estoppel passing on from grandad

Options
13

Comments

  • securityguy
    securityguy Posts: 2,462 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    TonyMMM wrote: »
    Lying to the registrar is a specific offence of perjury and carries a prison sentence (but is rarely prosecuted)

    "But is rarely prosecuted" is pretty much the definition of "a technical offence". The cases that would arouse the ire of the authorities would be where the circumstances of the death were in some way misrepresented, but that isn't the accusation here.
    and "relative" has a very clear definition under registration rules.

    I've been looking and have been unable to find anything. Do you have a citation you could point me to? There's a lot of by-play about the ways in which common law spouses can report deaths, which is presumably going to become more of an issue as the generations move on.
    although you could still submit an application for a correction to the registration.

    Which would have no bearing whatsoever on this shambles, of course.
  • TonyMMM
    TonyMMM Posts: 3,382 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    edited 11 May 2017 at 8:43AM
    Options
    Security Guy

    Making false statements to a registrar when registering a birth/death or for the purpose of procuring a marriage are specific offences under s3 of the Perjury Act 1911 and carry up to 7 years imprisonment. Offences related to marriages are quite regularly prosecuted - those for births/deaths would normally depend on someone making a complaint to GRO - they are then usually dealt with by way of correction and the facts reported to the DPP. If the statement was made for fraudulent purposes then the substantive offence would usually take precedence and the perjury be used as evidence to support that.

    The basic meaning of "relative" has been defined through years of legal cases and many statutes as being being those related by blood - the Birth & Death Registration Acts (specifically the interpretation sections with in the 1874 & 1953 Acts ) extend the definition for the purposes of registration to include those connected by marriage or adoption. These definitions are also in the GRO Handbook for Registrars.

    As the law stands cohabiting partners are not legally related and so cannot register a death as a relative - however there are number of other qualifications that may allow them to do so ( being present at the death, or being the person arranging the burial/cremation for example). This is a scenario registrars deal with every day - the qualification used will be stated on the register.

    Getting the original entry corrected may not achieve anything in relation to the problem of the estate, but would set the record straight and may help the OP move on. It would require an application to be made to the Registrar General with supporting evidence.
  • Yorkshireman99
    Yorkshireman99 Posts: 5,470 Forumite
    Options
    Getting the GRO to amend incorrect details of a death record is not easy. I tried to get it done and it was only once I involved my MP that they caved in. They then demanded I pay a fee for a copy of the corrected entry. My MP was not amused but again they caved in "due to exceptional circumstances". A word that rhymes with where you put the oars on a rowing boat!
  • TonyMMM
    TonyMMM Posts: 3,382 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Post First Anniversary
    Options
    Yorkshireman99 wrote: »
    Getting the GRO to amend incorrect details of a death record is not easy. I tried to get it done and it was only once I involved my MP that they caved in. They then demanded I pay a fee for a copy of the corrected entry. My MP was not amused but again they caved in "due to exceptional circumstances". A word that rhymes with where you put the oars on a rowing boat!

    It is difficult - and would normally require statutory declarations from two people to support it. In this case, if the informant was not actually qualified, it may be the RG would order a re-registration by a properly qualified informant....who knows.
  • Yorkshireman99
    Yorkshireman99 Posts: 5,470 Forumite
    Options
    Unless the details of the death are incorrectly recorded by the GRO then is there any point? In my case the spelling of the surname was wrong with the obvious difficulties this created.
  • kitty4ever
    kitty4ever Posts: 14 Forumite
    Options
    the first £25K in a bank account, does not need a grant of probate or will.
    only a death certificate, banks bereavement form, and ID from the person claiming the money is required.
    Any unscrupulous acquaintance of the deceased can get in-there first.
    "But afterward he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' "But when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, 'This is the heir; come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.' "They took him, and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
  • Yorkshireman99
    Yorkshireman99 Posts: 5,470 Forumite
    edited 16 May 2017 at 6:00PM
    Options
    kitty4ever wrote: »
    the first £25K in a bank account, does not need a grant of probate or will.
    only a death certificate, banks bereavement form, and ID from the person claiming the money is required.
    Any unscrupulous acquaintance of the deceased can get in-there first.
    This is not univeresally true. Banks and building societies have different rules. Some require probate for even trivial sums as others have already stated.
  • kitty4ever
    kitty4ever Posts: 14 Forumite
    Options
    It's hard to see how you think promissory estoppel arises. Are you thinking that a verbal, undocumented agreement would override intestacy provisions? No way. It would be virtually impossible to make that case over a will (after all, "Nan promised me her emerald necklace crockery, but it's not in the will!" would clog the courts up for years) but to claim that there was a verbal agreement which overrides people's rights in intestacy over what is clearly the deceased's property is doomed to disaster.

    In today's world with smart phones and hindsight, there are a many opportunities for clandestine secret recordings of will discussions and family business agreements.
    "But afterward he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' "But when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, 'This is the heir; come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.' "They took him, and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
  • Yorkshireman99
    Yorkshireman99 Posts: 5,470 Forumite
    edited 16 May 2017 at 6:21PM
    Options
    kitty4ever wrote: »
    In today's world with smart phones and hindsight, there are a many opportunities for clandestine secret recordings of will discussions and family business agreements.
    Maybe but the chances of these having much evidential value in contesting a will in this case is slim to non exeistant
  • kitty4ever
    kitty4ever Posts: 14 Forumite
    Options
    Play a game of poker, claim you have clandestine recordings without ever showing your full, or part of your hand [recordings].
    agree to reveal clandestine recordings only after a full and final out of court settlement; then you don't.
    "But afterward he sent his son to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' "But when the vine-growers saw the son, they said among themselves, 'This is the heir; come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.' "They took him, and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
This discussion has been closed.
★ ★ ★ Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.7K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.1K Life & Family
  • 247.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards