Solicitors fees
Discussion
My mum has left a significant amount of money to her 4 children with a massive bias to one of them - 80% to one, 20% to the three remaining siblings.
Beacause a house is involved there have been associated legal costs with that that far exceed the costs of the remaider of the estate.
As the majority of the legal fees have been incurred to benefit the majority recipient, what happens to the division of legal fees? Are they proportionately divided in the ratio of legacy recieved or just divided equally amongst the four, which seems a bit iunfair?
I have no idea on the normal procedures here.
Beacause a house is involved there have been associated legal costs with that that far exceed the costs of the remaider of the estate.
As the majority of the legal fees have been incurred to benefit the majority recipient, what happens to the division of legal fees? Are they proportionately divided in the ratio of legacy recieved or just divided equally amongst the four, which seems a bit iunfair?
I have no idea on the normal procedures here.
I think he's saying that because one of the siblings is getting 80% of the estate, then 80% of the costs of liquidating the estate should be covered by that sibling's share.
But I think it's a non-issue?
For argument's sake, if the estate was £100k in cash, then the lucky sibling gets £80k.
But if it is £100k including a house that costs £5k to sell, then the lucky sibling gets 80% of £95k, which is £76k.
So he has in effect 'paid' £4k of the £5k costs.
For the three siblings sharing 20%, they get £6,666 in the first instance and £6,333 in the second instance.
Of have I got the wrong end of the stick?
But I think it's a non-issue?
For argument's sake, if the estate was £100k in cash, then the lucky sibling gets £80k.
But if it is £100k including a house that costs £5k to sell, then the lucky sibling gets 80% of £95k, which is £76k.
So he has in effect 'paid' £4k of the £5k costs.
For the three siblings sharing 20%, they get £6,666 in the first instance and £6,333 in the second instance.
Of have I got the wrong end of the stick?
Edited by SpeckledJim on Thursday 24th August 17:22
My understanding is that the costs of liquidating the estates are incurred and the net amount is then distributed proportionately according to the bequests. If they are percentages, by default the 80% recipient will "bear" 80% of the costs of liquidation.
If the 20% beneficiaries receive actual amounts and the other beneficiary gets the rest, the other beneficiary effectively bears all of the costs.
SpeckledJim said:
I think he's saying that because one of the siblings is getting 80% of the estate, then 80% of the costs of liquidating the estate should be covered by that sibling's share.
But I think it's a non-issue?
For argument's sake, if the estate was £100k in cash, then the lucky sibling gets £80k.
But if it is £100k including a house that costs £5k to sell, then the lucky sibling gets 80% of £95k, which is £76k.
So he has in effect 'paid' £4k of the £5k costs.
For the three siblings sharing 20%, they get £6,666 in the first instance and £6,333 in the second instance.
Of have I got the wrong end of the stick?
This is correct. The total fees come off the gross value of the estate and what is left will be split according to the Will so 80% of the net figure to one beneficiary and the rest split 3 ways. Assuming the Will is written in the usual way of stating that the estate is "net of any debts, funeral and testamentary expenses" or something similar.But I think it's a non-issue?
For argument's sake, if the estate was £100k in cash, then the lucky sibling gets £80k.
But if it is £100k including a house that costs £5k to sell, then the lucky sibling gets 80% of £95k, which is £76k.
So he has in effect 'paid' £4k of the £5k costs.
For the three siblings sharing 20%, they get £6,666 in the first instance and £6,333 in the second instance.
Of have I got the wrong end of the stick?
Edited by SpeckledJim on Thursday 24th August 17:22
Mr-B said:
This is correct. The total fees come off the gross value of the estate and what is left will be split according to the Will so 80% of the net figure to one beneficiary and the rest split 3 ways. Assuming the Will is written in the usual way of stating that the estate is "net of any debts, funeral and testamentary expenses" or something similar.
Ah yes, see your points - it was only something that I had a random thought about.One other interesting point is that we have been charged for the appointment of a new trustee to replace a solicitor that left the practice.
The reason said solicitor left the practice was that he was struck off for stealing client funds as widely reported in the press. Thought that was a tad cheeky!
Mr-B said:
This is correct. The total fees come off the gross value of the estate and what is left will be split according to the Will so 80% of the net figure to one beneficiary and the rest split 3 ways. Assuming the Will is written in the usual way of stating that the estate is "net of any debts, funeral and testamentary expenses" or something similar.
Ah yes, see your points - it was only something that I had a random thought about.One other interesting point is that we have been charged for the appointment of a new trustee to replace a solicitor that left the practice.
The reason said solicitor left the practice was that he was struck off for stealing client funds as widely reported in the press. Thought that was a tad cheeky!
andygo said:
The reason said solicitor left the practice was that he was struck off for stealing client funds as widely reported in the press. Thought that was a tad cheeky!
That the trustee was a thieving crook is obviously simply your bad luck, and not an issue the remaining practice feels at all responsible for.Charming.
SpeckledJim said:
andygo said:
The reason said solicitor left the practice was that he was struck off for stealing client funds as widely reported in the press. Thought that was a tad cheeky!
That the trustee was a thieving crook is obviously simply your bad luck, and not an issue the remaining practice feels at all responsible for.Charming.
Edited by _Neal_ on Friday 25th August 13:12
andygo said:
My mum has left a significant amount of money to her 4 children with a massive bias to one of them - 80% to one, 20% to the three remaining siblings.
Beacause a house is involved there have been associated legal costs with that that far exceed the costs of the remaider of the estate.
As the majority of the legal fees have been incurred to benefit the majority recipient, what happens to the division of legal fees? Are they proportionately divided in the ratio of legacy recieved or just divided equally amongst the four, which seems a bit iunfair?
I have no idea on the normal procedures here.
There should be no division of legal fees, unless the will is worded in a certain wayBeacause a house is involved there have been associated legal costs with that that far exceed the costs of the remaider of the estate.
As the majority of the legal fees have been incurred to benefit the majority recipient, what happens to the division of legal fees? Are they proportionately divided in the ratio of legacy recieved or just divided equally amongst the four, which seems a bit iunfair?
I have no idea on the normal procedures here.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff