Fraudulent letter from solicitor?

chesky369

I don't think the OP can or should report the solicitor as, quite frankly, he hasn't a clue what he's talking about yet, so would be talking from a position of ignorance. You can't do anything until you understand what precisely has gone on.

pollypenny

retiredlady wrote: »

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.

You sound honest to me! The tax is payable if the estate is over £350 or so, so any attempt to evade that is dishonest. I cannot believe your solicitors. Ask for a explanation.

Farway

Of course we do not know amount, could be if solicitor reopens and bills costs to OP, plus 40% tax, then final amount could be very little

[Deleted User]

22BUK wrote: »

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?

wouldnt the bond been known about at the time and taken into account for iht?if so iht has probably been paid already and the letter badly worded

LeeSouthEast

Personally I'd cash the damn thing and be very happy you've got 40% more than you would have done.

But hey, that's just me.

muskoka

Flipping heck. I'd just cash the thing & be done with it.

I'm not a professional advisor, only voicing an opinion

Willman_Rodders

The problem with 'taking the money' is that the wording of the letter from the solicitor implies that by doing so you are breaking the law; and the letter makes you aware of that fact, and that the solicitors know that is the case, and [in effect] asks you to join the solicitors in doing so.

If the solicitor had written something along the lines of ... 'I have pleasure in enclosing a cheque for £x, representing a bond that matured in October 2009' then the OP may not have suspected anything was wrong; and assumed it was just an oversight by the solicitor.

Now the OP collusion might never be found out, but then again they might. The defence that they 'did not appreciate it was wrong' however will not stand up in Court as the evidence [i.e. the solicitor's letter] against such a claim is clear.

And what if, having made one mistake, there is an even bigger mistake by the solicitor that is yet to come to light in the future? If you then go back to complain the solicitor could then say 'Well, take me to Court. But be aware that if you do then we will have to implicate you in this fraud too'. Another words: blackmail. I know this example is extreme, and highly unlikely, but it just highlights the point that once you have knowlingly committed a fraud it becomes difficult to then stand on the high morale ground in the future.

I think I'd be tempted to go back to the solicitor, ask them what the letter meant, and then give them the option to have the letter back and start the process again - but this time properly.

LeeSouthEast

Rodders brings very valid points to the table.

I'm still cashing the cheque.

zygurat789

Couldn't the letter be seen as an incitement to break the law. Make sure you don't give it back to the solicitor you never know when it might come in useful.

jdturk

zygurat789 wrote: »

Couldn't the letter be seen as an incitement to break the law. Make sure you don't give it back to the solicitor you never know when it might come in useful.

Blackmail is just as good then :cool: