Residual land that isn't sold

If some land falls into the residual of a will that has 4 beneficiaries in it and can't be sold as it's landlocked does that land end up then in all the beneficiaries names?

The executor has made every attempt to sell but the two farmers that could have access aren't interested & costs to get a right of way would be huge.

How would operating the land work going forward with who could do what on it then? Would agreement need to be sought if one of the four wanted to put cattle on it or claim any grants? Shall we say all four aren't exactly on best terms.

How would this work?

Yes, it belongs to the four residuary beneficiaries jointly.

They have to agree about how to manage it. If they can't agree it gets neglected. None of the owners has a right to graze cattle on the land (or use it in any way) if the other owners object.

surely if it is locked by land owned by others all around it that the dead owner has a right of way?

The deceased owner willed the land around this residual land to his son who is also a residual beneficiary.. This son and one other farmer border the land...This residual land was offered by the executor to the son as first dibs to buy at estate valuation as the other 3 beneficiaries would not sign it over to him Free but for a minimal amount. But this beneficiary said no, he didn't want the residual land so only option was to sell if the other farmer with access wanted it which he doesn't.

So the other three beneficiaries have concerns as they don't live locally that the land could get used without agreement. They absolutely do not get on.

Tricky one I guess... How difficult Are access passes to get.

The other three beneficiaries don't want the land to be used without agreement, but if I have understood correctly the only people who could possibly have any interest in using it are the two adjacent landowners — nobody else has access to it. There's no evidence that either of them want to use it — certainly neither of them wants to buy it.

However, one of the adjacent owners is alse a co-owner of this land. We're told that the other three beneficiaries "would not sign it over to him free", which suggests that maybe he asked for that, or hoped for that. And perhaps the other three now feel that this indicates that he has some interest in the land, and as the only co-owner on the ground, might now feel that he can just use it, because who will stop him?

First point to note is that this is not the executor's problem, and he shouldn't let them make it his problem. This has nothing to do with the administration of the estate. If the land is not going to be sold out of the estate then it should be transferred over to the co-owners, and the transfer registered. Let them argue among themselves about who gets to use the land and on what terms; there is no reason to let this hold up the completion of the administration of the estate.

Who will prevent the co-owner who owns the adjacent land from using this land, if he is minded to? The other co-owners, is the answer, and if they're not going to do it then nobody will do it for them. As they don't get on, they probably won't be able to agree among themselves on measures to stop the land being used, so if the co-owner with the adjacent land wants to use it he probably, in practice, can. Which, in the great scheme of things, looks like a better outcome than the land being neglected, and becoming rank and weed-infested.

None of this is the executor's fault. The testator made the decision to carve out an an unmarketable property and leave it to a bunch of co-owners who don't get on with one another. That is now working out pretty much as you would expect. God knows what he was thinking.

Thank you so much TomEdison and your post outlines exactly the position. Leave them to it is all that can be done.

I suppose getting a pass through this beneficiaries land or the other farmer would be pricey and probably be contested .. That's the only way to sell to the open market if a right of way was obtained.

Yes it wasn't a wise idea of the deceased but it is what it is now.