You say but that can't be right. If it was, you would have had to sign the sale documents.

I'm therefore assuming that on paper the house was registered in his name, but that you were entitled to a quarter share. This would normally have been documented either in the original transfer to your granddad or in a separate `Declaration of Trust' that would have been signed at the same time.

If it was registered in your granddad's name probate must altready have been granted, as the house could not have been sold without it.

Either way, you were entitled to your quarter share on completion of the sale. If you haven't received it you need to ask the solicitors who dealt with the sale why not.

This is definitely an area where you need professional advice, but as soon as I read your post 2 things jumped out at me.

1) We have discussed 'reservation of benefit' before on these threads. In seeking to avoid Inheritance Tax, you cannot 'give away' your home to your relatives and go on living in it, unless it is a genuine 'arms length' transaction and you pay the owner a full market rent. If your grandfather was not paying rent to the various 'owners', then the house is likely to fall back into his estate for IHT.

2) You say the gift was 6 years ago. Again, this is likely to be a 'failed PET' (which requires the donor to live 7 years from the date of gift) with the house falling back into the estate.

The solicitor dealing with the estate should be able to advise on this.

The IHT factor mentioned above is quite correct : if you give away part of an asset but continue to enjoy some benefit from it, the IHT 7-year clock for Potentially Exempt Transfers never starts ticking.

There are other issues : if part of the house is owned by someone other than a non-separated, non-divorced spouse, the gain in value between acquisition and disposal may count for CGT.

In order to determine exactly what the position is re ownership and tax consequences/liabilities, you have to get the facts clear.

Who bought the house? Was it bought outright with the father's money (or was it in some way part of a trust?) or was it bought partly with Dad's money, partly with the son's money? Who appeared on the title deeds as owner(s). Was the property bought solely by Dad, jointly with wife as joint tenants or as tenants in common, was the son also listed as a joint owner? Who put up the money, and when? This may not be a full list.

Seek professional advice about the facts and the consequences of those facts.

In practical terms, the basic allowance for someone who was married is usually £650k, because of the transferable nil rate band. Although it wouldn't apply in this case, anyone who dies after 6 April 2017 also receives an aditional £100k exemption if they leave their residence to their children / grandchildren.

Again, in practice, this also often doubles up, the net effect being that for many people dying after 6 April 2017 they can leave an estate of £850k without paying any IHT.

However, I'm still puzzled as to what's happened here. Despite what Ryan stated the house can't have been "in his name" (i.e. registered in his name at the Land Registry) as he would then have initiated and overseen the sale process himself and would have had to sign all the sale documents.

But if the house was in his grandfather's name probate must have been obtained, otherwise the house couldn't have been sold.

It would be helpful if Ryan could comment on these points, if only to satisfy my curiosity!

Was it in the 1950s, in some gangster/cops TV series, that someone regularly said : 'Just give me the facts, man!"