How enforceable is a will?
Discussion
A relative told me how when her father died, some money was left to his wife but all the property and shops/businesses he had was left to his two sons, the three daughters received £1000 each, one of the sons called around and asked about why my relative was given so much money.
The relatives daughter was promised a jewelry set and he removed the earings as he thought his daughter would like them. Some people can be complete a
holes..
The relatives daughter was promised a jewelry set and he removed the earings as he thought his daughter would like them. Some people can be complete a
holes..Slightly off-topic but I was a bit surprised by the will of my former BIL (he and my sister got divorced in 2017).
He then married the woman he had been living with for some years and left everything to her - nothing to his son, daughter or only grandchild.
But he named the idiot partner of one of his sisters and my nephew as Executors.
Needless to say the "idiot partner" didn't want anything to do with it as he wasn't a beneficiary, so my nephew has had to do everything despite the only beneficiary being a woman he had no time for!
I'm sure the new wife told him what to write.
Maybe it could have been challenged, but given the size of his estate I'm sure legal costs would soon have been more than it was worth.
But it did make me think I needed to give some serious thought to my will to hopefully avoid causing any bad feeling.
He then married the woman he had been living with for some years and left everything to her - nothing to his son, daughter or only grandchild.
But he named the idiot partner of one of his sisters and my nephew as Executors.
Needless to say the "idiot partner" didn't want anything to do with it as he wasn't a beneficiary, so my nephew has had to do everything despite the only beneficiary being a woman he had no time for!
I'm sure the new wife told him what to write.
Maybe it could have been challenged, but given the size of his estate I'm sure legal costs would soon have been more than it was worth.
But it did make me think I needed to give some serious thought to my will to hopefully avoid causing any bad feeling.
Mr Tidy said:
Needless to say the "idiot partner" didn't want anything to do with it as he wasn't a beneficiary, so my nephew has had to do everything despite the only beneficiary being a woman he had no time for!
He didn't have to do it at all - he could have renounced his position as Executor, or even handed it to a solicitor to deal with.I've done it myself once and jointly a couple of times and it's not a job I'd do if I didn't want to.
Sheepshanks said:
He didn't have to do it at all - he could have renounced his position as Executor, or even handed it to a solicitor to deal with.
I've done it myself once and jointly a couple of times and it's not a job I'd do if I didn't want to.
No I realise he could have walked away, but thankfully he has a bit more self-respect than that.I've done it myself once and jointly a couple of times and it's not a job I'd do if I didn't want to.
I have been an executor twice. Not the nicest job - this time, for my mother, I wound up having to deal with two different jurisdictions and an incredibly complex deed of variation, with my mildly demented dad as second executor (Spy satellites, secret Nazi bunkers, brrr etc etc) l. I’m hopeful that I will have it all finalised before Xmas - two years on.
It has reminded me that I need to update my own will. Currently the only big asset is jointly owned and everything else goes to my spouse (and vice versa). However one of my two kids isn’t a legal descendant so has to be specifically written in if she is to get anything. Can we each specify that, if we are the surviving party, the estate is split between the two kids instead? Just in case we both croak at the same time ...
It has reminded me that I need to update my own will. Currently the only big asset is jointly owned and everything else goes to my spouse (and vice versa). However one of my two kids isn’t a legal descendant so has to be specifically written in if she is to get anything. Can we each specify that, if we are the surviving party, the estate is split between the two kids instead? Just in case we both croak at the same time ...
stitched said:
Curious,
Does sharia law have any relevance in the U.K.?
Or is it only relevant in countries which recognise it?
That depends on what you mean by relevance. Sharia law does not displace or take priority over the law of any part of the UK (go away, Tommeh, you're wrong), but in cases that span two or more jurisdictions there may be questions of what lawyers call the conflict of laws. That is a vastly complex subject and not one that can easily be summarised here.Does sharia law have any relevance in the U.K.?
Or is it only relevant in countries which recognise it?
oldbanger said:
...Can we each specify that, if we are the surviving party, the estate is split between the two kids instead? Just in case we both croak at the same time ...
That is a request for specific legal advice about a specific estate. Perhaps ask yourself this: who would you expect relevant parties to sue for negligence if the advice that you receive from some anonymous person on a car forum is negligently and damagingly wrong? The question also contradicts itself, as it refers to a surviving party but also to simultaneous deaths. There is by the way some law about the assumptions that are made as to order of dying when two people die in the same incident, for example when both are passengers on an aircraft that crashes. I reiterate, however, that you would be unwise to take estate planning advice from here.Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 30th October 13:10
https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/real-estate/couple-...
This appeared in my Facebook.
It seems rather a strange ruling unless the couple convicted the judge the woman wasn’t of sound mind.
This appeared in my Facebook.
It seems rather a strange ruling unless the couple convicted the judge the woman wasn’t of sound mind.
galtezza said:
What about an estate with absolutely no dependants or relatives, i guess just leave it to something you see as worthy?
You could select one or more charities, or give a bequest to a non-relative whom you think deserving. Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 30th October 06:41
Drawweight said:
https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/real-estate/couple-...
This appeared in my Facebook.
It seems rather a strange ruling unless the couple convicted the judge the woman wasn’t of sound mind.
That does not appear from that brief and not necessarily accurate report to have been the issue in the case. The Judge appears to have found that there was a prior agreement with regard to the estate, and that trumped the will. A testator cannot give to someone that which he or she has enforceably promised to someone else. Not the word enforceably. This appeared in my Facebook.
It seems rather a strange ruling unless the couple convicted the judge the woman wasn’t of sound mind.
My wife's gran died a few years ago and the bickering that has gone on between her two daughters ever since has been most unedifying. The slightly strange thing is that the only significant asset - a house - was dealt with without any trouble as it was sold and the proceeds split between them. Every other thing - a load of junk basically - has been the subject of a stupid petty argument. It's almost as if they're having a 'who did mum love the most' competition, with the winner decided by who gets the most of her stuff. At first I tried not to judge as they were both very close to their mum and were clearly very upset at her death, but three years later these two educated women, who are themselves in their sixties, are still squabbling over tat that invariably ends up in a box in the attic.
On the flipside my wife's uncle, who I'd always thought was a bit of a fool and would be the one to cause trouble, has been in fact been great. From the start he advocated in a very reasonable way that their mum wouldn't want them falling out and that all the tat should be taken to charity shops so that somebody can at least benefit from it. I only recently found out that he wanted his wife to give half her share to charity as they hadn't earned it and didn't really need it. Good bloke, and I was wrong about him.
So yeah cool story and all that, but the whole thing has made me really think about how I'll try to bring up my two young kids up so they don't end up falling out like that.
On the flipside my wife's uncle, who I'd always thought was a bit of a fool and would be the one to cause trouble, has been in fact been great. From the start he advocated in a very reasonable way that their mum wouldn't want them falling out and that all the tat should be taken to charity shops so that somebody can at least benefit from it. I only recently found out that he wanted his wife to give half her share to charity as they hadn't earned it and didn't really need it. Good bloke, and I was wrong about him.
So yeah cool story and all that, but the whole thing has made me really think about how I'll try to bring up my two young kids up so they don't end up falling out like that.
Observing litigation between siblings I note that it is partly about greed, but also sometimes about old grievances. Maybe forty years ago your brother got the fancy toy and you didn't...
Neither I nor my family have ever had much money, but I hope that if my parents had been rich I would have had the strength of character to walk away from any amount of money rather than fight my brothers.
Neither I nor my family have ever had much money, but I hope that if my parents had been rich I would have had the strength of character to walk away from any amount of money rather than fight my brothers.
Breadvan72 said:
Neither I nor my family have ever had much money, but I hope that if my parents had been rich I would have had the strength of character to walk away from any amount of money rather than fight my brothers.
Christ even the thought of that is absolutely anathema to me. My parents have always been cash poor but, thanks to having paid a pittance over 40 years ago for some land and derelict old buildings in what is now prime London commuter territory, they're sitting on a paper fortune. I'm one of five so in theory the possibilities for internecine strife over inheritance are many and varied. I very much doubt it'll happen as none of us are breadheads but we've all said to our parents that the best thing they could do is cash in and live the life of Riley while they still can, or throw bundles of cash at good causes. Because while, like you, I'd hope I could be the better man if it did ever come to it, I also know I'm only human. I've seen enough ostensibly solid relationships fked up by money to think that it would be best if my parents just got rid of it one way or another while they're still alive!Mr Tidy said:
Slightly off-topic but I was a bit surprised by the will of my former BIL (he and my sister got divorced in 2017).
He then married the woman he had been living with for some years and left everything to her - nothing to his son, daughter or only grandchild.
But he named the idiot partner of one of his sisters and my nephew as Executors.
Needless to say the "idiot partner" didn't want anything to do with it as he wasn't a beneficiary, so my nephew has had to do everything despite the only beneficiary being a woman he had no time for!
I'm sure the new wife told him what to write.
Maybe it could have been challenged, but given the size of his estate I'm sure legal costs would soon have been more than it was worth.
But it did make me think I needed to give some serious thought to my will to hopefully avoid causing any bad feeling.
The above is one of the areas of succession where English law and Scots law differ. Under Scots law a child (and in some cases grandchild) is entitled to a share of a deceased's estate, whatever the will may say. It is known as "Legal Rights". I don't propose going into the subject deeply because (as BV72 has said earlier in this thread) succession is a complicated area of law (in any jurisdiction) with numerous weighty tomes on the subject!He then married the woman he had been living with for some years and left everything to her - nothing to his son, daughter or only grandchild.
But he named the idiot partner of one of his sisters and my nephew as Executors.
Needless to say the "idiot partner" didn't want anything to do with it as he wasn't a beneficiary, so my nephew has had to do everything despite the only beneficiary being a woman he had no time for!
I'm sure the new wife told him what to write.
Maybe it could have been challenged, but given the size of his estate I'm sure legal costs would soon have been more than it was worth.
But it did make me think I needed to give some serious thought to my will to hopefully avoid causing any bad feeling.
Breadvan72 said:
Observing litigation between siblings I note that it is partly about greed, but also sometimes about old grievances. Maybe forty years ago your brother got the fancy toy and you didn't...
The ones I've seen it seems to be about perceived unfairness. I think they genuinely wouldn't care if there was nothing, but if there's something, they think the person getting it is less deserving than they are.Breadvan72 said:
galtezza said:
What about an estate with absolutely no dependants or relatives, i guess just leave it to something you see as worthy?
You could select one or more charities, or give a bequest to a non-relative whom you think deserving. Edited by Breadvan72 on Friday 30th October 06:41
My parents left the bulk of their estate to be divided equally between myself and my three siblings so sorting that was easy. When we came to clear the house there was very little of much monetary value, so we put stuff we'd like to keep on the dining room table and came to a consensus. That worked well for us.
Breadvan72 said:
Observing litigation between siblings I note that it is partly about greed, but also sometimes about old grievances. Maybe forty years ago your brother got the fancy toy and you didn't...
Neither I nor my family have ever had much money, but I hope that if my parents had been rich I would have had the strength of character to walk away from any amount of money rather than fight my brothers.
I cannot understand how a parent could leave their children anything other than equal shares. Neither I nor my family have ever had much money, but I hope that if my parents had been rich I would have had the strength of character to walk away from any amount of money rather than fight my brothers.
Breadvan72 said:
oldbanger said:
...Can we each specify that, if we are the surviving party, the estate is split between the two kids instead? Just in case we both croak at the same time ...
That is a request for specific legal advice about a specific estate. Perhaps ask yourself this: who would you expect relevant parties to sue for negligence if the advice that you receive from some anonymous person on a car forum is negligently and damagingly wrong? The question also contradicts itself, as it refers to a surviving party but also to simultaneous deaths. There is by the way some law about the assumptions that are made as to order of dying when two people die in the same incident, for example when both are passengers on an aircraft that crashes. I reiterate, however, that you would be unwise to take estate planning advice from here.Edited by Breadvan72 on Friday 30th October 13:10
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff