More to the point, make sure she signs (or at least initials) every mother&^%$ing page of the document, not just the “Signature” page.
IANAL either, but I thought that’s the was it was always done?
From a buyer’s standpoint, every day that the seller doesn’t sign is a day where some other bidder can enter the picture and drive the price up. I’m not saying that it wouldn’t put a bad taste in my mouth as a seller, but I understand the reasoning and wouldn’t describe it as sketchy.
I’m in the real estate industry and honestly for her share in this property and with the obvious fact that apparently none of the heirs is materially interested in maintaining or marketing the property or even paying the property taxes I think there is little reason to suspect anything here. I also would laugh at the thought of involving a lawyer over 1/28th of a parcel of land.
If I found myself in ownership of a divided parcel like that (and this actually happened because of a relative dying and me inheriting in stirpes through a pre-deceased relative) and we jumped at the first real estate developer offering to buy the property. It was half a country away, and for various reasons there was no real benefit to us trying to do anything with it given the divided ownership.
If the assessed value of the property is $30k and it has $7k in back property taxes that in itself in many States could mean that you’ve not paid property taxes in a really long time. That could mean you’re fairly close to having it sold in a tax sale.
After a tax sale pays off the arrears and disposition costs, what happens to the net proceeds? Would they fall into the estate? If so, let it be sold at the tax sale and see what comes of it. The exposure is only a hundred bucks.
Thanks for all your insights, guys. Martin Hyde, you’re right, the taxes haven’t been paid since 2007. I believe the girl and her brother with the 50% interest are the ones trying to sell out quickly and pushing their cousins to sign. Supposedly they will get the money in time for Christmas and that’s why they’re all in such a hurry to have this done.
It turns out my daughter already signed the document to sell her share months ago. The original deadline was February and all the others had signed by then. At the time, it was presented to her as a windfall $100 from her grandparents’ estate. She didn’t grow up with them and only reconnected with the family at her dad’s funeral, so it was a big surprise to her and better than the $0 that she expected. The only reason it’s not a done deal already is that her father was the original beneficiary so she has to sign this claim to his estate.
I think that when the two cousins suddenly have $xxxx? and the rest have $100 there will be a lot of family drama, but fortunately we won’t be involved.
If nothing else, it never benefits me to sign quickly, especially without reading and agreeing with everything I’m signing. A legal transaction done properly takes the time it takes.
Having this many people “owning” a property sounds like a recipe for family drama. I hope to God I never end up owning a 28th share or whatever in a property.
If 1/28 is $100, then the two big winners in this are going to get $800 each (25% of $2800 + $100). If the price of a nice TV is really going to cause family strife, maybe it’s for the best that you don’t live near these guys.
She’s being set up.
If she signs a paper saying that your deceased partner never acknowledged paternity, she will receive nothing because she will have signed away her rights to inherit from her father.
Thanks, Bass Chick. When we insisted, they sent us a new form stating that he had acknowledged paternity by signing the birth certificate.
Also, I don’t think for a minute that the 50% people will get $800. I think they have a separate deal to sell their half for a lot more. The only documentation of the sale I saw pertained to the claimants to the half divided into 14.
I actually doubt this. I’m not saying to be naïve, but I think in some cases people unfamiliar with certain types of legal transactions assume things like this over everything.
Minor inaccuracies in legal documents happen surprisingly often, and are usually just an indicator of incompetence.
As for the buyer yes, most he most likely stands to benefit from the sale. Otherwise he would be foolish to buy the property. At the same time, the 1/14th owners and even most likely the two who own 50% probably cannot do much with the property. Evidence of this is the property taxes not having been paid in 5 years and nothing being done with the property. Without knowing what the purchaser intends to do, it’s very likely however he plans to make more money off the property is simply not an available option to the sellers in this case.
Yes, you may be able to get more money, but small real estate developers walk the moment a seller gets it in their mind that they are going to milk a well financed buyer. For example in my commercial real estate firm we had bought up some extremely dilapidated riverfront property and built offices. We also bought some ramshackle houses that were across the street and had been converted years ago into multi-unit apartment buildings. We tore those down to develop as parking lots and more commercial space to provide an area for a restaurant to open up and cater to the office workers. One land lord of one of the houses, for a dilapidated house he was earning around $400/month in rent off of told us he wouldn’t sell for less than $1.5m.
That house is still there and isn’t even rented any longer, and may even be condemned soon. The guy saw buyers and he assumed because we had invested a good bit of money in that neighborhood he could make us pay something crazy, he was wrong. I doubt very seriously there is a huge amount of money trading hands over this property, but it’s hard to say without knowing where it is located.
With a maximum potential benefit of $100, this is isn’t worth signing ever.
I’d be inclined to agree, except that the attorney involved seems VERY willing to alter documents once they’ve been signed, which would leave me wondering just what OP’s daughter’s signature might get attached to once said attorney has it.
Since the papers are already signed, it’s strictly a discussion out of curiousity at this point, I suppose.
Question for the real estate/law types. In this type of divided ownership of a parcel of land that is presumably not practical to divide, is it typical for a buyer to reach seperate deals with each owner, as seems to be the case here?
I’m not clear how property can have code violations - if the trailer is hauled off and demolished, it’s empty land, right? Or could be stripped of other fixtures?
There’s something very fishy going on here, especially with the insistence on now-Now-NOW for the deal. If the property’s worth ca. $1500 net now, it will be worth that much a week from now, a month, a year. I would make the buyer wait until you can review all the relevant papers and issues, and if he won’t make him explain why.
The house has been empty for 5 years and has/had water damage and mold. I’m sure no one was cutting the grass, etc, and it’s not unlikely that there were junk cars and toilets on the lawn or whatever.