Yeah the estate isn’t settled. The house is still part of the estate and in the dads name. The timeshare is part of the estate in the dads name.
Its more a question for a lawyer. What happens if an estate isn’t setttled for 12 years and a debtor tries to collect a debt on the estate.
What happens for debts incurred AFTER the death ? Is the estate liable for debts incurred after death?
OTOH … Practically … do timeshares aggressively try to collect debts for special asssessments on deceased owners?
More questions than answers. Its still theoretical though since thre isn’t a special assement YET.
I’ll have to check but I don’t recall seeing this timeshare mentioned in his will.
It was bought together with my mother and they divorced many years prior. I don’t recall it ever being mentioned in the divorce. And it was never mentioned by her lawyer who did the arraignments after she died. Maybe they will go after her for half?
Of the maybe 5,000 timeshare owners, I would be low on the list of ones they go after, even if they have any rights for anything beyond the property itself. And this IF seems pretty sketchy at best.
I’m sure the timeshare contract would hold the owners responsible for debts against the timeshare. Its not secured but they can still come after the owners for debts.
I don’t think it really matters if the timeshare is / isn’t in the will or divorce documents. If its legally in the fathers name then his estate owns it and its debts are the responsibility of the estate.
An unsecured debt would not have a high position versus other debts but if the house is worth money debts could potentially force the sale of the house to collect the money. (I think… )
But IANAL and as far as I know nobody here is a lawyer… so the opinions here don’t really get you much.
These are questions for lawyers to answer if/when necessary.
You seem pretty sure of yourself. I don’t really see why you posted here in the first place. Everyone has brought up a bunch of good points and you just keep returning to this claim that they wouldn’t bother going after you. If you are so sure that’s the case and aren’t actually worried, why did you ask us for our thoughts?
My question was more towards what happens to this and millions of other older buildings in this country after a certain point in time when either repair costs are so much that owners would be forced to abandon their ownership if they don’t have the money to pay, or repair costs are more than what the building is worth.
I’m not the the one that asked about my personal liability for paying for repairs, or that they would go after a house still in my fathers name. Other posters interjected that, and while interesting to ponder, a bit off topic.
Sale prices of 50 year old condos aren’t that much less than in 10 year old buildings, yet their future lifespan is much less. Why don’t appraisals take any of this into consideration?
In well-run condo buildings, they’ve thought ahead and collected maintenance money ahead of time all along, rather than deferring it all for 50 years then trying to catch up. Not every building is that well run though. Developers tend to want to make the monthly carry as low as possible. I bet it’s even worse in a timeshare.
I dunno. I don’t think they ever let it get so bad that it’s a teardown. I’m thinking of NYC condo and co-op buildings here. If it’s got to be torn down I imagine it becomes a liquidation.
Think about the Miami building that collapsed and which wasn’t even as old as this one. Aren’t most NYC skyscrapers built on a steel skeleton? That doesn’t deteriorate nearly as much as concrete and is probably easier to maintain and repair.
If a building goes into disrepair and is not maintained then eventually they are condemned and eventaully torn down. I don’t know how often that will happen with large highrises where 100’s of people live though. Usually people will want to pay money for repairs to not lose their homes. Thats easier to get done with 100’s of peoples homes at stake.
the “future lifespan” of a building really varies. 50 year old condos aren’t simply disposable tear downs. there are many 100+ year old highrise buildings.
If theres known / documented structural damage then appraisals should take that into account. If a higrise is cement/rebar construction that has known problems then that should be taken into account.
I bet you good money the value in those condos is going to severely suffer after the report you cited.
The issue is not deferring maintenance indefinitely. My house is 100+ years old and still standing. You pay as you go, although I’m sure at ~1%/year for maintenance, the expenses have been quite substantial over the years.
