URGENT inheritance,money owed and deed of variation HELP

morrison321

Hi can someone help. a relative died recently and left the sale of the house to be divided between three sisters. one sister owes another (who happens to be the executer of the will) practically all of her share (from lending over the years) , due to personal problems which i shall not get into here. she has agreed to give the money back but we know that once she gets this cheque it will be spent. we think we can convince her to sign her share over but is this legal to do this? we dont even think she has a bank account.

1 is there anyway the cheque can be written out in the executors name?
so that she can pay whats owed and we can give her the difference?

2 does this require a deed of viarience?

if not what is the protocol required

3 We dont know if she is on benefits. We are unsure how this would affect anything since the other two sisters have always worked. she never tells us anything unless she wants something.

Now the problem is this the solicitors are almost ready to hand over the amount from the sale of the house to send out. The one sister/ executor sees this as their final opportunity the recoup all the money owed, less 2000 pound.

BUT she is worried that she will not get it if the cheque is sent straight to the sister. She has substance abuse issues. She is and always will have as far as i can see.

can someone help and fill us in ? if the cheque goes to her it lost. she will agree to do any chnages if possible but we dont know what they are.

thank you

Oldernotwiser

Unless she is actually on benefits and you want to know the effect of an inheritance on these, you've posted this on the wrong board.

bryanb

It is the executor of a will who distributes assets, it must be done in accordance with the will after probate and payment of debts.

john539

morrison321 wrote: »

Hi can someone help. a relative died recently and left the sale of the house to be divided between three sisters. one sister owes another (who happens to be the executer of the will) practically all of her share (from lending over the years) , due to personal problems which i shall not get into here. she has agreed to give the money back but we know that once she gets this cheque it will be spent. we think we can convince her to sign her share over but is this legal to do this? we dont even think she has a bank account.

1 is there anyway the cheque can be written out in the executors name?
so that she can pay whats owed and we can give her the difference?

2 does this require a deed of viarience?

if not what is the protocol required

3 We dont know if she is on benefits. We are unsure how this would affect anything since the other two sisters have always worked. she never tells us anything unless she wants something.

Now the problem is this the solicitors are almost ready to hand over the amount from the sale of the house to send out. The one sister/ executor sees this as their final opportunity the recoup all the money owed, less 2000 pound.

BUT she is worried that she will not get it if the cheque is sent straight to the sister. She has substance abuse issues. She is and always will have as far as i can see.

can someone help and fill us in ? if the cheque goes to her it lost. she will agree to do any chnages if possible but we dont know what they are.

thank you

You seem to think that you can take the money due to the sister with problems before she gets her hands on it.

The sister who is owed money & is also an Executor needs to be careful.
The inheritance and debt are completely separate matters.

It's up to the sisters to agree if, when & how the debt is repaid, but the sister owed money can't insist on anything.

If there is a problem the Executor sister needs to ask/persuade/insist that the problem sister repays her, but she still needs to agree.

I would think the solicitors would only want to pay the money to the beneficiaries & not get involved in settlement of other family debts they don't know anything about.

Mojisola

If you can get her to sign a deed of variance, it could be done that way. The problem would be if the sister is on means-tested benefits, this would be seen as intentional deprivation of assets and she could lose her benefits.

bryanb

john539 wrote: »

I would think the solicitors would only want to pay the money to the beneficiaries & not get involved in settlement of other family debts they don't know anything about.

The solicitor has no right to decide what he wants to do. The EXECUTOR has the responsibility to distribute the inheritance.

The solicitor will act on instructions-providing the instructions are legal.

john539

bryanb wrote: »

The solicitor has no right to decide what he wants to do. The EXECUTOR has the responsibility to distribute the inheritance.

The solicitor will act on instructions-providing the instructions are legal.

Like in all things involving other people you need to get agreement.

If someone does not agree, whether they are right or wrong, you get delays until the dispute is resolved.

The solicitor has no right, but the solicitor has the money, you can just wait until they agree.

If the solicitor has no knowledge or involvement in the distribution of the estate they should do what the Executor instructs.

If the solicitor is aware of the beneficiaries and the Executor instructs not to pay someone, the solicitor can politely query this or ask for everything in writing.

Kimitatsu

MOVING THREADS FOR BETTER RESPONSES


Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere(please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

chesky369

...The solicitor has no right to decide what he wants to do. The EXECUTOR has the responsibility to distribute the inheritance...

However, the monies involved are channelled through a solicitor and no solicitor worth his/her salt, will give two-thirds of an estate to an executor, cutting out another beneficiary, just on the executor's say-so. And once the executor has explained, the said solicitor will tell them in no uncertain terms that the two issues are entirely separate in law.

bryanb

chesky369 wrote: »

...The solicitor has no right to decide what he wants to do. The EXECUTOR has the responsibility to distribute the inheritance...

However, the monies involved are channelled through a solicitor and no solicitor worth his/her salt, will give two-thirds of an estate to an executor, cutting out another beneficiary, just on the executor's say-so. And once the executor has explained, the said solicitor will tell them in no uncertain terms that the two issues are entirely separate in law.

You fail to quote where I said the solicitor will act on instructions providing they are legal.
Also the funds may or may not be channeled through a solicitor depending on circumstances.
As I have pointed out it is the executor who has the legal responsibility, there is no requirement to even involve a solicitor if the executor chooses not to.

dzug1

If the solicitor is a joint executor (and it sounds possible - why else are they involved?) then they also have legal responsibility.