Apologies if this has been asked ad nauseum before -
A family member is looking into signing over her house to her (adult) child now, rather than just leaving the house to her child in her will.
Situation as it stands is that the house is to be left solely to this child in the will anyway, but would there be any benefits (or drawbacks) in signing it over now?
It is a given at the moment that no other children of this person would try to lay claim to the house or dispute the will, all are agreed that the house will pass to this particular child, but of course we all know how these things could change in years to come. I think the person in question would like to a) ensure there is no wrangling after her death over the house and her will, and b) that the inheritor won't be hit with some legal roadblocks/inheritance taxes/prolonged length of time trying to sort out deeds etc.
Would it be an easier/quicker/less cumbersome process to sign the house over now rather than wait and leave it pass on via the will or are there negative implications to doing so now - i.e. a second property being in the name of the child (possible second property taxes, it being seen as an
"asset" of the child, when it's really not an asset they could be tapping into until it's actually theirs after the passing away of the person in question, etc).
The house would to all intents and purposes remain in the possession of the person, and they will continue to live there for the rest of their lives, but the legal end of things would see the house being put into the child's name now. If the situation arose where the sale of the house was neccessitated to fund healthcare/nursing home fees etc, it would of course be sold to fund it, but what implications would there be then, given that the house would be in the name of the child rather than the parent who needs the funds? As it stands, the plan is for this house to remain in the family and be passed from this child in question down to her own (adult) child when the time comes etc, and we don't forsee a situation barring some catastrophe as mentioned above (funding of healthcare) where the house will ever leave the possession of the family.
They will of course be consulting a solicitor, but they'd like to get an idea of what the postives and negatives to the idea are before they go in.
Any advice or thoughts much appreciated.
A family member is looking into signing over her house to her (adult) child now, rather than just leaving the house to her child in her will.
Situation as it stands is that the house is to be left solely to this child in the will anyway, but would there be any benefits (or drawbacks) in signing it over now?
It is a given at the moment that no other children of this person would try to lay claim to the house or dispute the will, all are agreed that the house will pass to this particular child, but of course we all know how these things could change in years to come. I think the person in question would like to a) ensure there is no wrangling after her death over the house and her will, and b) that the inheritor won't be hit with some legal roadblocks/inheritance taxes/prolonged length of time trying to sort out deeds etc.
Would it be an easier/quicker/less cumbersome process to sign the house over now rather than wait and leave it pass on via the will or are there negative implications to doing so now - i.e. a second property being in the name of the child (possible second property taxes, it being seen as an
"asset" of the child, when it's really not an asset they could be tapping into until it's actually theirs after the passing away of the person in question, etc).
The house would to all intents and purposes remain in the possession of the person, and they will continue to live there for the rest of their lives, but the legal end of things would see the house being put into the child's name now. If the situation arose where the sale of the house was neccessitated to fund healthcare/nursing home fees etc, it would of course be sold to fund it, but what implications would there be then, given that the house would be in the name of the child rather than the parent who needs the funds? As it stands, the plan is for this house to remain in the family and be passed from this child in question down to her own (adult) child when the time comes etc, and we don't forsee a situation barring some catastrophe as mentioned above (funding of healthcare) where the house will ever leave the possession of the family.
They will of course be consulting a solicitor, but they'd like to get an idea of what the postives and negatives to the idea are before they go in.
Any advice or thoughts much appreciated.