I'm hoping someone can answer my question regarding acting as administrators to an estate. There are three acting administrators and two who waived their rights in the family. Our father passed away in February and mom passed in May, neither one leaving a will. This is in the state of Virginia and all outstanding bills have been paid. One administrator wants to sell all the real estate and the rest of us do not. Can she take this to court and order the property sold forcibly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harmie1954

I'm hoping someone can answer my question regarding acting as administrators to an estate. There are three acting administrators and two who waived their rights in the family. Our father passed away in February and mom passed in May, neither one leaving a will. This is in the state of Virginia and all outstanding bills have been paid. One administrator wants to sell all the real estate and the rest of us do not. Can she take this to court and order the property sold forcibly.

---

I'm a little confused by the language here - are there FIVE heirs (I would presume natural children). THREE are administering the estates and TWO have waived.?

ONE wants to sell real estate and FOUR do not?

If you can't come to an agreement the Probate Court will settle it for you - probably some sort of buy-out of the one's interest by the other four with other estate assets.

Thank you Judy for your quick response. Yes, there are 3 admins and 2 waived, all natural children. My question now is what do you mean by other estate assets? She is asking us for 40 thousand dollars for her fifth and I don't think she will take anything less. If we do not have 40 thousand to give her, will we be forced to see the property?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harmie1954

Thank you Judy for your quick response. Yes, there are 3 admins and 2 waived, all natural children. My question now is what do you mean by other estate assets? She is asking us for 40 thousand dollars for her fifth and I don't think she will take anything less. If we do not have 40 thousand to give her, will we be forced to see the property?

---

Glad I got it right - sometimes I have to almost parrot the question to make sure I understand. Who set the price per share? Did she? Has the property been independently appraised? A Judge will have to make a determination as to value if you cannot agree among yourselves.

As far as estate assets - Instead of, for example, receiving $40,000 (if that is a fair per share value for the property) AND $20,000, you individually would receive your share of the property, no cash ($20,000) and owe her the other $20,000.

You and the 3 others would take the balance of the inheritance in real estate and the 5th person would take primarily cash, stocks, whatever.

It would undoubtedly be the job of the Court to come up with equitable figures.

Judy, once again I thank you for kindly answering my questions. I thought I'd clarify something for you as your answer to my question makes perfect sense to me. My sister, one of the admins is basing her 1/5 of the value of the property with last years real estate tax tickets. The land has not been surveyed since it was purchased 50 years ago and the land totals around 80 acres. One other question I have and I promise, I'll leave you alone. If 4 out of 5 of us want our brother to have the family home and the person who wants her 1/5 is the only one who will not agree to this, does this mean it doesn't matter what we want and we'll just have to give her what she wants, which is forty thousand dollars?

Hello h:

Judy will be along in a minute... But I have $.02.

It seems to me that EVERYBODY can be satisfied, assuming the property is WORTH what you THINK it is. What the property WAS appraised at, even last year, has NOTHING to do with its present worth. An ASSESSMENT (tax tickets?? ) is NOT an appraisal. So, the very FIRST thing to do, is have it surveyed and appraised.

Assuming it IS worth the $200,000 that the one sibling THINKS its worth, then there's a deal in the making... The FIVE of you need to sell the property to the ONE brother you want to have it. He can easily get a loan for $40,000 on a property that's worth $200,000, and pay off the sibling.

There's lots of different ways this can work to satisfy everybody.. But, I suspect that things will change when the appraisal comes in. Then you'll have a REAL number to work from, instead of one that was made up by the greedy sibling.

I don't know what the remaining three of you are going to do. I wish I had siblings like you.

excon

Excon beat me to it, but that's the best solution. If the recalcitrant heir want to cash out now, then the other 4 can buy her out.

You can each put upo $10K for her share, or seel it to the one brother or whatever. The point is that you buy her out.

I agree with ex-con. Get the property appraised. THEN go from there.

If there's no dispute with neighbors, etc about property lines or anything I wouldn't spend the money on a survey just yet. It could be quite costly for an 80 acre chunk of land and, again unless there's some question about property lines, etc, wouldn't have much, if any effect on the appraised value.

Make sure that someone other than the
"greedy" sister orders the appraisal and deals with getting the appraiser on the property, etc. With privately ordered appraisals it's not uncommon for the value to come out higher or lower based on what you tell the appriaser you're after. I can explain that in more detail if you have questions about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockinmommy

I agree with ex-con. Get the property appraised. THEN go from there.

If there's no dispute with neighbors, etc about property lines or anything I wouldn't spend the money on a survey just yet. It could be quite costly for an 80 acre chunk of land and, again unless there's some question about property lines, etc, wouldn't have much, if any effect on the appraised value.

Make sure that someone other than the
"greedy" sister orders the appraisal and deals with getting the appraiser on the property, etc. With privately ordered appraisals it's not uncommon for the value to come out higher or lower based on what you tell the appriaser you're after. I can explain that in more detail if you have questions about it.

---

That's why I suggest right away that it be appraised. I would go with someone recommended by the Court, not an independent.

Anyway, with this situation, there is already a problem, I think I would get a survey done. It'll come out of the estate's money but I think things could get dicey.

- and this is just my 2 cents.

Thanks to everyone for your answers to my questions. I know having the land appraised and surveyed is going to be quite expensive, however I do not see a way out of it. I also see the need to have an outside source do the survey. I'm not sure my sis will agree with this as her hubby is an attorney himself and I'm sure he's coaching her on what to do next every step of the way. The tax assessment values are very low compared to the real value of the property. This is mostly farm land and part of it is not worth a lot as it's full of rocks and the road to the farm is pretty bad as in you have to have a 4x4 and hope it's of the ground or it's going to drag. Our daddy considered farming his hobby and none of us have the time or interest in farming and we would hate to see the land grow up with brush and such. Our brother has lived at the family home all his life (he's 39) and worked the farm for our parents. He is now going to have to find a job and he is the only one of us who does not own a home of his own. All but one of us feels he deserves the home and property it sits on. Will it be possible for the home to be his portion of the estate? That is our only concern, just to know he has the home as he truly deserves it.

Well, if an appraisal is going to come back way higher than the tax appraisal, then buying her out for $40,000 is probably getting out cheap. Once the appraisal is done I'm sure her price will go up.

Are you just mad at her because her behavior is being perceived as selfish in regards to the brother who lives there?

The more you tell us the more I think the suggestion for the brother to take out a $40,000 equity loan against the property and pay off sister is a better and better idea.

Are there other assets figuring into all of this, or is it just the property?

The question has been asked and not answered as to whether this real estate is the only asset of the estate or not.

The bottom line here is that you have 5 siblings each entitled to a share of the estate (assuming 1/5 each). It doesn't matter HOW the estate is distributed as long as each heir gets their 20%.

The proper way to do this is to get appraisals of all the assets and determine the value of each person's share. If one heir wants to cash out their share, then the executor needs to either sell off assets or the other heirs need to buy out that person's share.

While I would like to agree with the idea of paying her the $40K if that's all she wants, that may come back to haunt you if it's a low ball of the value of her share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rockinmommy

Well, if an appraisal is going to come back way higher than the tax appraisal, then buying her out for $40,000 is probably getting out cheap. Once the appraisal is done I'm sure her price will go up.

Are ya'll just mad at her because her behavior is being perceived as selfish in regards to the brother who lives there?

The more you tell us the more I think the suggestion for the brother to take out a $40,000 equity loan against the property and pay off sister is a better and better idea.

Are there other assets figuring into all of this, or is it just the property?

---

I asked about other estate assets right at the beginning and that question hasn't been answered. I think a lot of this depends on what other assets are in the estate.

Everyone is apparently entitled to 1/5th - in real estate or some other asset, which I think I've addressed.

Need more info -

And you know... surprisingly, no one has answered the original question. I am not a lawyer, but I believe that the one sibling can force a partition sale if that's the only way to get her part of the inheritance. This can be stopped by figuring out some other way of her getting her inheritance.

And personally, I dislike the characterization of the one sibling as "greedy". If the 40K is what she is entitled to under the terms of the will, it's not greedy for her to want that in cash. In fact, one could argue that the others are being greedy by trying to deprive her of her part of the inheritance in order to enrich the one brother.

And I do agree with Scott that if the 40K is not actually equivalent to her part of the inheritance, she won't have waived her right to the rest of it by taking the 40K. So figuring out what the estate is actually worth is probably the most important part right now.

First I agree with Froggy, that one heir can force a sale of the property to get her share. But it shouldn't come to that. It doesn't matter whether the other heirs buy her out or other assets are used just as long as she can get her share.

I also went back and reviewed this thread looking to see where anyone called her greedy. I agree with Froggy, she just wants her fair share.

But in looking over the previous posts, I'm still bothered by this statement of 3 admins and 2 who waived their rights. Since there was no will there should be no admins. If the estate was probated then the probate court will appoint an executor to make decisions on the dispersal of the estate. If the estate hasn't been probated then I'm not sure where anyone is getting the right to manage the estate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harmie1954

Our brother has lived at the family home all his life (he's 39) and worked the farm for our parents. He is now going to have to find a job and he is the only one of us who does not own a home of his own. All but one of us feels he deserves the home and property it sits on. Will it be possible for the home to be his portion of the estate? That is our only concern, just to know he has the home as he truely deserves it.

---

Hello again:

I said she was greedy. I still think she is. Maybe non-caring would have been a better description.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by froggy7

And you know... surprisingly, no one has answered the original question. I am not a lawyer, but I believe that the one sibling can force a partition sale if that's the only way to get her part of the inheritance. This can be stopped by figuring out some other way of her getting her inheritance.

And personally, I dislike the characterization of the one sibling as "greedy". If the 40K is what she is entitled to under the terms of the will, it's not greedy for her to want that in cash. In fact, one could argue that the others are being greedy by trying to deprive her of her part of the inheritance in order to enrich the one brother.

And I do agree with Scott that if the 40K is not actually equivalent to her part of the inheritance, she won't have waived her right to the rest of it by taking the 40K. So figuring out what the estate is actually worth is probably the most important part right now.

---

I thought I did answer this when I said the probate court would settle it - force a sale or not force a sale - and that the one person could receive more cash and less real estate. That's why I asked the questions I asked. It's going to come down to other assets, buying out the one sibling, what is fair value. If there are other assets I don't see a forced sale. If there are not, then the probate court will decide how to proceed.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear enough.

And I think money issues bring out the worst in people - including siblings. Also, there is no indication of what the prior family relationships were - this may just be a manifestation of old problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

I also went back and reviewed this thread looking to see where anyone called her greedy. I agree with Froggy, she just wants her fair share.

---

I called her "greedy", too. I was basically using that title just for clarification of who was who in the story. It gets confusing when you generically use "he" and "she".

I agree... I don't necessarily think she's being greedy. She wants what she is entitled to. It may seem greedy, when the other 3 are apparently (? ) willing to give / donate their shares to the brother who has lived in the home.

I agree with everyone else... ORIGINAL POSTER... what other assets are there, if any, in addition to this property?

Okay everyone, here goes. The family home and all of the land is valued at 200 thousand via tax assessment. There are a few pieces of old farm equipment that is valued at around 10 thousand, but we have not even discussed selling, but will I'm sure. We all went to the courthouse and the three sisters were appointed as administrators and the brothers waived their rights to settle all outstanding debts for our mom and dad. I do not know that this entitles us to anything other than that and we have already completed this. Personally, I don't care if everything is sold. The only thing I have ever asked for is to allow our brother to have the house. I guess we'll just sell part of the land in order to satisfy our sisters request for her portion and leave it at that. I'm not going to say she's greedy and I will not go into this any further. I've always tried to treat others as I want to be treated and am a firm believer that what goes around, will eventually come back to bite you sooner or later.

Ok, so the estate was submitted to probate. But you still haven't answered the question about the extent of the estate. You have mentioned that you have settled all outstanding debts. But where did the funds to do so come from? That all goes into the total value of the estate.

If the three sisters advanced their own funds to pay off the debts, then they need to be reimbursed from the proceeds of the estate.

And you can't use the tax assessment value in valuing the estate. That would be a violation of your fiduciary responsibility as an administrator. You have to get a real appraisal of the property.

So here's the sequence of events.

1) determine the value of the whole estate.
2) reduce that value by the debts owed by the estate.
3) further reduce that value by costs of administering the estate, e.g. atty fees, appraisal fees, etc.
4) determine the value of each heir's share

Once this has been done, you can decide how to fund the disbursement. The remaining heirs could buy ot the one heir who wants to cash out now. Or a portion of the property could be sold to provide that amount.