Dodgy wording in a will ?

John_Pierpoint

You have put your finger directly on my second major problem.
It is fairly obvious that his will was written in response to the death of his wife.

So far I've found no trace of any probate for his wife, there are no papers in his desk or in the safe deposit box; but I am still hopeful of finding something in his house, when I go through it room by room, making an inventory.

Depending on the falling knife that is the value of his house, I might need what is left of her zero rate IHT band.
Many years ago I tried the approach of ".......can you have a look in the file you are keeping and let me know the amount of tax already paid?" with the tax man, admittedly over a matter of income tax not capital tax, and the tax man took the attitude that if I wanted to claim something it was up to me to have the evidence.
So I am not confident that the Capital Taxes office will give me any help in identifying the figures. It is just possible that his "housewife" spouse had so little money in her own name, that it was not necessary to gain probate for her.

John_Pierpoint

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]PRINCIPAL REGISTRY OFFICE[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Address[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Probate Department, Principal Registry of the Family Division, First Avenue House, 42-49 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6NP
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]has been able to prove that his wife died intestate (with no living parents or other dependants) so her husband must have inherited what ever she left.
So that clears up a line of investigation[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif].

[/FONT]

John_Pierpoint

Bump Bump Bump

Pee

Take it to a solicitor. Someone needs to see the whole wording - you have me very confused with cat and dog all over the place, i thought we would be discussing typographical errors in Wills.

I think that what will happen is that any beneficiaries who are not direct descendants who have predeceased will not receive anything, but there may be additional wording i.e. the administrative provisions that alters this.

Why as a lay executor would you take the risk of distributing £100,000 to the wrong people when you could pay £100 per person - i.e. a total of £1000 - to have it done properly by someone else. (I don't mean the running around and getting figures, which you can do to keep costs down, but the legal work.)

I'm sorry, but doing it yourself in this situation is like me buying an expensive car and then attempting to service it myself. Even if I had all the time and interest in the world, I wouldn't be the best person to do that, I would take it to a garage.

Errata

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding is that an executor is perfectly at liberty to seek professional help when a will is somewhat beyond the scope of their abilities to deal with and any costs for such work are charged to the estate.
This is what my stepdad did as executor of my mum's will.

John_Pierpoint

Thanks guys, the answers above did sort out the intestacy issue to my satisfaction BUT with nearly a dozen other beneficiaries to convince, I got a "STEP" solicitor to write me a letter confirming what I had been told by LocalHero above; just so I could photocopy it and give everyone a copy. However that letter cost the estate a 3 figure sum.
Now that I am tidying up the last few lose ends, another accounting nicety has come up about the apportionment of IHT, debts and expenses over the amounts payable to the beneficiaries.

Rather than explain the concept of a partially intestate will, all over again, I referred to this thread in the new posting here.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2154721

Baggysdad

A will is read from the time of death of the person making it.

While is is good practice to clarify whether gifts are made 'at date of death' or 'at date of will', if the will is 'silent' on the matter, it is assumed to be 'at date of death'.

So the lack of words 'as shall survive me' is of no consequence here - IMHO.

As cat and mouse are not children of the testator, their own children (if they have any) do not inherit their parents share - unless there is wording elsewhere in the Will to say that they do.

My interpretation is that the residue should be divided eight ways and that there is no partial intestacy.

But the ultimate decision is with the probate registry - so they are the best people to contact. As Localhero says, no point in wasting time and money on solicitors opinion - that's all it will be - just like everyone's comments in this thread.

B

John_Pierpoint

Hi Baggysdad,

I hope you are wrong! I have two solicitors and at least half a local Hero's opinion that the will is partially intestate.

My experience at the Central Probate Office was very disappointing - I wrote them a nice letter saying I would like to discuss the situation at my interview and explaining the problem with the will.
The person conducting the interview had not bothered to think about the situation and went off on a totally irrelevant story about three sisters sharing an estate.

They don't seem to be able to get the staff these days.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1713441

John.

Baggysdad

Umm,

If the residuary clause had named the 10 beneficiaries, I would agree with Localhero and the two solicitors - the estate would be partially intestate.

If the wording of the residuary bequest had made reference to those 'living at death' then I think Localhero and the two solicitors would agree that the estate would not be partially intestate.

We know that a Will is read as if it speaks on death and in such cases the need to clarify 'at death' is a worthwhile drafting technique for clarity, but is not strictly necessary. So the own question is - does this apply in this case?

As a personal representative you are personally liable for the distribution of the estate, so you want to be 110% certain. And you won't get that from this forum (or any forum) and you won't get it from a solicitor. The only place you will get it is from the court.

I would go back to the probate registry - what you are looking for is a general administration order from the Chancery Division of the High Court to interpret ambiguous wording. I know the theory but have never had to do one so don't know the procedure - but I expect that you can represent yourself to keep costs down.

Having said that, I would be talking to the firm who drafted the Will - or the firm who have taken over the files. Although the solicitor who drafted has retired, the file notes and the liability will be somewhere and the file notes might help with interpretation and whoever has the liability should be footing the bill for all this extra work that you are having to do.

Good luck!

B

wise_fool

Baggysdad wrote: »

Umm,

If the residuary clause had named the 10 beneficiaries, I would agree with Localhero and the two solicitors - the estate would be partially intestate.

It does doesn't it?

The will makes reference to the same people getting the specific gifts - two of whom have predeceased - so I reckon there is a partial intestacy.

As a reminder the will says:

I bequeath all the rest residue of my estate unto my executor upon trust that he shall divide the same amongst all the legatees mentioned in clause (x) of this my Will fractionally according to the value of each legacy bequeathed by the appropriate sub clause thereof.

The probate registry weren't helpful as you must follow a certain procedure - and unfortunately if you do want the chancery division to rule on this, expect expense and aggravation. It may be simpler (if this is at all possible) to get the beneficiaries to agree that the STEP guy is correct (and that there is an intestacy) before you wind up the estate or take this through the courts.