Have a family member who is in an interesting spot. They have some land west of Rockdale that has been in the family for generations. The original owner left it to their kids who left it to their kids and so on. So this property has like 10 owners now each with a different percentage. Some of the owners are wanting to sell and some are willing to buy but nobody can agree on how to divvy up the land or at what price. Land has a major highway along the front side and a county road along another side. The thinking is that the land on the major road is worth more. Any of you guys ever seen anything like that and if so how would you handle it?

sell the whole thing and split up the percentages to those with a stake in it....anybody who wants to buy it can bid on it in the open market

Can't agree more with PB. Do not tie it down with inter family dissection if value: sell it all, split the proceeds.

Sounds simple but will not be. Count on one, or more, family members to be out of reasonable discussion.

Oh and contact a local title company first. They know the rules and will avoid attorneys fees at least up front

We are kind of going through this right now. It's worth what someone will pay for it. If folks want to be a-holes, they can refuse to sell their portion making it virtually impossible to sell. Especially if it's an "undivided estate ". Good luck.

We are having the place appraised next week and will make a proposal to the 2 brothers of my wife's great aunt as soon as we figure the value out.

It's always sad to see family land get sold off because of greed. I can guarantee if there are 10 heirs, 5 don't even know where the place is. Too bad they won't sell it at a discount to the family members wanting it. After all, it was given to them and they most likely did nothing to deserve it. Sad deal and it's more and more common these days.

giddings_ag_06 said:

---

It's always sad to see family land get sold off because of greed. I can guarantee if there are 10 heirs, 5 don't even know where the place is. Too bad they won't sell it at a discount to the family members wanting it. After all, it was given to them and they most likely did nothing to deserve it. Sad deal and it's more and more common these days.

---

It has nothing to do with greed and everything to do with being fair to everyone. The land on the highway is more valuable. Unless the owner divided up how the property should be split up, someone is going to get screwed unless they sell out and split up the proceeds.

I'm in a similar situation and would be willing to settle for less than market value to those who stayed on the land, but they basically want it for nothing. It's going to be a damn mess before all is said an done.

That's not completely true. If the road is straight and property lines are parallel and perpendicular to the highway, all heirs get "x" feet of highway frontage, end of story, and equal acreage however it's divided up. Grid that sucker out, let heirs who want the property buy it from the others, knowing that some heirs will never sell so the value is potentially diminished.

PB yep. Seen this situation too much. Family's claws come out. Sad.

We have 20 acres in Smith county with 25 claimed owners, it is not worth my Dad's time. I'm stuck with it.

OnlyForNow said:

---

That's not completely true. If the road is straight and property lines are parallel and perpendicular to the highway, all heirs get "x" feet of highway frontage, end of story, and equal acreage however it's divided up. Grid that sucker out, let heirs who want the property buy it from the others, knowing that some heirs will never sell so the value is potentially diminished.

---

yeah, that's a good way to ruin the value of the property, but go for it if that's what you want to do

You folks should not devalue PBS comments.

I know him. I trust him.

Full disclosure he's a repeat client.

I would approach it like this:

Each owner has X % of title, not land (it sounds like that's how it was left..undivided parcel).
Get market value for the parcel.
Get sum for each % of ownership.
Those who want to sell have willing buyers in those that want to buy. This will keep the parcel together and in the family.

Agreed. Now find a family that will do that

Good luck.

Kill entire family and keep the land for yourself??

I just went through this. Basically cut parcel up in sections.. 10 people...10 sections. You can split value based as not all acreage the same size or split based on equal acreage. Whatever group decides on split majority wins. Next draw like a lottery for your pick. Then people can pick their parcel based on order of draw. After that get surveyed and those that want to sell can sell. Those can keep what they picked out. You can divide land numerous ways and i suggest doing all possible scenerios to present.

We just divided up 100 acres at lake limestone among 6 people with the land holding various value. Some places water shallow, gas well pads, swamp, utility transformers splitting property but the impossible was done and land didnt have to be sold

giddings_ag_06 said:

---

HIt's always sad to see family land get sold off because of greed. I can guarantee if there are 10 heirs, 5 don't even know where the place is. Too bad they won't sell it at a discount to the family members wanting it. After all, it was given to them and they most likely did nothing to deserve it. Sad deal and it's more and more common these days.

---

True, it's emotional to see "family" land sold, but that is the nature of inheritance and the urbanization of America. Land sells every day and in every country in the world, however, so really "sadness" is being misapplied.

And what exactly did the "wanting" family members do to "deserve" it among the others? Is there a special priviledge for knowing where the land is that someone else either inherited or purchased? That's stupid, non-linear logic at best. Don't bother with the "working the land" argument because no one works for free. What's truly sad is that so much inherited land, much of it never paid for but awarded by government, never hits the market to balance the low supply of the land that does. And then they ***** about paying $0.10/ acre property tax to support the 15 miles of paved highway getting to their place that ALL of us pay for every year.

No sadness here for the inherited land barons. Buy it yourself and Ithen I'll respect that, and perhaps listen to the woes of your great, great grandchildren when they argue about who knows where it is, or who "deserves" it.

Stagecoach said:

---

giddings_ag_06 said:

---

HIt's always sad to see family land get sold off because of greed. I can guarantee if there are 10 heirs, 5 don't even know where the place is. Too bad they won't sell it at a discount to the family members wanting it. After all, it was given to them and they most likely did nothing to deserve it. Sad deal and it's more and more common these days.

---

True, it's emotional to see "family" land sold, but that is the nature of inheritance and the urbanization of America. Land sells every day and in every country in the world, however, so really "sadness" is being misapplied.

And what exactly did the "wanting" family members do to "deserve" it among the others? Is there a special priviledge for knowing where the land is that someone else either inherited or purchased? That's stupid, non-linear logic at best. Don't bother with the "working the land" argument because no one works for free. What's truly sad is that so much inherited land, much of it never paid for but awarded by government, never hits the market to balance the low supply of the land that does. And then they ***** about paying $0.10/ acre property tax to support the 15 miles of paved highway getting to their place that ALL of us pay for every year.

No sadness here for the inherited land barons. Buy it yourself and Ithen I'll respect that, and perhaps listen to the woes of your great, great grandchildren when they argue about who knows where it is, or who "deserves" it.

---

what a weird rant

Not a rant, but a discourse on Giddings' misguided comments.

haircut said:

---

Stagecoach said:

---

giddings_ag_06 said:

---

HIt's always sad to see family land get sold off because of greed. I can guarantee if there are 10 heirs, 5 don't even know where the place is. Too bad they won't sell it at a discount to the family members wanting it. After all, it was given to them and they most likely did nothing to deserve it. Sad deal and it's more and more common these days.

---

True, it's emotional to see "family" land sold, but that is the nature of inheritance and the urbanization of America. Land sells every day and in every country in the world, however, so really "sadness" is being misapplied.

And what exactly did the "wanting" family members do to "deserve" it among the others? Is there a special priviledge for knowing where the land is that someone else either inherited or purchased? That's stupid, non-linear logic at best. Don't bother with the "working the land" argument because no one works for free. What's truly sad is that so much inherited land, much of it never paid for but awarded by government, never hits the market to balance the low supply of the land that does. And then they ***** about paying $0.10/ acre property tax to support the 15 miles of paved highway getting to their place that ALL of us pay for every year.

No sadness here for the inherited land barons. Buy it yourself and Ithen I'll respect that, and perhaps listen to the woes of your great, great grandchildren when they argue about who knows where it is, or who "deserves" it.

---

what a weird rant

---

Lol, every piece of land has to be purchased to get your blessing? Yea, that's a blessing I'll pass on then.

Stagecoach said:

---

Not a rant, but a discourse on Giddings' misguided comments.

---

Misguided comments? Please.

If the land is not a large parcel, does it make sense to split up the land into smaller parcels of land? For example, if it's a quarter section (160 acres) to be divided up in odd sizes among 10 people, you'll end up with individual parcels of land that migh be about too small to bother farming. And if they are odd shaped, that just makes it worse.

If it's on the edge of town and there is a demand for home sites, than smaller parcels may be worthwhile.

I have no idea how small a property in central Texas might be worth farming. Around here, we often think in terms of sections, not acres.

Can you lease it out and split the proceeds by percentage?

If some family members never want to sell then that doesn't matter to them.

Is that a foreign concept?

Let's just go back to primogeniture to keep all the land with the first born son, and we won't have to deal with large parcels getting split up. As the first-born son in my family, I approve of this.



On second thought, because my Dad is the youngest son in his family, and my grandpa is the youngest son in his family, we'd actually have much less family land to our names if that's how we did land inheritance, so I think I'll pass.

The reality is there are no easy answers and every situation is different on how to best approach. What works for one family absolutely will not work for another. Internet advice is about worthless here except for generalities.

Hopefully you have a trusted family member or two that can lead and mitigate throughout this process or hopefully you can hire a professional that can serve in that roll.

Know that the odds of all parties being completely satisfied is near zero, but hopefully you can find a decent solution that doesn't ostracize anyone from the family.

Both sides of my parent's families have gone or are going through this. The "best" approach was entirely different for each family and even with each parcel.

In my experience, don't expect a quick resolution. This will likely take years and years to resolve.

One simple way of dealing with this ahead of time is to grant one individual as executor of the estate before the land is passed down and what they decide is final. It likely won't help hurt feelings, but will helps get stuff done and decisions might actually be made before folks die.

Sue to partition then when an agreement can't be made the court will sell it all and everybody will get cash.

GatorAg03 said:

---

The reality is there are no easy answers and every situation is different on how to best approach. What works for one family absolutely will not work for another. Internet advice is about worthless here except for generalities.

Hopefully you have a trusted family member or two that can lead and mitigate throughout this process or hopefully you can hire a professional that can serve in that roll.

Know that the odds of all parties being completely satisfied is near zero, but hopefully you can find a decent solution that doesn't ostracize anyone from the family.

Both sides of my parent's families have gone or are going through this. The "best" approach was entirely different for each family and even with each parcel.

In my experience, don't expect a quick resolution. This will likely take years and years to resolve.

One simple way of dealing with this ahead of time is to grant one individual as executor of the estate before the land is passed down and what they decide is final. It likely won't help hurt feelings, but will helps get stuff done and decisions might actually be made before folks die.

---

Really good thoughts here. I've seen these things to very smoothly or absolutely terrible and the variables are different every time. Maybe part of the property is more valuable, maybe someone has an emotional tie to the property, etc.

This thread makes me wonder a bit about how my great-grandparents land would have been divided up if it was just passed down through each generation. They had about 2.5 sections (~1,600 acres) in Howard County. When it came time for them to step down from working the land they actually (a probably rather smartly) discussed it with each of the nine kids (my grandmother and her siblings) to see who wanted what and how much.

My grandparents had already moved to Fort Worth and really didn't have much interest in having a piece of land out there and a couple of the other siblings felt the same, basically they grew up simple country folk and enjoyed the "big city living" when they got a taste of it. From what I recall, they kept one entire section and sold the rest, with two brothers dividing the remaining section that had the main farm house and barn. The mineral rights for the 2.5 sections were divided equally among the nine heirs.

I don't know who actually owns it now, if it is still in the family it probably belongs to a cousin I have never met.

So I guess if it had just been passed down equally, my grandmother would have owned about 177 acres which would have been split between my mom and her sister (88-ish each) which then would be split between my brother and me. My aunt produced four offspring (see my "cousins" threads on the GB for hijinks) which I guarantee would have immediately sold their shares to the first person with cash in hand when my aunt died in 2011.

So theoretically I could have 44 acres out there somewhere, but how much use would I really get from it? At least I do know that I get half of a half of a ninth of the mineral rights so I could be earning dozens of dollars a year from that.

Land should never be divided up by interests over more than 1 generation without forming a trust.

You sure sound bitter Stagecoach.

Lot's of folks on here DID pay for their land, or their ancestors did. They worked their asses off through drought, flood, fire, blizzards, insects, etc. to scratch a damn living out of the dirt to feed people like you and often for just enough money to keep the place going "until next year". When they died, they passed down the only thing they had left to their kids: Land. Their kids kept things going, rinse wash repeat for generations. To say they "haven't done anything to deserve" the land they are on is ignorance. An 80 year old farmer who has scratched out a living on a couple of sections all his life on land his Dad passed down on him he doesn't deserve his land? Who the does then?

What does someone have to do to deserve the land? Take a big city job & save up to buy 20 acres, build a giant house and entry, give it a cute name like "El Rancho Verde"? Then pay someone (an illegal perhaps) in the country to take care of it for you and run 5 steers on it for an Ag exemption. This is happening all over Texas, btw and a great part of our heritage is being chopped to pieces in the process. Oh, and it's terrible for wildlife and habitat as well.

Land is expensive, and maybe you're jealous of folks who have family land. I certainly get that. I could be wrong, It sure doesn't sound like to me you have experience in the country or working the land.... otherwise you might get it.

Sorry about the rant. I just don't think Stagecoach has though much about the "other side" of his argument.
If he has & still comes to the same conclusion.... well let's just say I disagree more strongly then and leave it at that.

I'm familiar with one instance where 100 acres was split between five heirs. The piece was a long rectangle, bounded on the west by a blacktop and the north and east by dirt roads. The far east portion of the property has 100+ year old pecan trees. The remainder was mesquite brush and pasture.

The split up went like this:

• Pre-separated into five equally sized 20-ac pieces.
• The piece on the west was deemed the best because of the blacktop, so four acres were deducted and given to each of the remaining four pieces.
• The piece on the east with the pecans was deemed the second best, so three acres were deducted and given to each of the remaining three pieces.
• The final split was one 16-ac piece (road), one 18-ac piece (trees), and three 22-ac pieces.
• The kids selected what piece they wanted based upon age - oldest to youngest. They were allowed to sell if they so chose.

When it was all said and done, one heir owned a contiguous 84 acres, including the piece he chose and the three interior pieces he bought from siblings.

I'm in line to get a 400 acre East Texas farm so it's easy for me to have this opinion...

That being said, I don't understand why land ever gets split. When it does come to me, I wouldn't ever dream of splitting it. Since it's been in my family since 1896, I will do my best to pick the best steward among my kids and give it to them. If I didn't have that emotional connection I still wouldn't split it up because I know it would just cause headaches (as described in the thread). I'd probably sell it and give my heirs the proceeds rather than the land.

Why do people feel like all descendants must be equal heirs?

Ironic username.

sellthefarm said:

---

Why do people feel like all descendants must be equal heirs?

---

So what happens when you have three kids and they all have a love for the outdoors, willingly fix the fence & watch the cattle, hunt out there, etc? You can just pick one of them to take it all? I dont have kids yet, but that seems like a pretty hard prospect to give one of your kids something worth that much money and not give the others anything.....

Are you Italian? I work in consulting for agriculture and have noticed Italians prevent this problem with farming by pretty much giving everything to the first born son, anybody after that is sol.