We use cookies
We use cookies to enhance your experience, maintain your session, and remember your preferences. Some cookies are essential for the platform to function properly. Learn more in our Privacy Policy
Tips and strategies for collaborating successfully with other executors to administer an estate smoothly.
Many wills appoint multiple executors - and for good reason. Sharing the responsibility of administering an estate can reduce the burden on any one person, bring together complementary skills, and provide reassurance to beneficiaries that no single individual has unchecked control. However, co-executorship also introduces complexity. Personalities, grief, competing priorities, and logistical challenges can all create friction. This guide will help you navigate the role successfully, with practical advice drawn from common real-world scenarios.
Testators (the people making wills) choose multiple executors for a variety of practical and personal reasons.
Sharing the workload is perhaps the most common motivation. Administering an estate - especially one with property, investments, or complex family arrangements - can take hundreds of hours over many months. Spreading that work across two or three people makes the task more manageable.
Different expertise is another key factor. One executor might be financially savvy, comfortable dealing with HMRC and investment portfolios, while another is practical and organised - better suited to clearing a property or managing tradespeople. Combining these strengths can make the administration smoother and more efficient.
Family representation matters greatly in blended families or where the deceased had children from multiple relationships. Appointing one executor from each side of the family can reassure all beneficiaries that their interests will be considered fairly.
Geographic coverage is increasingly relevant. If the deceased owned property in different regions, or if beneficiaries are spread across the country, having executors in different locations can ease the practical burden.
Mutual oversight provides a safeguard against mistakes or misconduct. Two executors checking each other's work reduces the risk of errors going unnoticed.
Case Study: The Value of Complementary Skills Margaret, 78, left her estate to her three adult children. She appointed her eldest son David, a retired accountant, and her daughter Sarah, a project manager, as co-executors. David took the lead on tax returns, investment accounts, and correspondence with HMRC. Sarah managed the sale of the family home, liaised with estate agents and solicitors, and kept a detailed timeline of the administration. The two spoke every Sunday evening and used a shared spreadsheet to track progress. The estate was fully administered within eleven months - faster than average, and without a single dispute.
Understanding the legal basis of your appointment is essential before you take any action.
Most executors act jointly, which means all must agree on significant decisions, all must sign key documents, all share equal legal responsibility, and all can be held liable for each other's mistakes. Some wills and grants of probate specify "joint and several" authority, which allows any one executor to act independently. Even then, all executors remain jointly liable - so acting without informing your co-executor is rarely advisable, even if technically permitted. Check your grant of probate carefully to confirm which applies in your situation. If you are unsure, ask the Probate Registry or a solicitor to clarify.
Yes - executors are not obliged to act. There are three ways to step back:
At least one executor must always act. If all named executors renounce or are unable to act, an administrator will be appointed by the court instead.
Case Study: Using Power Reserved James and his brother Tom were appointed co-executors of their father's estate. Tom was working overseas on a two-year contract at the time of their father's death. Rather than renouncing entirely, Tom had power reserved — meaning James could proceed with the administration alone, while Tom was kept informed and consulted on major decisions by email. When Tom returned to the UK, he was able to take a more active role in the final stages of the administration.
One of the most valuable things co-executors can do is have an honest conversation about how they will work together before any formal steps are taken.
Approach 1: Shared Everything - Both executors are involved in every task and decision. Maximum oversight, but can be slow and unwieldy.
Approach 2: Divided Tasks - Each executor takes primary responsibility for a defined area (e.g. one handles finances, the other handles property). Efficient and plays to strengths, but requires strong communication.
Approach 3: Lead Executor - One executor leads day-to-day administration, with the other consulted on significant decisions. Can create resentment if the lead executor becomes too dominant.
Case Study: Dividing Tasks Effectively When Helen and her brother Richard were appointed co-executors of their mother's estate, they sat down together in the first week and drew up a list of every task they could foresee. Helen, who worked in finance, took on banking, investments, and tax. Richard, who lived closest to their mother's home, managed the property clearance and instructed the estate agent. They held a brief call every fortnight to update each other. The arrangement reduced stress for both and meant neither felt overwhelmed.
Poor communication is the single most common cause of co-executor disputes.
Before you begin, agree: how often you will update each other, by what method, what level of detail each person needs, and how quickly you expect responses. There is no single right answer - the key is that both of you feel adequately informed. Keep a shared written log of communications and decisions. This does not need to be elaborate — a shared Google Doc or spreadsheet works well. Estate management platforms such as EstateCopilot are designed for exactly this purpose.
Case Study: When Communication Breaks Down After their father died, Claire and her stepbrother Mark were appointed co-executors. They had a difficult relationship and fell into a pattern of minimal contact. Claire made several decisions — including appointing a solicitor and accepting an offer on the family home - without consulting Mark. Mark, feeling excluded, began raising objections at every turn. A straightforward estate was delayed by over a year and ultimately required a solicitor to mediate. The legal costs reduced the estate's value significantly. The lesson: no matter how strained the relationship, structured communication from the outset is essential.
Not every decision requires full agreement. Routine tasks — gathering information, chasing correspondence, booking valuations - can generally be handled by one executor with notification to the other.
Decisions requiring joint agreement include: selling or transferring property, accepting offers, appointing professionals, rejecting creditor claims, distributing assets, and resolving beneficiary disputes.
Step 1: Each executor sets out their position and reasoning in writing.
Step 2: Seek additional information - many disagreements stem from incomplete facts.
Step 3: Return to the will. What did the testator intend? What serves the beneficiaries best?
Step 4: Explore compromise.
Step 5: If genuinely deadlocked, apply to the court for direction.
Case Study: Disagreeing on a Property Sale Brothers Paul and Simon were co-executors of their aunt's estate, which included a small terraced house. Paul wanted to accept the first offer, which was slightly below asking price. Simon believed the market was about to improve and wanted to wait. Neither would back down. They commissioned an independent estate agent for a second opinion; the agent confirmed the offer was fair. Armed with this objective evidence, Simon agreed to proceed. Both brothers felt the decision had been made fairly, and the estate was sold within weeks.
Most executor bank accounts require all signatories to authorise transactions. Agree spending limits to avoid constant sign-off for routine costs - for example, under £500 one executor may authorise, £500–£5,000 requires two, and over £5,000 requires all executors. Executors may reclaim reasonable out-of-pocket expenses from the estate, but are not normally entitled to charge for their time unless the will expressly provides for this. Keep all receipts and share them with your co-executor before claiming.
Case Study: Expense Disputes Sisters Anna and Fiona were co-executors of their parents' estate. Anna lived near the family home and claimed £1,200 in travel expenses for overseeing the clearance and sale. Fiona questioned the amount. Anna produced a detailed mileage log with dates. Fiona accepted the claim once she could see the supporting records. The lesson: document expenses as you go, not retrospectively.
If one co-executor is a solicitor or accountant, the dynamic differs significantly from working with a family member. The professional brings expertise, experience, and indemnity insurance — but may take a directive approach, charge significant fees, and have different pace expectations.
Tips: Clarify the charging basis at the outset. Stay engaged: you remain legally responsible even if you defer to their expertise. Ask to be copied on all significant correspondence. Do not rubber-stamp decisions you do not fully understand.
Case Study: Navigating a Professional Co-Executor When Diane's father died, his will appointed Diane alongside his solicitor, Mr. Graham, as co-executors. Diane initially felt out of her depth and approved Mr. Graham's decisions without fully understanding them. Midway through the administration, she discovered that he had sold an investment portfolio at a time that resulted in an avoidable tax liability. She subsequently sought independent legal advice and negotiated a reduction in his fees. The lesson: always understand what you are agreeing to, even when working alongside a professional.
If a co-executor stops responding, refuses to sign documents, or fails to engage:
Court applications to remove an executor are a last resort - expensive, time-consuming, and potentially damaging to family relationships.
Case Study: An Uncooperative Co-Executor After their mother died, Jane and her brother Kevin were appointed co-executors. Kevin had been estranged from the family and, after initial contact, stopped responding entirely. The estate included a property that could not be sold without his signature. Jane wrote a formal letter through a solicitor explaining that Kevin could be removed by the court and held personally liable for losses caused by the delay. He responded within a week and agreed to sign the necessary documents.
You are jointly liable for the administration - including decisions you were not directly involved in. This makes staying informed essential, not optional. Keep records of all communications, decisions and their reasoning, professional advice received, and any disagreements and their resolution. Do not rubber-stamp decisions you do not understand. If you are unsure, ask. If you disagree, say so in writing.
Old rivalries, questions about who was closest to the deceased, and competing views on the family home can all create tension. Agree roles based on practical strengths rather than family hierarchy. Acknowledge that you are both grieving. Keep disagreements professional. Involve a neutral third party - solicitor, mediator, or trusted family friend — if needed.
The surviving spouse is grieving and may feel overwhelmed. The adult child may feel responsible for both the administration and their parent's emotional wellbeing. The adult child should take the lead on practical matters without undermining the parent's authority. Allow more time than you expect to need, and be patient with each other.
Consider drawing up a simple written agreement covering: how you will communicate, the division of tasks, which decisions require joint agreement, how you will handle disagreements, spending limits, and your target timeline. This has no legal force, but sets clear expectations and gives both executors something concrete to refer back to.
Seek advice early if: you reach a genuine deadlock, a beneficiary threatens legal action, a co-executor fails to engage, the estate involves business interests or overseas assets, or you are simply unsure of your legal duties. Early intervention is almost always less costly than allowing problems to escalate.
Co-executorship, done well, is genuinely better than acting alone. The challenges are real but manageable - provided both executors approach the role with honesty, flexibility, and a shared commitment to the task. The estates that go wrong are almost always those where communication breaks down early, where personal grievances override professional duties, or where one executor feels excluded or undervalued. The antidote is straightforward: talk to each other, agree how you will work together, document what you decide, and focus on what you are there to do - carrying out the wishes of the deceased and protecting the interests of the beneficiaries. You are, ultimately, on the same side.