Fraudulent letter from solicitor?

22BUK

Not sure this is the correct forum for this problem...

This morning my wife received a letter from the solicitors dealing with her father's estate. He died three years ago. They detailed a payment they had received regarding a bond that had matured in October 2009 and enclosed a cheque payable to my wife.

But then the last paragraph of the letter:
"Strictly speaking this payment forms part of the estate. However, and I feel sure you will agree with me here, I would prefer not to re-open matters with the Capital Taxes Office at this point which would involve paying 40% of the total value of the cheque."

We had to re-read this to believe what we were seeing.

Surely this is fraud?
If my wife cashes the cheque, doesn't she become an accessory?
Could she cash it and then send the Revenue 40% as part of her annual return?

Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated.

Debt_Free_Chick

Was IHT paid by the Estate?

Or, would it have been, if this payment were included?

pollypenny

Sounds very dodgy!

Errata

Sounds completely bizarre and I'm quite surprised a solicitor would write "strictly speaking" as they're usually sticklers for unambiguity.
Why not write to the senior partner and ask for clarification ?

22BUK

Thanks for the replies.

Yes, IHT was payable and has been paid.

The letter came from a senior partner!

Do you think the Revenue would be interested to get a copy?

gfplux

Someone has made a mistake.

Do you want someone to pay with their career.

You have to ask yourself what sort of person you are.

Either phone them up and ask to reopen the file
OR
Call the revenue and shout Fraud

Then live with your decision.

monkeyspanner

Yes it sounds like they may have missed this investment from the probate valuation and do not wish to reopen the issue with the revenue as it is their error.

I am sure this would not be unusual and the revenue would merely ask for a further payment.

Would your wife be comfortable knowing that tax should have been paid and waiting for that tax investigation?

sagalout1954

22BUK wrote: »

But then the last paragraph of the letter:
"Strictly speaking this payment forms part of the estate. However, and I feel sure you will agree with me here, I would prefer not to re-open matters with the Capital Taxes Office at this point which would involve paying 40% of the total value of the cheque."

I suppose it's vaguely open to interpretation, they said THEY would prefer not to re-open....... didn't tell you not to do it yourselves. They should have given you 3 options, 1) is the one they gave you ie keep it & do nothing 2) re-open and pay (plus their costs) 3) contact tax office and arrange payment yourselves leaving them out of it.

Will you get some sort of satisfaction from getting someone at the firm into hot water? It's highly unlikely to be anyone of any relevance.

chesky369

Say you don't understand and ask for a clarification in writing.

Sweey_as_a_nut

You have done nothing wrong, get it out in the open.
There are a lot of solicitors who are shady to say the lest. GET IT SORTED.

retiredlady

Sounds to me that they were actually trying to do you a favour! As soon as you report them they will certainly stop trying to help any other people save 40% of the money that their father leaves them. Got to say you sound pretty mean spirited in my opinion.