Subtitle, what's the best way to snarl up one's estate so no one owns anything outright and has to cooperate with all other heirs or successors?
If a guy was to leave multiple properties to multiple people, other than a trust, what would be the best way to leave it such that no one could use it or sell their portion unless they had complete agreement from all parties?
Hire an Attorney who practices in that area and make sure your intentions relating to the will are crystal clear, documented and the will filed.
Depends on the state, but in at least some places it is not possible to rope someone in forever; if one person wants to get out and the others don't agree or won't pay him the share value according to his appraiser, he can force them all to sell and split the proceeds. This happened in my family.
I've learned one thing after 40+years of surveying, and that's I know less about property law than I think I do. Every time I have one of these types of questions and chat with an attorney about it, I find my opinion was wrong or only partially correct.
"Subtitle, what’s the best way to snarl up one’s estate so no one owns anything outright and has to cooperate with all other heirs or successors?
If a guy was to leave multiple properties to multiple people, other than a trust, what would be the best way to leave it such that no one could use it or sell their portion unless they had complete agreement from all parties?"
Subtitle: If someone hated people and wanted to encourage fighting for man years until the assets get sold for nothing, how would they make that happen?
Google machine:
In Tenancy in Common, the ownership portion passes to the individual's estate at death. In Joint Tenancy, the title of the property passes to the surviving owner. Some states set Joint Tenancy as the default property ownership for married couples, while others use the Tenancy in Common model.
Around here Tenancy is Common is assumed. Joint Tenancy creates all sorts of complications, from what I have seen.
Granting life estate to multiple people might work, at least for a while. Working on one currently where the life estate will remain in effect until a family member provides the original death certificate, looks like it will go on for months if not years. It's interesting stuff. Not necessarily misanthropy.
Here down under you could use a covenant on the title
But I think it is generally not desirable to impose limits on the beneficiaries of an estate. It devalues the property, may cause problems long term and may mean they dont actually want the gift
If you are going to leave them something it is better to do it with as few restrictions as possible. Leave the new owners as free to enjoy the bequest as possible.
Can you incorporate property? I mean create a company and transfer to title to it and give shares out to whoever you want? I'm just spitballing here, have no idea about tax implications and on going costs related to incorporation. I also have a feeling that what I'm describing a trust in my ignorance.
On an unrelated matter, I had a boundary setout job recently and the lot was a tenancy in common. I had to explain to the owner that his lot isn't split in two because of the way that tenancy in common works. The funny thing is that he owned both shares of the lot under different companies but I'm not sure how exactly he can go about selling half of it without changing the title, which was the reason for the boundary setout.