Help me tease out a complicated property situation

[AprilTN]

Dh's grandparents passed away in 1970 and 1975ish.  They owned a farm and a house on the property.  They had 7 children.  The executor was the oldest sibling.  They left the property to all the children, but in the will they specified that the disabled sibling was allowed to live in the property until his death, and then it could be sold.  

Dh's mother moved in with the disabled sibling when he needed care, because he couldn't drive and had trouble with many adult-type tasks.  Everyone was happy with the situation.  

Dh's mom and uncle paid the property taxes each year.  Dh's mom also kept up the property at her own expense, such as keeping the fields mowed and maintaining the long gravel driveway that needed new gravel every year or so, as well as maintaining the house.  

Disabled uncle passed away late 2016.  At that time all the beneficiaries were fine with dh's mom staying on the property.  We were NOT in favor of that.  We wanted her to move to a place closer to us and a place that didn't need so much care.  She was in bad health (COPD) and almost 80, wasn't really able to drive, could barely walk, so it was a pain.  

Dh's mother passed away December 2018.  She had enough money saved for her funeral, and a little left over.  But it wasn't a big estate.  She had an older car that we gave to someone in the family that needed it.  

Now the executor of the grandparents' estate (the executor is now dh's cousin; dh's mom never owned it, she was a beneficiary) has come to us wanting us to pay the property taxes for last year.  

On one hand we feel like we should pay it because dh's mom would have paid it if she were alive.  BUT she is not alive, and we personally think the taxes were handled improperly all along.  Also, she was not technically responsible on her own to pay the taxes or do any upkeep, there was no agreement, she just did it.  

Also, in the last weeks before dh's mom passed away, a cousin that was destitute moved in with dh's mom, and is now living in the house.  She will not be able to upkeep anything nor pay any future taxes.  So dh and I want the place to be sold, (to be fair, we wanted it sold before mil died) but we are getting pushback on selling the property.  

Our problem is that the longer the property sits unmaintained, the lower in value it will go, and also we don't know who will pay the taxes in the years going forward.  If we pay them for 2018, then technically the cousin that is refusing to leave will need to pay them next year, but she has no money whatsoever.  

I know we need to talk to an attorney but I thought I'd get your input because I can't quit thinking about it.  Ugh.

[PrincessMommy]

I don't know a lot about such situations but I think that the estate should have been paying the property taxes all along.  I would be tempted send them a bill for back-taxes since your mom never owned the property and she was there as a care-giver for her sibling. 

[gardenmom5]

I agree, your mother never should have been paying taxes - OR upkeep of the property out of her personal pocket.  that is something all the beneficiaries should have had an equal share to do.   

she was there as a caregiver for disabled sibling - who was allowed to live there rent free.  so during that time, she should have had a zero sum cost for living there.  "free rent" in return for caregiving.   she lived there two years, I assume rent free - so the estate could have conceivably charged her rent.  considering she paid the taxes and maintenance - that she also worked out to a zero sum cost, and possibly due  a refund.

 for 2018 - I would consider paying ONLY her "share" of the taxes -  and charge the estate for how much she spent for maintenance minus her "share" of that.

I would talk to a property or estate lawyer.

[Carol in Cal.]

There is the legal stuff and the moral stuff ,and it's complicated.

Legally I don't think you owe those taxes, and neither did your mom.  OTOH, the family might look at them as kind of like rent.  IOW, she lived there without having to pay rent, but paid the taxes in lieu of rent (along with some upkeep.)  It's an informal arrangement but one that carried through for a long time.  My guess, though, is that the real issue is that the family thinks that she had an estate and that the estate should pay the taxes for the last year that she lived there.  In which case what you do is say, hey look, she did not actually have an estate, and we generously gave her car to XXX which was pretty much all she had, so we are really not in a position to pay these taxes from her estate. 

Then the follow up question is, what counter proposal do you have?  Because that is what might fix this.  If the counter proposal is that the families split the taxes evenly, would that give rise to any resentment?  Are you significantly better off than the rest, in which case it would be a generous thing to do, or not, in which case it would be a tremendously unfair hardship?  Also, you might suggest that others who want to keep the old place should buy you out over a period of time.

[Janeway]

I think the house should be sold and last years taxes should be paid out of the sale. The most amount of compromise I would make it allow the taxes to be taken out of the portion of money your MIL would get from the sale. I would not pay taxes without the house sold. That cousin likely won't move and there will be a huge uphill battle. Saying the tax money must come out of the earnings from the sale will either get them to move forward with the sale or admit it won't be sold therefore, the loss of the property costs, well, ..here is the thing..I bet cousin does not move out. The house won't be sold for years and when it is sold, it will need a lot in repairs and back taxes. Then you all will get stuck paying for that. So..you all will be losing money all over the place. They will either sell now because they need the money for the taxes, or they will let it sit, losing value, which comes out of what your husband will inherit later. So, I am just saying..do not pay the taxes now.

[Tap]

Is there any chance that the heirs would agree to allowing the house to be redistributed. Split the heirs into two groups. Those who want to keep the property, and those who don't.  Allow those who want to keep the house, to buy out those who don't want to keep it.  Redo the title to reflect that change so there is no liability on the behalf of those who don't want the responsibility.  

If they can't afford this, or are not willing to get a loan, then insist the house be sold and the assets distributed.

[Carol in Cal.]

I wonder whether the property is sentimental to some.  That can complicate things.

If it looks like a respite property that is informally available to anyone in the family who is in need, and if it's not terribly expensive to keep it that way, it might be reasonable for some or all to do so.  I know a family with property like this--a decently large farmland in a nice weather area that yields a little income and has several dwellings with rotating related folks living in them.  It's a tough model to make work in our individualistic society but it can be really helpful.  Actually, now that I think about it I know another family with horsey property like that.

What makes it tricky is when the matriarch/patriarch who originally set this up don't pass on the values and clarity that they had to everyone in the next generations.  Or when expenses get really large down the road.  

[Bootsie]

This is a situation in which I would get some legal advice.  You have a number of things that are coming into play:  property law in your state, inheritance laws in your state, federal income taxes, state income taxes, which could be complicated by the fact that you say it was a farm and a house, so the property in questions may go beyond a homestead.