- 3 min read
- 01.04.2026
- by Benjamin Rogmans
Not every inherited property is a gift
Verbs without a clear structure? Real estate can quickly become a source of conflict. Good intentions aren’t enough. Clear rules ensure long-term value.
In Germany, real estate is considered the epitome of security. Anyone who leaves a house to their children has “provided for the future.” At least, that’s the common perception. From our experience, we know that this is true—but only under one condition: the structure must be right.
Over the past few years, we have worked with numerous communities of heirs. Three children, sometimes four. None of them live in Berlin anymore. None of them have hands-on experience with real estate. They are all, in principle, well-intentioned. And yet, the property gradually finds itself at an impasse.
At first, it’s the little things. Who handles the utility bill? Who speaks with the property manager? Who decides on a roof repair? One person takes on the work, the others sign off. It still works.
Over time, the balance shifts. One person invests time, the others see only the payout. Mistrust sets in. Discussions become more fundamental. Should we modernize? Should we sell? Should we wait and see? A property doesn’t know the meaning of “wait and see.” It ages. It needs decisions.
If no agreement is reached, many things are left undone. Investments are postponed. Rent adjustments aren’t consistently implemented. Technical issues are put off. Tenants quickly sense when a building is leaderless.
At the same time, the structure becomes more complicated. Three children are manageable. But each of these children, in turn, has their own families. With the next generation, the number of ownership shares multiplies. Three become six, six become nine. Each share comes with a say in the matter.
For professional investors, this is a warning sign. Unclear decision-making processes, inconsistent goals, and internal tensions have a direct impact on negotiability. Banks scrutinize more closely; buyers factor in risk premiums. The market rewards clarity and punishes indecision.
It becomes particularly difficult when individual co-heirs live abroad. Different time zones, tax issues, divergent life realities. What is a long-term investment for one person is a source of liquidity for another. The property becomes a projection of personal priorities.
It is not uncommon for us to find ourselves, after years of deadlock, facing communities of heirs who now communicate only through lawyers. At this point, the financial leeway is often smaller than it was at the start. Neglected maintenance, missed market opportunities, and internal conflicts have left their mark. The paradox: The property was originally intended as a means of preserving wealth.
The problem rarely lies with the property itself. Berlin remains a sought-after location. Housing remains scarce. The market is receptive. What is missing is structure. Those who fail to establish clear succession plans during their lifetime leave their heirs not only with assets, but also with the burden of decision-making. Without clear responsibilities, without defined exit options, and without a coordinated strategy, a tangible asset quickly turns into a source of conflict.
Real estate is not a savings account. It requires management.
An inherited property can be a strong foundation for the next generation. But it can just as easily become a source of ongoing friction. The difference rarely lies in the market, but almost always in the preparation.
