Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • leespot
    • By leespot 18th May 17, 12:04 AM
    • 542Posts
    • 434Thanks
    leespot
    FIL died intestate
    • #1
    • 18th May 17, 12:04 AM
    FIL died intestate 18th May 17 at 12:04 AM
    Hi all,

    FIL died intestate in March. He was married (but separated, widow was living elsewhere) with 2 kids under 18 to his wife, the lads lived with the FIL, then there is my partner and her two sisters (all over 18).

    The house was solely in the FIL name, no mortgage. Approx value 500k. No other estate that we're aware of as money was held in joint account.

    The widow was in a relationship with someone else and has decided to move the guy into the property (FIL was in process of divorce but died before it got very far). The widow has now asked my partner and sisters to sign away any claim to the estate.

    What would the correct process be for doing this? Can one sister sign on all three sisters behalves? The widow is suggesting only one needs to sign the forms to relinquish any claim.

    Thanks in advance.
    Last edited by leespot; 22-05-2017 at 10:41 AM.
Page 1
    • gettingtheresometime
    • By gettingtheresometime 18th May 17, 12:18 AM
    • 2,756 Posts
    • 6,168 Thanks
    gettingtheresometime
    • #2
    • 18th May 17, 12:18 AM
    • #2
    • 18th May 17, 12:18 AM
    Why would the children give up their inheritance?

    As it stands, the wife receives the first £250,000 and then half of the remaining estate so £375,000.

    The remaining £125,000 is shared between the 5 children so £25,000 each.

    Sounds as if the widow knows this and is trying to pull a fast one.

    But to answer your question I'd be very surprised if one child could sign away all the children's claim to the estate
    Lloyds OD / Natwest OD / PO CC / Wescott cleared thanks to the 1 debt v 100 day challenge


    Next on the list - the Argos Card!
    • Yorkshireman99
    • By Yorkshireman99 18th May 17, 2:33 AM
    • 2,965 Posts
    • 2,321 Thanks
    Yorkshireman99
    • #3
    • 18th May 17, 2:33 AM
    • #3
    • 18th May 17, 2:33 AM
    Hi all,

    FIL died intestate in March. He was married (but separated, she was living elsewhere) with 2 kids under 18 to his wife, the lads lived with the FIL, then there is my partner and her two sisters (all over 18).

    The house was solely in the FIL name, no mortgage. Approx value 500k. No other estate that we're aware of as money was held in joint account.

    The FIL wife was in a relationship with someone else and has decided to move the guy into the property (FIL was in process of divorce but died before it got very far). His wife has now asked my partner and sisters to sign away any claim to the estate.

    What would the correct process be for doing this? Can one sister sign on all three sisters behalves? The step mother in law is suggesting only one needs to sign the forms to relinquish any claim.

    Thanks in advance.
    Originally posted by leespot
    They are trying it on big time. Tell them go away.
    • getmore4less
    • By getmore4less 18th May 17, 5:47 AM
    • 29,791 Posts
    • 17,813 Thanks
    getmore4less
    • #4
    • 18th May 17, 5:47 AM
    • #4
    • 18th May 17, 5:47 AM
    Hi all,

    FIL died intestate in March. He was married (but separated, she was living elsewhere) with 2 kids under 18 to his wife, the lads lived with the FIL, then there is my partner and her two sisters (all over 18).

    The house was solely in the FIL name, no mortgage. Approx value 500k. No other estate that we're aware of as money was held in joint account.

    The FIL wife was in a relationship with someone else and has decided to move the guy into the property (FIL was in process of divorce but died before it got very far). His wife has now asked my partner and sisters to sign away any claim to the estate.

    What would the correct process be for doing this? Can one sister sign on all three sisters behalves? The step mother in law is suggesting only one needs to sign the forms to relinquish any claim.

    Thanks in advance.
    Originally posted by leespot
    Would need all three adults to do a deed of variation(one for all would be sufficient).

    sometime where a spouse is involved a typical deed would be to only give a life interest with conditions such as until sold or new partner.

    Given the circumstances you may feel a life interest of any kind is too generous

    Also the two children under 18 would not be able to sign theirs shares away.

    (might want to put a note in the diary on that one)


    No ISAs or premium bonds?
    • Spendless
    • By Spendless 18th May 17, 5:53 AM
    • 19,519 Posts
    • 31,530 Thanks
    Spendless
    • #5
    • 18th May 17, 5:53 AM
    • #5
    • 18th May 17, 5:53 AM
    Hi all,

    FIL died intestate in March. He was married (but separated, she was living elsewhere) with 2 kids under 18 to his wife, the lads lived with the FIL, then there is my partner and her two sisters (all over 18).

    The house was solely in the FIL name, no mortgage. Approx value 500k. No other estate that we're aware of as money was held in joint account.

    The FIL wife was in a relationship with someone else and has decided to move the guy into the property (FIL was in process of divorce but died before it got very far). His wife has now asked my partner and sisters to sign away any claim to the estate.

    What would the correct process be for doing this? Can one sister sign on all three sisters behalves? The step mother in law is suggesting only one needs to sign the forms to relinquish any claim.

    Thanks in advance.
    Originally posted by leespot
    Why? She is very fortunate that she is benefiting from him dying before they were divorced and without a will. If it's because she thinks it's unfair on the 2 boys, she could always give them something from her share!

    ETA - I've just re-read and I think what she's asking is for is one of the adult children to sign away any claim on behalf of ALL children, inc the 2 boys under 18.

    No chance, as it is she inherits a sizeable amount from a bloke she's split up from, why shouldn't his biological children at least have something.
    Last edited by Spendless; 18-05-2017 at 6:03 AM.
    • leespot
    • By leespot 18th May 17, 7:27 AM
    • 542 Posts
    • 434 Thanks
    leespot
    • #6
    • 18th May 17, 7:27 AM
    • #6
    • 18th May 17, 7:27 AM
    Thank you all for the replies. I think initially my partner and her sisters were happy to consider the life interest route, but the announcement of the new partner moving in only came this week. It has been the family home for over 30 years and given it'd less than two months since he died it's a lot to take in.

    Although FIL died without a will I've explained to my partner that it would be best to take her share as per the rules of intestacy and not to sign anything at all. My partner and her sisters rightly feel that their dad would not want the widow and new partner to benefit from his hard work.

    I just wanted to be clear with regards to one sister being able to sign for them all, I didn't think it was possible so thank you all for confirmation of that. I'll keep this thread updated for info as I'm sure this will develop into something further!
    Last edited by leespot; 22-05-2017 at 10:42 AM.
    • securityguy
    • By securityguy 18th May 17, 7:45 AM
    • 2,406 Posts
    • 3,653 Thanks
    securityguy
    • #7
    • 18th May 17, 7:45 AM
    • #7
    • 18th May 17, 7:45 AM
    With children under 18 as beneficiaries, it is not possible to execute a deed of variation that affects their portion of the estate. The end. They can't sign it, and their parents can't sign it on their behalf.

    A deed of variation has to be signed by all the people who are disadvantaged by it.

    The idea that one sibling can sign away the rights of them all, including minors, is outrageous.

    There may be IHT to be paid on the portion payable to the children, depending on the value of the estate.
    • Yorkshireman99
    • By Yorkshireman99 18th May 17, 8:22 AM
    • 2,965 Posts
    • 2,321 Thanks
    Yorkshireman99
    • #8
    • 18th May 17, 8:22 AM
    • #8
    • 18th May 17, 8:22 AM
    Thank you all for the replies. I think initially my partner and her sisters were happy to consider the life interest route, but the announcement of the new partner moving in only came this week. It has been the family home for over 30 years and given it'd less than two months since he died it's a lot to take in.

    Although FIL died without a will I've explained to my partner that it would be best to take her share as per the rules of intestacy and not to sign anything at all. My partner and her sisters rightly feel that their dad would not want the wife and new partner to benefit from his hard work.

    I just wanted to be clear with regards to one sister being able to sign for them all, I didn't think it was possible so thank you all for confirmation of that. I'll keep this thread updated for info as I'm sure this will develop into something further!
    Originally posted by leespot
    There really is nothing else to decide. Because their are beneficiaries who are minors under the intestacy rules a deed of variation is not possible. The house is going to have to be sold unless the widow can afford to buy the others out. The sooner all parties start cooperating the better it will be. If anyone decides to challenge the rules it will just waste money and is doomed to failure.
    Last edited by Yorkshireman99; 18-05-2017 at 8:42 AM.
    • leespot
    • By leespot 18th May 17, 8:24 AM
    • 542 Posts
    • 434 Thanks
    leespot
    • #9
    • 18th May 17, 8:24 AM
    • #9
    • 18th May 17, 8:24 AM
    Completely agree Yorkshireman - better the house be sold and everyone can go about their business. Partner and sisters are not prepared to walk away with nothing and allow the widow to benefit from everything.
    Last edited by leespot; 22-05-2017 at 10:43 AM.
    • Yorkshireman99
    • By Yorkshireman99 18th May 17, 8:43 AM
    • 2,965 Posts
    • 2,321 Thanks
    Yorkshireman99
    Completely agree Yorkshireman - better the house be sold and everyone can go about their business. Partner and sisters are not prepared to walk away witg nothing and allow the (almost) ex to benefit from everything.
    Originally posted by leespot
    Just to make sure, the estranged wife IS entitled to most of the estate. Fighting it will fail!
    • paddy's mum
    • By paddy's mum 18th May 17, 9:23 AM
    • 3,460 Posts
    • 12,497 Thanks
    paddy's mum
    I'm confused. Are there two wives in the picture, one being the "step mother in law" "almost ex" you mention and the other being a first wife and the biological mother of some of the children?

    I ask only because there might be other factors operating which may alter who gets what eg provision for a dependent.
    • PasturesNew
    • By PasturesNew 18th May 17, 9:29 AM
    • 59,947 Posts
    • 350,414 Thanks
    PasturesNew
    If they had divorced, the 5 kids would've got the equivalent of £100k each.

    Don't sign away your right to the money that the father spent his life earning. Wife 2, who was being divorced and already has another man, is already sitting pretty on a fortune ... a fortune not earnt and more than she'd have got from any divorce.
    • getmore4less
    • By getmore4less 18th May 17, 9:30 AM
    • 29,791 Posts
    • 17,813 Thanks
    getmore4less
    There really is nothing else to decide. Because their are beneficiaries who are minors under the intestacy rules a deed of variation is not possible. The house is going to have to be sold unless the widow can afford to buy the others out. The sooner all parties start cooperating the better it will be. If anyone decides to challenge the rules it will just waste money and is doomed to failure.
    Originally posted by Yorkshireman99
    I believe the initial intent could be to get the adult sister to give up their shares, that removes one set of raising of funds.

    As the wife becomes trustee of the estate an subsequently the shares of the minors that could be left in the property, that removes the rest of the funds that need raising.

    no house sale needed.
    • getmore4less
    • By getmore4less 18th May 17, 9:32 AM
    • 29,791 Posts
    • 17,813 Thanks
    getmore4less
    A timely reminder to anyone thinking of initiating a divorce get that new will done first.
    • securityguy
    • By securityguy 18th May 17, 9:58 AM
    • 2,406 Posts
    • 3,653 Thanks
    securityguy
    A timely reminder to anyone thinking of initiating a divorce get that new will done first.
    Originally posted by getmore4less
    Quite. Although "intestate" implies there wasn't a will to start with: wills (other than those prepared in contemplation of marriage to a specific person) are voided by marriage, but are not voided by divorce, so had there been a will the FIL in this case wouldn't have been intestate, rather would have had a will which they might not have chosen.
    • securityguy
    • By securityguy 18th May 17, 10:02 AM
    • 2,406 Posts
    • 3,653 Thanks
    securityguy
    I believe the initial intent could be to get the adult sister to give up their shares, that removes one set of raising of funds.

    As the wife becomes trustee of the estate an subsequently the shares of the minors that could be left in the property, that removes the rest of the funds that need raising.

    no house sale needed.
    Originally posted by getmore4less
    That sounds on the bleeding edge of legality. We have had this discussion recently about whether residual beneficiaries are entitled to their share in cash rather than in other (potentially illiquid) assets, but to convert the entitlement of minors to the assets of their father into minority shares in a house which no-one intends to sell seems incredibly harsh. Normally, a trust for a minor beneficiary would be empowered to advance money ahead of majority for purposes of education or other good things - in essence, the things their late father would have paid for had he not died - and to replace that with a part share in a house is clearly not to their advantage. The trustees for the minors would be derelict in their duty, morally if not legally, if they permitted this.
    • Yorkshireman99
    • By Yorkshireman99 18th May 17, 12:42 PM
    • 2,965 Posts
    • 2,321 Thanks
    Yorkshireman99
    That sounds on the bleeding edge of legality. We have had this discussion recently about whether residual beneficiaries are entitled to their share in cash rather than in other (potentially illiquid) assets, but to convert the entitlement of minors to the assets of their father into minority shares in a house which no-one intends to sell seems incredibly harsh. Normally, a trust for a minor beneficiary would be empowered to advance money ahead of majority for purposes of education or other good things - in essence, the things their late father would have paid for had he not died - and to replace that with a part share in a house is clearly not to their advantage. The trustees for the minors would be derelict in their duty, morally if not legally, if they permitted this.
    Originally posted by securityguy
    Surely if the widow is entileted to her share she can force the sale of the property. If so end of story. All the rest is conjecture.
    • Keep pedalling
    • By Keep pedalling 18th May 17, 1:11 PM
    • 3,577 Posts
    • 3,850 Thanks
    Keep pedalling
    If they had divorced, the 5 kids would've got the equivalent of £100k each.

    Don't sign away your right to the money that the father spent his life earning. Wife 2, who was being divorced and already has another man, is already sitting pretty on a fortune ... a fortune not earnt and more than she'd have got from any divorce.
    Originally posted by PasturesNew
    Although I suspect the estate would probably been reduced with the divorce settlement.

    It simply amazes me at the number of people with these complex family set ups, who fail to make a will leaving their loved (and no longer loved) ones sorting out a horrible mess.
    Last edited by Keep pedalling; 18-05-2017 at 1:17 PM.
    • leespot
    • By leespot 18th May 17, 7:17 PM
    • 542 Posts
    • 434 Thanks
    leespot
    Just to make sure, the estranged wife IS entitled to most of the estate. Fighting it will fail!
    Originally posted by Yorkshireman99
    We're not fighting it Yorkshireman - we accept that the widow is entitled to a fair chunk, but she is wanting the others to sign away any claim to the whole estate so she retains everything.

    I'm confused. Are there two wives in the picture, one being the "step mother in law" "almost ex" you mention and the other being a first wife and the biological mother of some of the children?

    I ask only because there might be other factors operating which may alter who gets what eg provision for a dependent.
    Originally posted by paddy's mum
    No - only the one wife, sorry for the confusion.

    Surely if the widow is entileted to her share she can force the sale of the property. If so end of story. All the rest is conjecture.
    Originally posted by Yorkshireman99
    The widow isn't wanting to sell up to release her share, she is wanting the children to relinquish any claim to the whole estate so she can keep it all.
    Last edited by leespot; 22-05-2017 at 10:44 AM.
    • leespot
    • By leespot 18th May 17, 7:21 PM
    • 542 Posts
    • 434 Thanks
    leespot
    At the moment the older children have agreed between them to refuse to sign anything and speak to a solicitor. They are also in agreement that their father would not have wanted them to not receive anything from the estate (although a will would have been nice to have confirmed!)

    We only know the value of the property because it was valued as part of the divorce proceedings. There might be more money somewhere but we have no idea. We do know the widow has received his private pensions and subsequent lump sum payments.

    The next step is get the true value of the estate because at the moment that is not known and without that nothing further can be done.
    Last edited by leespot; 22-05-2017 at 10:45 AM.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,620Posts Today

6,083Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @thismorning: 'Sometimes the best gift is releasing somebody else from the obligation of having to give to you' says @MartinSLewis. Do y?

  • Shana tova umetuka - a sweet Jewish New Year to all celebrating. I won't be online the rest of t'week, as I take the time to be with family

  • Dear Steve. Please note doing a poll to ask people's opinion does not in itself imply an opinion! https://t.co/UGvWlMURxy

  • Follow Martin