Just Blue]

All (almost all?) of these questions are answered in the OP's other thread: https://forum.freeadvice.com/threads/lawyer-established-heirs-and-vanished.658389

It's unfortunate that the OP started another thread instead of posting to that one...but it is what it is now.

post 2.

 

[LdiJ]

This is NOTHING "akin to a situation where two people own a house". Two people don't own this house. The ESTATE (as a separate legal entity) owns the house and the ESTATE is the landlord. One sister has established exclusive tenancy (you know there doesn't have to be a written document for this to occur). The landlord (the ESTATE) must follow the state's landlord/tenant laws. The ESTATE cannot just move additional tenants in willy-nilly.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not saying that the ESTATE can't change the terms of the tenancy, rather, I'm saying that the ESTATE must follow the law when making such changes.

I still disagree with you. However, the OP should consult a local attorney (probate attorney who might also consult a real estate attorney) for advice.

 

[Zigner]

I still disagree with you. However, the OP should consult a local attorney (probate attorney who might also consult a real estate attorney) for advice.

I agree that an attorney should be consulted.