Inheritence Advice

Tom_Jones

A member of my family is about to have a substantial amount of money given to her from a bequest in a will. Her ex husband has said that he is entitled to some of this money ( up to 25 % he says ) as there are new laws entitling him to this money. Is this correct ?

I personally feel he is trying it on and is entitled to nothing as they have been divorced over 5 years now.

Any advice would be appreciated before I go and see a solicitor.

Thanks

dunstonh

I would have said once the divorce has been concluded, any money that comes in the future is not included unless there was something in the settlement which had a specified earmark against it.

Rikki

If you have a clean break divorce he will not be entitled to any money you receive as a result of a relatives death.

edit: Some solicitors offer a half hour free consultation. It would put your mind a rest.

Debt_Free_Chick

I agree with others ... but you need to look at the terms of the original divorce. There will have been a Court Order which dealt with all the financials. Where there are no children, then the "clean break" is normal. So the finances are split at the time of divorce and what happens after that is irrelevant.

Unusually, there might be a share of future fortunes, but I have to admit I've never come across this other than where there are children involved. Even then, any revision of the finances has to be by a Variation of the Court Order, which means going back to Court.

Get the original Court Order and read what it says (or get your friend to).

Even if the divorce were not finalised, an inheritance can be excluded, if you have a clever enough lawyer (as an inheritance can be deemed to be "not the product of the marriage" if you see what I mean).

Tom_Jones

There is a child involved although he is over 16. Originally when the divorce happened he was paid a sum of money by my parents, to get rid of him basically, and he signed a legal agreement with a solicitor that he had no further claim against her, so I would have thought that would have been an end to the matter.

Thanks for the help though, and I will be seeing a solicitor next Wednesday.

Bossyboots

If there was a clean break settlement, i.e. a court order whether by consent or order of the court that includes a paragraph specifically prohibiting future claims against each other then the ex-husband cannot claim.

Whether there are children is irrelevant, as is the idea that it has to be a product of the marriage. If an inheritance or lottery win even occurs before divorce, or afterwards where no proper financial document exists precluding future claims, then the ex partner can make a claim made against it.

I find it interesting that there has been a could of threads on this on here this week and strangely enough it has cropped up at four times elsewhere, including my friend's ex who has tried it on too. Seems to be something in the air at the moment.

dunstonh

Let us know the outcome as it appears that we are all interested in what is said.

Robert_Sterling_3

Please do not answer this question if you do not wish to but ...

... I am wondering

... What is the relationship, if any, between the member of your family
and the 16+ child.

... What is the relationship, if any, between your parents and
the member of your family.

... What is the relationship, if any, between the person making the will
and your parents, the member of the family and the 16+ child.

... What is the relationship, if any, between the member of your family's
former husband and the 16+ child.

... Is the 16+ child also 18+.

... Is the 16+ child in full time education.

I do not expect that answers to these questions will make any difference as there appears to have been a valid will.

The reason I have asked the question, without actually expecting an answer,
is your use of the phrase "to get rid of him" which at first sight at least seems a bit harsh.

Bossyboots

Perhaps it would have sounded less harsh if the phrase had been "paid him off" but the effect was no doubt the same.

Robert_Sterling_3

Tom_Jones wrote:

he signed a legal agreement with a solicitor that he had no further claim against her.

I have just noticed the above statement.

Children do not usually sign away any rights they might have.
I am not even sure that a child can sign a legal agreement.

Bossyboots

Robert_Sterling wrote:

I have just noticed the above statement.

Children do not usually sign away any rights they might have.
I am not even sure that a child can sign a legal agreement.

I think you have misread the poster's meaning, or else I have.

I read it that there was a 16 year old child. Thats it, just a statement of fact but maybe a salient point in the marriage settlement.

Then, that the ex was paid off and signed a legal agreement, not the child.

I can see how you might have read it differently but I just took it as a continuation of the first post and interpreted as I have put.

Perhaps the OP could confirm what was meant.