Co-Executor Refusing to Sell Estate Property? What Executors Can Do
The starting point is not simply whether the other executor is being difficult. It is to establish who has proved the will, exactly what step is being withheld, why it is being withheld and what the continuing deadlock is costing the estate.
Real Estate Concurrence vs. Independent Action
For a contract to sell or convey estate land, first check which executors have proved the will. Subject to the statutory qualifications, section 2(2) of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 generally requires the concurrence of all proving personal representatives or an order of the court. An executor who has not proved need not necessarily concur.
1. The Blockage
A common executor deadlock arises after probate has been granted and an estate property needs to be sold, but one of the proving executors will not cooperate.
The disagreement may concern:
- which estate agent should be instructed;
- the asking price or accepting price reductions;
- whether the property should be sold at all;
- whether a particular offer should be accepted;
- whether works or renovations should be carried out before sale;
- the terms of the contract of sale;
- execution of the TR1 transfer deed; or
- treatment and division of the sale proceeds.
Where there is more than one proving personal representative, section 2(2) of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 is critical. Subject to statutory provisions, a conveyance of real estate by personal representatives, or a contract for such a conveyance, generally requires the concurrence of all the personal representatives unless the court otherwise orders.
Where probate was granted to only one or some named executors, the proving executor or executors can generally act without the concurrence of a named executor who has not proved, whether or not power was reserved.
The practical question: Who has proved the will, what precise act is being withheld, and what is actually preventing agreement?
2. The Stakes
Delay can turn an ordinary disagreement about sale strategy into a significant estate-administration problem.
An unsold property may generate ongoing expenditure and risk:
- unoccupied property insurance premiums;
- council tax (including empty homes premiums where statutory exemptions expire);
- utilities and standing charges;
- maintenance, clearance, and security expenses;
- mortgage interest or financing penalties;
- risk of deterioration;
- lost buyer opportunities or collapsed chains; and
- additional legal and administration fees.
Under section 25 of the Administration of Estates Act 1925, personal representatives have a duty to collect and get in the estate and administer it according to law. That does not mean an executor must accept the first offer received or sell at any price; a genuine concern about value or proposed terms requires proper investigation.
However, prolonged inactivity should be capable of objective explanation. Where progress remains stalled, recording the reasons and ongoing expenditure provides an administrative baseline for assessing proportionate action.
A simple schedule of actual bills and reasonable estimates converts an emotional dispute into an objective administration metric:
Insurance + Council Tax + Utilities + Finance Charges + Maintenance + Security = Estimated Monthly Carrying CostThis is an administrative metric, not a calculation of recoverable loss. Avoid counting one-off expenditure as a recurring monthly cost.
3. What Needs Establishing
Before escalating the dispute, the executor should identify the precise factual and procedural position.
1. Who holds the Grant?
Establish which executors were named in the will, which proved, whether power was reserved to another executor, and whether there has subsequently been any change in representation. An executor named in the will who has not proved is not in the same procedural position as a proving co-executor named on the Grant.
2. What exactly is being refused?
There is an important difference between refusing to instruct an agent, disagreeing about listing price, rejecting a specific offer, refusing to exchange contracts, refusing to execute the transfer deed, and refusing to deal with sale proceeds. The response depends on where the sale has stalled.
3. What valuation evidence exists?
Assemble the probate value, current estate-agent market appraisals, any formal RICS valuation obtained, marketing history, offers received, agent recommendations, and property condition reports. Independent evidence makes a price disagreement easier to analyse than competing family opinions.
4. Why is the other executor refusing?
Possible reasons include concern that the property is marketed below value, disagreement over timing, occupation disputes, an asserted beneficial interest, pressure from beneficiaries, or a proposal that a beneficiary receive the property.
Where a beneficiary seeks the property instead of sale proceeds, section 41 of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 makes appropriation relevant. Whether it is suitable is fact-sensitive: valuation, estate liabilities, beneficiaries’ entitlements, and the statutory consent and protection safeguards all require consideration.
5. What is the effect of delay?
Record ongoing expenditure and any endangered buyer opportunities. This provides an objective basis for deciding whether further delay remains proportionate.
4. Available Non-Court Routes
A property-sale deadlock does not automatically require removal proceedings or immediate litigation. Several structured, proportionate steps can be explored first:
Independent Appraisal Framework
If price is the central issue, executors can agree a jointly instructed valuer, two independent market appraisals, or a defined marketing period with fixed review dates, replacing competing opinions with an evidence-based decision framework.
Written Sale Protocol
Record the chosen agent, initial asking price, review schedule, process for evaluating offers, and who communicates with the conveyancer. This prevents each conveyancing milestone from becoming a fresh dispute.
A Focused Written Proposal
Where one executor will not engage, a structured written proposal should set out:
- the proposed transaction step;
- the evidence supporting it;
- the monthly carrying costs currently being incurred;
- the consequences of further delay on the estate;
- the alternative proposal requested from the objecting executor; and
- a reasonable, defined period for response.
Check for a wider dispute: Refusal to sign may only be the visible symptom of a dispute over estate accounts, allegations against another executor, or occupation. Those issues should be isolated and addressed separately.
5. The Litigation Boundary
Non-court measures may eventually reach their limit where a proving executor continues to withhold required concurrence and no agreed route forward exists.
Section 2(2) of the Administration of Estates Act 1925 recognises the possibility of a court order where concurrence cannot be obtained. The application and order sought depend on the facts; the provision does not itself dictate a standard order approving a sale or directing execution.
Section 39 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 is a secondary enforcement mechanism. It may become relevant only after a court has ordered a person to execute a document and that person then neglects or refuses to comply. The court may then nominate another person to execute the transfer. It is not the initial application to resolve an executor disagreement.
Where the dispute reflects a wider failure of administration, section 50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 (removal or substitution of an executor) may also need consideration. Removal is a discretionary remedy and is not automatically granted because executors disagree.
Where contested court proceedings, substantive judicial determination or representation on the court record become necessary, the matter falls outside Human Law's non-court scope and specialist litigation representation may be required.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can one executor sell a property without the other?
It depends who has proved the will. Where two or more personal representatives have proved, a contract for sale or conveyance of estate land generally needs all their concurrence under Section 2(2) of the Administration of Estates Act 1925, or an order of the court. Where probate was granted to only one or some named executors, the proving executor or executors can generally act without the concurrence of a named executor who has not proved, whether or not power was reserved.
What can I do if my co-executor refuses to sign the transfer deed?
First check whether that executor's concurrence is required, what transaction step is blocked and why. Gather the Grant, sale terms, valuation evidence and correspondence, then propose a clear written route to agreement. If a proving executor still withholds required concurrence, legal advice on possible court intervention may be needed.
Can a co-executor be held personally responsible for costs caused by delay?
Possibly, but delay alone does not automatically create personal liability or an adverse costs order. The facts, the executor's reasons, evidence of any loss and the court's assessment would matter. A carrying-cost schedule helps document the estate's ongoing expenditure; it is not itself proof of recoverable loss.