Will - not enough money in estate to cover

[Halmyre]

Take the case of a will which includes various fixed sums of a few thousand pounds here and there, and then the remainder of the estate split between various people.

But what happens if the deceased's estate ends up with less than the amount to cover the fixed sums? Is the priority taken in the order they are named in the will? This is under Scots Law (if that helps).

[w1bbles]

I’ve got nothing sensible to add but hello if your Halmyre username is associated with the Halmyre near West Linton!

[Enut]

I'm not an expert but I would expect that the stated amounts to the beneficiaries will be reduced proportionately and the beneficiaries of the 'residual estate' (i.e. after the set amounts have been paid out), won't get anything.

I resently saw a case when the solicitors who drafted the will had split the estate in percentages, which is quite normal, but the percentages added up to 101%! Each beneficiary had their proportion reduced accordingly.

[Halmyre]

w1bbles said:

I’ve got nothing sensible to add but hello if your Halmyre username is associated with the Halmyre near West Linton!

Only indirectly - it's the name of the street in Edinburgh where I used to live.

[mikeiow]

Enut said:

I'm not an expert but I would expect that the stated amounts to the beneficiaries will be reduced proportionately and the beneficiaries of the 'residual estate' (i.e. after the set amounts have been paid out), won't get anything.

I resently saw a case when the solicitors who drafted the will had split the estate in percentages, which is quite normal, but the percentages added up to 101%! Each beneficiary had their proportion reduced accordingly.

Also no expert here, but that would sound logical & correct. Maybe not what the deceased intended, of course, but makes sense.

I imagine if the beneficiaries of the 'residual estate' were related, they *may* have a reasonable claim to get ‘something’ ahead of those who were named, but that would really need a solicitors input….I suspect they would most likely be unsuccessful, unless they could prove some dependency on the deceased & of course the solicitors fees would only reduce things even further….

[Mogul]

Odd that a will was drafted without even contemplating that there might not be enough to cover the pecuniary legacies, but if under Scots law, there are Legal Rights which could override the will in some circumstances.

This first link I found… https://www.jgcollie.co.uk/our-services/personal/w...

[Halmyre]

Mogul said:

Odd that a will was drafted without even contemplating that there might not be enough to cover the pecuniary legacies, but if under Scots law, there are Legal Rights which could override the will in some circumstances.

This first link I found… https://www.jgcollie.co.uk/our-services/personal/w...

Considering the amount the solicitor charged for drawing up the will (it required a home visit as well) you'd think he might have chipped in a few suggestions (but then he might have upped his fee even further...)

mikeiow said:

Enut said:

I'm not an expert but I would expect that the stated amounts to the beneficiaries will be reduced proportionately and the beneficiaries of the 'residual estate' (i.e. after the set amounts have been paid out), won't get anything.

I resently saw a case when the solicitors who drafted the will had split the estate in percentages, which is quite normal, but the percentages added up to 101%! Each beneficiary had their proportion reduced accordingly.

Also no expert here, but that would sound logical & correct. Maybe not what the deceased intended, of course, but makes sense.

I imagine if the beneficiaries of the 'residual estate' were related, they *may* have a reasonable claim to get ‘something’ ahead of those who were named, but that would really need a solicitors input….I suspect they would most likely be unsuccessful, unless they could prove some dependency on the deceased & of course the solicitors fees would only reduce things even further…

Proportional reduction sounds sensible and logical. All the fixed sum beneficiaries, bar one charitable donation, are close family, as are the remaining beneficiaries, so if such a situation arises there will just be a bit of give and take.

It's not as if anyone's going to kick the door in and demand to see that the will's been carried out to the letter.

[Mogul]

If there is a charity involved, they may choose to fight their corner…

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/50...

[mikeiow]

Mogul said:

If there is a charity involved, they may choose to fight their corner…

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/50...

Indeed…..& a reason we have not left anything to a charity in our wills.

Our offspring are decent humans, & give generously (both with time & money) over the years, but I’m not willing to have a charity with an opportunity to wade in at a stressful time for them in the future.

[The Leaper]

Mogul said:

If there is a charity involved, they may choose to fight their corner…

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/50...

Indeed. I have been an executor for someone in the family about seven times, and one or two wills required a distribution to charities. Significantly into the process, I advised the charities: big mistake! Just about every day I got call chasing me for their money, telling me I was too slow and they wanted me to speed things up by using a solicitor ( does not work) etc. and they were sometimes very nasty and threatening. I'd advise leaving telling charities until the latest possible time.

R.

[mikeiow]

The Leaper said:

Indeed. I have been an executor for someone in the family about seven times, and one or two wills required a distribution to charities. Significantly into the process, I advised the charities: big mistake! Just about every day I got call chasing me for their money, telling me I was too slow and they wanted me to speed things up by using a solicitor ( does not work) etc. and they were sometimes very nasty and threatening. I'd advise leaving telling charities until the latest possible time.

R.

Or just don’t mention them in your will….leave it sufficiently vague for beneficiaries to make a donation if they wish!

[Mr Whippy]

Mogul said:

If there is a charity involved, they may choose to fight their corner…

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/50...

This is also exactly why you never leave percentages of estates to charities, so I’m told.

They’ll nit pick every disposal to maximise the value of the estate and thus their share.

Since they seem to have legal people on their books they can sink however many hours into this rather than an estate or beneficiaries paying by the hour.


What’s most odd here is that the fixed amounts are so high. Is the solicitor who drew the will up an executor?

[C69]

Mr Whippy said:

This is also exactly why you never leave percentages of estates to charities, so I’m told.

They’ll nit pick every disposal to maximise the value of the estate and thus their share.

Indeed, but people with potentially large estates might be tempted state in their wills that they want to leave 10% to charities (because 10% or more could reduce the Inheritance Tax rate to 36%).

Combining that approach with choosing the big national charities as beneficiaries might lead to some headaches for the executors.