Solicitor slow over probate

sdooley

Deed of variation should be possible but it may require a new grant to be taken out in the father's estate.

I don't think we're in disagreement about what should have been done, but whether what should be done now is an aggressive approach or a practical one will depend on personal style & the advice of the accountant and/or STEP member, who will likely have had dealings in the past with this solicitor. Doing a deal where practical control of the estate is surrendered and reasonable fees agreed for work carried out will be preferable to some people than a dispute - in almost all probate disputes both sides costs will be taken out of the estate (though the solicitor's costs may be challenged and often cut heavily).

Agree with what you say re: appointing relatives where possible rather than a professional; the only exception would be where the family are likely to argue, there a neutral professional will help calm things as if you think costs in non-contentious estates are outrageous you haven't seen anything in relation to contentious ones.

There will be a big scandal in 20-30 years time when all the people currently getting 'free wills' from their banks die and their banks get their 2-3% fee (plus 'extras' such as conveyancing) or whatever. There is some logic to the hourly charge, it generally works out cheaper than percentage fees.

sloughflint

sdooley wrote: »

Agree with what you say re: appointing relatives where possible rather than a professional; the only exception would be where the family are likely to argue, there a neutral professional will help calm things as if you think costs in non-contentious estates are outrageous you haven't seen anything in relation to contentious ones.

Thanks for your reply sdooley. I think you may have misunderstood one aspect of an earlier post of mine.
I would be quite happy to pay close to £200 per hour ( not terribly far from the STEP fees you stated) for a decent job. The problem I have is that solicitors in far larger firms than OP's dealing with, claiming to be work solely in this area of expertise day in day out, can make quite fundamental and costly mistakes.

I see your point with argumentative families. That is a difficult decision for the person choosing their executor to make.

sloughflint

sdooley wrote: »

Doing a deal where practical control of the estate is surrendered and reasonable fees agreed for work carried out will be preferable to some people than a dispute - in almost all probate disputes both sides costs will be taken out of the estate (though the solicitor's costs may be challenged and often cut heavily).

I also see your point about personal style but don't you think there is a duty to ensure this doesn't happen again?
I once did a 'deal' and to this day I regret doing it and wonder what other mistakes may have been brushed under the carpet.

sdooley

sloughflint wrote: »

I also see your point about personal style but don't you think there is a duty to ensure this doesn't happen again?
I once did a 'deal' and to this day I regret doing it and wonder what other mistakes may have been brushed under the carpet.

Absolutely. Do you 'sort' things and move on or do you fight. Choose your battles. Lots of people will have taken 70%+ of unlawful bank charges as a refund rather than holding out for the full 100% and may be glad to have done so rather than be stuck in the delay while the case is on hold.

If it's worthwhile then fight it but for example half Wordsworth's life was spent fighting the Lowther family over an inheritance, imagine how much more poetry he could have written if he wasn't wasting his energy on a dispute which neither his father not he concluded in their lifetimes.

There is a saying, a happy customer will tell 3 other people, a disappointed one will tell 20.

The other problem with family is the number of people who will be appointed executor and just go off with the money... you might not think so but the figures on power of attorney fraud, for example, are quite shocking.

sloughflint

sdooley wrote: »

Absolutely. Do you 'sort' things and move on or do you fight. Choose your battles. Lots of people will have taken 70%+ of unlawful bank charges as a refund rather than holding out for the full 100% and may be glad to have done so rather than be stuck in the delay while the case is on hold.

If it's worthwhile then fight it but for example half Wordsworth's life was spent fighting the Lowther family over an inheritance, imagine how much more poetry he could have written if he wasn't wasting his energy on a dispute which neither his father not he concluded in their lifetimes.

There is a saying, a happy customer will tell 3 other people, a disappointed one will tell 20.

The other problem with family is the number of people who will be appointed executor and just go off with the money... you might not think so but the figures on power of attorney fraud, for example, are quite shocking.

The bank charges analogy isn't quite the same as here though is it? For me it's a question of morality rather than the monetary aspect. I still feel very guilty for allowing a professional get away with a serious mistake and be able to continue to make mistakes. I had my reasons at the time.

People put in OP's situation are in the end so tired with the brain ache, the hassle. It's so very tempting to let things go.I'm sure it happens a lot.

How many dissatisfied customers are there really, I wonder? If OP's solicitor had perhaps been a little more charming,convincing,he may have been able to persuade his co-executor that the timescale was adequate, OP may never have posted on here in frustration and found out that she could have saved 120k in IHT. How many others are there around?

It's all very unsatisfactory. I wish something could be done about the global picture.
But as far as OP's concerned, I would put my faith in STEP now.

ukmaggie45

Crumbs, husband rang this afternoon to say money is transferred. Checked account after a 2 hour nap and found it is true! :j Can't believe it! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

At least will now be able to pay Advance Payment on Motability car when it arrives (hopefully mid month) which was otherwise going to go on credit card. And pay off my credit card too! :money: Good heavens, I've come over quite faint feeling! :beer:

Will catch up on the rest of this thread when I'm over the shock!

sloughflint

Good news. That's a start.

localhero

sdooley wrote:

Doing a deed of variation is simple. But re-opening a closed estate (the father's) to enter into a deed of variation in it is more difficult, especially as the father's estate was paid to the mother. A grant de bonis non may have to be applied for - this is a special kind of grant of probate where the person who was sole beneficiary (your mother) in the father's estate has died. That new executor can enter into the deed of variation.

Sdooley, please tell me you are not a member of STEP - that Rolls Royce of estate planning, as I'm afraid you are getting out of your depth here.

For the benefit of those not legally qualified or fluent in Latin (and you too), a Grant de bonis non administratis applies only where the last remaining executor dies before the estate has been administered. It has nothing to do with any beneficiaries dying.

I find it almost unbelievable how the solicitor can suggest that there was no potential for tax planning with a Deed of Variation. When the second parent died, I suspect that the solicitor (if he had even belatedly spotted the tax saving potential) thought that this opportunity had gone.

Well it hadn't, and still hasn't, irrespective of whether the estate had been passed over to the mother. The Deed of Variation can still be carried out without any problem. When I say that, I mean by somebody competent, without incurring thousands more in unnecessary fees. It shouldn't require a STEP practitioner either - as this is a relatively straightforward estate. However in view of the OP's situation, a STEP practitioner (who knows their stuff) might at least bring some peace of mind to a very depressing state of affairs.

Sloughflint has raised some valid points which you don't seem to have addressed. Being 'practical' lets this incompetent fool off the hook - do you not think that he should be held to account for the protection of the many countless other unsuspecting clients who stray into his path for his so called 'professional services'? Let's not forget, the professional conduct issues alone which are bad enough - but up to £120,000 in simple tax savings missed? :eek:

sloughflint wrote:

I still feel very guilty for allowing a professional get away with a serious mistake and be able to continue to make mistakes. I had my reasons at the time.

Even Sloughflint who is probably more intelligent than most, was persuaded to do a deal with at least one incompetent probate 'specialist' - what hope does everybody else have if nobody is held to account?

sdooley

localhero, you're quite right it is executor and not just beneficiary who must have died, I just assumed that the father's will appointed mum as executor.

There were no inheritance tax complications over Dad's will, as he left everything to Mum.

I have been involved in a case of successive deaths and it was not simple to deal with and a grant de bonis non was required - apologies for making assumptions and not looking up chapter and verse but as I said above, nothing posted on these boards is advice, just discussion. Hopefully highlighting the possibility of the DoV was of assistance - as you say a further grant may not be necessary, it depends on who was the executor.

It's all very unsatisfactory. I wish something could be done about the global picture.

What needs to be done is a widening of the pool of people working in the area (the high fees seen are a symptom of the shortage of probate practitioners) together with good oversight of matters by relevant professional bodies - ultimately also the expansion of STEP to the stage where it is no longer just seen as an ivory tower but a course which every self-respecting practitioner in the field would undertake. It's less expensive than one year of an undergraduate degree and open to everyone - lawyers, accountants, stockbrokers, willwriters and bank staff.

As for being practical versus taking a complaint, isn't it possible to do both? i.e. be practical until you get the estate sorted (at least things are getting moving now) then put a complaint in for inadequate professional service or whatever. Just don't sign a discharge for the executor until you are satisfied.

I'm not a qualified STEP member and I don't currently work in that area of law (but might hope to in the future) but hope my contributions have been helpful. As it's getting personal I'll leave the thread.

sloughflint

There is no need to leave the thread, sdooley. There is a huge shortage of posters willing to share their knowledge on this forum.
I would far rather people did their best to be accurate but were prepared to be corrected and still posted to give people pointers to research further to double check accuracy.That's what I do. The usual official advice of not acting on contents of posts is written somewhere.

sdooley wrote: »

as you say a further grant may not be necessary, it depends on who was the executor.

Comparing your post and what localhero has written, since the solicitor was dealing with the father's estate ( presumably as executor), the 'death of the last remaining executor' aspect doesn't seem to apply and hopefully one of these grants might not be necessary.

edit:
In fact here we have it.

ukmaggie45 wrote: »

Both my parents appointed my husband as joint executor with their solicitor.

Good news!
Hopefully it will be straightforward after all, ukmaggie45.

sdooley wrote: »

ultimately also the expansion of STEP to the stage where it is no longer just seen as an ivory tower but a course which every self-respecting practitioner in the field would undertake. It's less expensive than one year of an undergraduate degree and open to everyone - lawyers, accountants, stockbrokers, willwriters and bank staff.

Couldn't agree with you more. I have always wondered why I have experienced so many 'hiccups' ( and read of so many more on here). It wasn't until a few months ago when I posed a semi-related question, that I realised that solicitors aren't obliged to undertake relevant exams. No wonder mistakes happen!

The trouble is how can this be enforced? Larger solicitor firms seem more keen on compensating clients to keep them quiet than deal with the real issue:rolleyes:. And even more likely, many clients will be oblivious to mistakes being made.

sdooley wrote: »

As for being practical versus taking a complaint, isn't it possible to do both? i.e. be practical until you get the estate sorted (at least things are getting moving now) then put a complaint in for inadequate professional service or whatever. Just don't sign a discharge for the executor until you are satisfied.

I'd been wondering about this.The 'deal' I did was my very first introduction to the dubious world of solicitor antics.
OP needs to be aware that, if my experience is anything to go by, the firm will be very keen to get a signature stating that the matter will not be taken further. If OP could be prepared for this and resist signing then in months after things have relaxed, if she feels so inclined, she could perhaps try and get this man's professionalism and competence investigated.Hopefully the STEP member will advise on the best way forward.
Also I am concerned that this man will still be difficult and waste time arguing with a specialist. I've seen this happen.