6

Upon my death how do I physically write the actual release of debt without an attorney, so my children are not held responsible for my debts.

ohwilleke
  • 257,510
  • 16
  • 506
  • 896
Artemus hutchens
  • 83
  • 1
  • 1
  • 3

8 Answers8

39

Upon my death how do I physically write the actual release of debt without an attorney, so my children are not held responsible for my debts.

You should hire an attorney for a few hundred dollars, so the job is done right.

Even if you do nothing and your children do nothing, your children are not obligated to pay your debts out of anything other than your own assets at death, unless they have personally guaranteed those debts. And, if they have personally guaranteed those debts, you can't release them, only the creditor can do that.

If your children owe debts to you, you can release them from those debts. But, you should hire an attorney to do so in order to avoid ambiguity. The biggest question would normally be whether or not the discharge of debts owed by your children to you should count in the process of dividing up the assets you have left after the debts you owe to third-parties at death, or not.

ohwilleke
  • 257,510
  • 16
  • 506
  • 896
24

Not possible in

To not inherit a debt in Germany, the heir has to declare to the state that they don't want to inherit this inheritance. This also excludes them from inheriting anything else though.

Trish
  • 50,532
  • 3
  • 101
  • 209
12

In the this happens automatically.

Heirs are not responsible for the "debts of the father", unless they willingly co-signed or something really weird is going on. They just aren't. You don't need to do anything special here.

However -- when a person dies, it forms an estate which contains the assets and debts of the person who died. That estate is a legal entity, is treated by the law much like a person, and it still owes the debt. Get it? The estate still owes the debt.

Someone would be assigned as an "executor" of the estate, and they would be responsible for continuing to manage the estate's assets - e.g. cancel cable TV at the deceased's home, make sure the electric and heating bill continues to be paid so the pipes don't freeze (to preserve value in that home), and part of that duty is to settle that debt. The executor should be making a searching inventory of the estate's assets, using probate or (if trust documents were prepared in advance) those trust documents to get control of assets, figuring out the value of those assets and liquidating (selling) them or making other arrangements.

The executor does not need to use "their own money" to do any of those things, but I could see an executor lending the estate money short-term while the executor gets access to bank accounts etc.

The debts must be paid by the estate and the executor must see to that. If the estate has cash lying around, they should simply contact the lender and offer to settle the debts using the estate's money. (not their own). Otherwise, the executor will need to liquidate (sell off) assets to raise money to pay off the debts.

It would be wise to be sensible about this; if a descendant absolutely has their heart set on a Hummel vase, and the will grants them that vase, the executor make every effort to satisfy the debts by selling other stuff than that - and likewise for anything an heir very much wants or is of sentimental value. That's just "being a decent human being" (and is independent from the question of whether the heir is; don't sink to their level).

Note that the executor is responsible for keeping the estate from being looted via self-service from heirs. If someone takes home the deceased's new $1000 iPhone that should be sold/returned to settled debts, that's on the executor to retrieve it.

And this is where the weird can happen. Anyone who "self-help collects" assets like that phone or that vase before the estate is settled - they are stepping in front of another creditor "out of turn", and they become personally liable for the estate's debts, at least up to the value of what they improperly took (and the legal fees of going after them). The more they take, e.g. if they choose to move into and live in a house with a mortgage, the weirder it gets. They can easily find "their" car repo'd and stuck with a bunch of costs. Etc.

With that warning given, it is certainly possible for the estate to sell any sentimental item to an heir at bona-fide market value as established in a manner likely to be acceptable to a judge (i.e. such that a creditor will give up and say "yeah, that's pretty close to market value". For instance, eBay "completed items" might be a valid way; a reasonably advertised auction would be; an "auction" that was advertised to no one but family would not.

Harper - Reinstate Monica
  • 20,495
  • 2
  • 30
  • 88
11

The heirs must use the proper way in .

As in (almost?) everywhere else, debts are part of the estate and your heirs cannot accept your assets without accepting your debts.

But they can accept the inheritance "a beneficio de inventario"(*). This means that if there are debts, they are liable only to the extent of the assets received.

For example, you leave them a $100,000 bank account. If they accept "a beneficio de inventario" and then someone claims your $1,000,000 debt, they will be forced to pay your creditor $100,000.

If they accept the inheritance without using that formula, they might be forced to pay the full debt.

And of course, heirs may refuse the inheritance. Which, even with this formula, makes sense if they are sure that there will be no surplus (if you know that the $100,000 assets come with $1,000,000 debt, there is nothing for the heir by accepting the state other than the work of dealing with the debtors, paperwork...).

(*) The literal translation of the expression does make not sense, I would translate it as "for what is worth".

SJuan76
  • 6,676
  • 1
  • 28
  • 31
4

There is an easy way to do this - get yourself life insurance for the amount you owe. When you die it is used to pay off your debt.

This does not work if the OP is likely to die as the premiums would be excessive.

DJClayworth
  • 2,092
  • 14
  • 20
3

In Japan, the heirs get the debts along with the assets, but they can opt out of getting both if they want.

Once the choice is made, it cannot be changed later even if new assets or debts are discovered.

Details may be found in the Japanese Civil Code, Chapter IV - Acceptance and Renunciation of Inheritance

Bruce
  • 131
  • 3
3

You need to specify your country.

I doubt there is any place in the world where you can get rid of the debt on your death other than by buying life insurance.

Your potential heirs will either inherit everything, including the debt, or in most countries they can refuse to take your inheritance and get nothing.

If you give a country, someone will likely tell you what your kids need to do to refuse your inheritance. And of course if you have more property than debt then they will take the inheritance and have to pay off your debt. Say you have a house worth a million and owe 100,000 to the bank, there is no way for me to get the house without having to pay back the 100,000.

gnasher729
  • 35,915
  • 2
  • 51
  • 94
1

I think you are getting confused with your estate. When you die, your estate inherits the debts, not your children. And you cant sign yourself out of that. The trustee then has the responsibility of paying off the debts if they are able to.

In India, traditionally, the eldest son inherits the debt of their father. But this is not legal, its in the ethical, cultural and religious sense now.

Rohit Gupta
  • 337
  • 2
  • 3
  • 13