Possible issue regarding death and will?
Discussion
I don't yet know the full details, but it looks like after my grandfather died 12 years ago, nobody informed the solicitor who was acting as executor, thus, the will has never been read.
Anyone know what the possible implications of this could be?
Just to add, my grandfather was survived by my grandmother, and we have all assumed (most likely) that grandfather has left all possessions to grandmother in the will.
Anyone know what the possible implications of this could be?
Just to add, my grandfather was survived by my grandmother, and we have all assumed (most likely) that grandfather has left all possessions to grandmother in the will.
Is the solicitor the only person with a copy of the will? Does he/she still have a copy?
Obviously you need to get a copy and read it and see if indeed he left everything to his wife - which would be normal.
However, he may well have carved out some cash for the grandchildren - if this is the case, then it could get awkward... especially if there are any tensions running in the family.
Also there could be issues if the total estate (cash and property) exceeds a certain amount.
You would need to be advised separately to the solicitor acting as Executor if there are bequests that have not been made.
Obviously you need to get a copy and read it and see if indeed he left everything to his wife - which would be normal.
However, he may well have carved out some cash for the grandchildren - if this is the case, then it could get awkward... especially if there are any tensions running in the family.
Also there could be issues if the total estate (cash and property) exceeds a certain amount.
You would need to be advised separately to the solicitor acting as Executor if there are bequests that have not been made.
"Anyone know what the possible implications of this could be?"
The possible implications are endless. However, it's highly probable that he just left everything to his wife, in which case there's no harm done.
But unless and until we know what the Will says anyone offering advice is just speculating.
The possible implications are endless. However, it's highly probable that he just left everything to his wife, in which case there's no harm done.
But unless and until we know what the Will says anyone offering advice is just speculating.
KevinCamaroSS said:
Unless the will reached the inheritance tax value and HMRC will want their share, plus interest.
There is no inheritance tax between spouses.Also if the balance of he estate (not left to spouse) did ot exceed the inheritance tax threshold, that amount can be added tonthe spouses threshold in the future.
I.e. if he left the whole lot to his wife then his wife will have doubke the threshold when she dies.
konark said:
Just to add that anything 'jointly' owned, such as property or bank accounts, automatically passes to the survivor and does not form part of the deceased's estate.
That's not strictly true. Although a share in jointly owned property does pass automatically, the value of the deceased's share is still counted as part of his estate, and if it takes it over the IHT threshold inheritance tax will (subject to any exemptions) be payable on the value of the share.Pro Bono said:
konark said:
Just to add that anything 'jointly' owned, such as property or bank accounts, automatically passes to the survivor and does not form part of the deceased's estate.
That's not strictly true. Although a share in jointly owned property does pass automatically, the value of the deceased's share is still counted as part of his estate, and if it takes it over the IHT threshold inheritance tax will (subject to any exemptions) be payable on the value of the share.Also there is the recently introduced residence nil rate band which is only valid on a main residence and where the recipient of a home is a direct descendant.
(Which is classed as children, step-children and grandchildren).
* Assuming in the case of a dwelling it is held as joint tenants rather than tenants-in-common.
For the majority of most married couples IHT isn't a big deal. It's only a potential issue for their children when the survivor dies.
Red Devil said:
For the majority of most married couples IHT isn't a big deal. It's only a potential issue for their children when the survivor dies.
Thats like saying my life assurance isnt a big deal - only for my kids when I die with not enough!Lots of married couples...in fact, anyone elderly with a bit of money, worries a HUGE amount about IHT and admin hassles left behind.
Dixy said:
Oh look another solicitor feathering their own nest by suggesting they are an executor and causing unnecessary problems down the line.
Wills, keep them simple.
You can't keep it simple if the circumstances are not simple. On the face of things, everything is simple; mother, father 3 kids. But, two of the children are my wife's sons from her first marriage and we have a daughter together. The boys' father is still around, everything is amicable and his sons are provided for in his will. We sold my wife's house to use as the deposit to buy our family home, but we didn't need to sell my London property. Although she put more into the deposit, I paid other things and my pre-mortgage disposable income is much greater so a much larger proportion of the mortgage is paid from my income, even though everything goes into the joint account and is held jointly. If we were to die together in a car accident, she would be deemed to have died earlier as she is a few years older than me. Without making appropriate provision including comprehensive wills, in a situation like that, she would be deemed to have died first, I would be deemed to have inherited the entire ownership of our family home and the bulk of her assets, and then my daughter would receive my entire estate leaving her brothers with practically nothing which would be profoundly unfair. Conversely, if I were to die first without a will, or if I left everything to my wife, and she were to fall out with our daughter, she could cut her out of her will after having inherited 7 properties in London, 10 properties abroad and substantial other assets from my side of the family transferring my entire wealth out of the reach of my only natural child. I wouldn't see it as fair even if she divided it all equally between her 3 natural children. Therefore, complex wills and arrangements are what we have. Solicitors are not there to feather their own nest but to resolve the complex affairs of their clients. Wills, keep them simple.
Tiggsy said:
Red Devil said:
For the majority of most married couples IHT isn't a big deal. It's only a potential issue for their children when the survivor dies.
Thats like saying my life assurance isnt a big deal - only for my kids when I die with not enough!IHT is not something for which you can elect. It's simply there. A factor which some people may need to plan for: others won't.
It's all about thresholds and the value of your estate.
Tiggsy said:
[Lots of married couples...in fact, anyone elderly with a bit of money, worries a HUGE amount about IHT and admin hassles left behind.
Define 'a bit'.It may come as a surprise to you but the majority of the UK population are not Home Counties, goatee wearing, powerfully built, company director types.
Some simple maths will tell you if you're likely to come within its ambit - https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/family/inheritan...
If you are, then get some advice and plan accordingly. If not, stop worrying. Otherwise you risk getting an ulcer and shortening your life expectancy.
Double fair enough 
If you mean that the average UK married couple doesn’t face IHT-completely agree.
I took your comment to mean that the average UK married couple m, for whom IHT does apply, are not bothered because it doesn’t affect them-just the kids.
My point was that, for those affected, worrying about the impact on the children is a very big deal (which is handy, as it’s what I do....as in, help them)
If you mean that the average UK married couple doesn’t face IHT-completely agree.
I took your comment to mean that the average UK married couple m, for whom IHT does apply, are not bothered because it doesn’t affect them-just the kids.
My point was that, for those affected, worrying about the impact on the children is a very big deal (which is handy, as it’s what I do....as in, help them)
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff