Property with building after inheritance

  • Erstellt am 2024-10-05 22:52:22

Dresdnerin

2024-10-05 22:52:22
  • #1
Dear community,

we have a situation that is now also affecting our health. Therefore, I am now looking for advice, help, tips here.

The following happened to us. A relative who owned more than half of a house and property has passed away. I am one of the heirs. We heirs are in agreement among ourselves and no one wants to take advantage of the other. In this regard, everything is fine.

However, the part to which the other part of the house and property belongs (less than half) is not an heir but is registered in the land register along with the deceased person. The apartment that belongs to this person has been vacant for many years and not rented out. The other apartment is inhabited by the wife of the deceased. It is a 100-year-old, unrenovated two-family house. The property is about 1000 sqm. There are no liabilities such as loans or anything else. The house completely belongs to both residential parties.

There was a purely verbal agreement between the deceased person and another person who is entitled to the inheritance of the unoccupied apartment but does not live there that there would be a payout so that the deceased person, respectively us survivors, would then own everything. A substantial sum flowed from the deceased person to the person entitled to the inheritance of the unoccupied apartment. However, the persons who own the unoccupied apartment are still alive, so this inheritance event has not yet occurred.

Now we heirs of the inhabited apartment have asked the parties of the other apartment to gift the rest to us heirs since the payout for the outstanding inheritance had already been made. However, this party now wants money again to carry out the "gift." The money is not available and was not agreed upon. Please refrain from comments like "Why isn’t it in writing." This was not within my power to arrange. The deceased person mistakenly trusted the rest of the family.

There is also no valuation for the house. The other part of the family vastly overestimates the value. Should the house be compulsorily appraised? According to the land unit value, the property is worth €350,000. The house is about 220 sqm in size.

We had a construction company inspect it and they basically tore the house apart because it really needs a complete renovation. The roof needs to be raised, the roof insulation is damp, the floor between the living floors is hollow and therefore uninsulated, the roof has 20-year-old bitumen shingles, cracks in the walls, the electrical system needs to be completely redone, and all heating pipes must be replaced, as well as 50% of the windows in the house. My husband and I, who are supposed to take over the house at the request of the deceased (no will), have no craftsmanship skills and are also tied up with work and several children of kindergarten age. The construction expert said renovation/modernization around €250,000 +/-.

The amount that the person who has actually already been paid now wants, on top of the money they have already received and what we would have in construction costs, far exceeds our borrowing capacity.

In addition, there is a partition declaration between the two residential unit owners. However, this only states the division of living spaces and not the division of the land. Therefore, according to the lawyer, every square meter belongs partly to one and partly to the other owner party. Therefore, only the apartments can be sold individually and a usage agreement would have to be made for the garden. Thus, nothing can be done in the garden without asking the other party for permission.

Has anyone had a similar situation or can say anything about this?

I am grateful for any constructive contribution.

As said, it is already affecting our health and a solution must be found.

Many thanks and have a nice evening
 

nordanney

2024-10-05 23:46:01
  • #2
You inherit an estate of whatever kind and it is taking a toll on your health that you have received an inheritance. I would also like to be that confused. 1. No written agreements = officially nothing is provable. 2. So there are two apartments in a ramshackle building, which on one side belong to the community of heirs and on the other (smaller) side to a third party. 3. The deceased’s wife = co-heir wants to continue living there? 4. Declaration of division? So there is a formal owners’ association (then you can really make life difficult for the third party through majority resolutions, which you can bring about yourselves, with various resolutions) 5. I see the following options - Paying out the third party based on an external appraisal. You heirs should be significantly involved in commissioning an appraiser in order to steer the price in your favor. - Partition auction. First, conclude a rental agreement with the deceased’s wife, because purchase does not terminate rent (the only drawback: termination for own use, if the house is auctioned off to a third party). But usually one party wants to become sole owner. In that respect, this is equivalent to the first option. - Do nothing. No stress, everything stays as it is. Apart from that, I really don’t understand your description of the situation nor the health-damaging problem. You have to write everything down properly structured and explain why an inheritance is making you sick. What you write is unfortunately quite confusing. Nicely with bullet points, maybe code names, shares, who with whom what and how much. THAT is something I don’t understand at all. You are an uninvolved third party and have nothing to do with the whole inheritance? How do you come to That’s what I mean by confusing. At request and no will. Who are you then that you inherit? Does the deceased’s wife and/or children give you the share as a gift? Then you have to think about the value of the house anyway in order to calculate gift tax. So please write everything down in such a way that uninvolved third parties (= us here in the forum) understand the story.
 

ypg

2024-10-06 00:26:22
  • #3

does not apply. Because what counts are facts. And you are not the ones who decide the inheritance or gave money away to someone, but that was the deceased. You are _only_ heirs.
As an heir or community of heirs, you have to accept that sometimes.

And yes, why should an heir be limited by health reasons? Because it could have been much more? I assume that you are simply overwhelmed, and instead of handing it over to an administrator, you are brooding over the situation and the state and the could-have-beens, ifs, and buts.

Person 3? Shall we call her Gudrun?! Entitled by Brunhilde, who is still alive but does not live in the apartment? (Whether she lives there or not, whether Brunhilde has heirs or not, that is completely irrelevant here, right?)

?

Should there be a payment to Brunhilde or has there been one, so that everything returns to one ownership of Bruno, the deceased? But the payment did not take place. So it is not. Completely irrelevant in this matter, what should have been, could have been, but is not.

but it was not, right?!

Do you see it that way? Is it so?
I already hinted at it above: it is of course disappointing when a relative gives someone an advantage by giving him money, a lot of money. It may be that this was not right because the relative, in this case Bruno, was already very old and forgetful. Or also too trusting. But usually it is as it is. And if one had had lively contact, one would probably have learned something about it in due time. But now it is as it is.

?


Yes, one owns 60%, the other 40%. The land is divided ideologically.

Yes, of course. You as a community of heirs own 60%, namely Bruno’s apartment. Nothing more. With condominiums in multi-family houses or some row houses, it is the same – but they can also be sold.

No, of course nothing was agreed. It is never agreed that or if money is missing.
What one does or others do or what one can do if money is missing: take out a loan: either to pay off the other heirs or/and to renovate the house.
You have to call it as it is: you are a community of heirs, but none really has the money to do something with the house.
Renovation backlog makes it a zero-object on a plot that can be found on the market again.
From the two-family house, you as a community of heirs own 60%, Brunhilde 40%.

I’ll put it this way: either offer Brunhilde the 60%, one from the community of heirs takes out a loan, or sell the 60%.
P.S. This is a personal opinion and could contain errors.
 

11ant

2024-10-06 00:35:12
  • #4
Your credit rating and debt service capacity are "only half the battle," I see it as a bigger issue that the property, as described, tends to be a wreck and would not bring an adequate collateral value. Just to trip up the stubborn co-owners alone — as far as I can reasonably make sense of the story — this would be the option that comes to my mind first. I can only fully agree with: I don’t even understand how non-heirs of the ownership share can even get into a position to (co-)decide on cooperation (or its refusal). And then, how can one speak explicitly separately of one apartment and the other when, on the other hand, there is supposed to be no declaration of division (?) As far as I understand, legally the surviving dependents of the major owner own both the apartment used by the widow and the vacant apartment as part of that share. A vacancy lasting several years damages the substance of the entire property, by the way.
 

Dresdnerin

2024-10-06 00:59:31
  • #5


In my post, I asked not to judge. You have no idea what we have been through and sentences like "I want to be that clueless too" can be spared. You don’t know any background or anything. I asked for constructive help. So please either do it that way or just leave it.

Losing someone very young and suddenly is not nice. Especially when the rest of the family then exploits the death of the person to make financial profit from it.

You are right about the confusion though. It is hard to describe but I will try it as follows:
- Person A dies (no will)
- leaves heirs A1, A2 (me) and A3
- for that property with land, Person A and Person B are listed in the land register
- A owns more than half
- Persons C and A would inherit 50/50% in the event of Person B's death
- A2 and A3 now move up in the legal line of succession to the position of A, since A has died
- thus, in the potential event of B's death (no will), C would inherit 50% and A2 and A3 each 25%
- part of the property was a gift from Person B to Person A 20 years ago
- Person C wants to be paid out by Person A for his share from Person B so that A would then own everything, respectively now the survivors
- Person C lives far from the property and has no interest in it
- Person C receives the agreed sum from A, Person B is informed
- there is no written evidence of this, only a bank statement proving the payment
- then Person A dies
- A1, A2 and A3 ask B to initiate the gift, B also wants to do this
- however, C vetoes and wants double the amount already paid, Person B agrees and only wants to gift when the additional amount has been paid
- Person B’s living unit has been vacant for over 10 years, is neither occupied nor rented
- Person B does not contribute to any costs or maintenance/repairs of the property
- in case A1, A2 and A3 do not pay C again, B wants to sell their part of the property
- thus, B and C would receive money
- A1, A2 and A3 do not want B to sell their part and let strangers into the house
- B is old and sick and wants to get money for C who has high debts
- furthermore, A asked B and C on their deathbed to confirm the arrangement and wished that A2 would get the entire estate, A1 and A3 would have other equal shares and also no interest in the “shack”
- B originally received the property as a full gift before A and C came into the picture
- and it is affecting our health because we are paying money for something we cannot use, ongoing costs for everything
- and it also hurts because C didn’t have to make the deal with A if he wanted more money
- instead, C is now exploiting A’s death and says afterward that he wants more

The house is currently in such a condition that it could not be inhabited by more than 2 people. Part of it has been a shell construction for 30 years. Therefore, I could not even move in with my family without investing at least €250,000. With the additional payment to party C, I would have to take out more than €300,000 in credit. And that with inflation, economic crisis, and without my and my husband's wages being raised.

We don’t want a partition auction, partial sale, and we also don’t want nothing to happen because this house is currently completely empty and thus its potential is being wasted. Then you might as well sell everything.

At point 5 you write that one could influence the amount of a payout through a carefully chosen expert. How is that supposed to work? Doesn’t every expert make the same appraisal?

Yes, and with A's death, all other parties moved out of the house. The woman (A1) cannot maintain a 220 sqm house without payments from B at all. B currently pays nothing and the wife of A carries all the burdens. Or rather now all heirs. B and C want money and B is old and sick and C has high debts. So A1, A2 and A3 are the scapegoats of the family. Especially since A3 is just in their early twenties and too young to decide or assess such things.

B and C also think that no investment has to be made in the house. So we can’t avoid an appraisal, right?

In a first legal consultation, we were advised not to wait for B’s death. That was actually my thought because then A2 and A3 would inherit further shares of the house. But the lawyer said C could persuade B to make a will to the disadvantage of A2 and A3. Because the compulsory portion that would still be due to us would be extremely low.

I hope this is somewhat clearer now?!

Thanks for further information and answers!
 

ypg

2024-10-06 01:35:43
  • #6

Why, there is one after all!


..


You want no judgment here. But you are making one yourself!

It may not hold legally, but morally:


You, who see yourselves as scapegoats, are yourselves like A beneficiaries of a gift from B.
You don’t like that C is still there, holding out their hands.


I now see the classic inheritance story here, where an ex-partner (B) with a child (C) still plays a role. Of course, it could be different, but the mentioned inheritance claims read that way.


That may not be feasible for you, but that has nothing to do with the constellation. Then you have to sell.


My advice: completely separate C from the matter, also your personal relationships with A and B, and especially your judgments regarding C and B.
Only facts count!
Get yourself a manager who handles everything and be glad when each of you ends up with a little extra in your account.
 

Similar topics
27.02.2015Is property financing feasible?56
23.04.2015Does this donation bring advantages or disadvantages?21
12.10.2015Plot with some special features - various questions34
10.04.2016divide a long, narrow plot12
15.04.2016Costs for extension and partial modernization of existing property32
29.04.2016Purchase contract / Division of property / How to determine the land21
17.11.2016Sell apartments or keep them?36
16.09.2016False information about the property in the exposé39
12.07.2017Heavily overgrown property - what is the best way to proceed?22
31.07.2017Large plot, additional planting opportunities available - Investor?13
12.09.2019Sell the property completely or partial sale with investment?183
13.02.2019How to formulate a bid for a property?48
25.10.2019Gift / Semi-detached house / Land register23
23.04.2020Land available - how to use it?51
25.10.2021Buying a house from grandma or waiting for the inheritance?27
18.12.2021Sell house and property to daughter: save real estate transfer tax?16
30.03.2022Developer New Build: Buy two apartments and then combine them18
29.07.2022Inheritance semi-detached house - Will or land register decisive?47
10.08.2022Consultation for house purchase from an inheritance community, built in 1967, 230 sqm unrenovated11
16.08.2024Buy land with cash, construction through KfW/NRW Bank27

Oben