Charities, Wills and letters

x332raqce

I wonder if anyone can help me.

I am a lay person dealing with my Aunt's will.

The Executors saw that there was an ambiguity in the will and requested an Independent Counsel's opinion. The result of the Independent Opinion meant that the 9 charities listed in the will would effectively receive nothing.

The executors wrote to each charity explaining the situation and attaching a copy of the Independent Counsel's Opinion. Representatives of all the 9 charities wrote back agreeing to accept the Independent Counsel's Opinion. A significant proportion of the letters state that the Trustees and / or solicitors had been consulted.

Since then a firm of Solicitors has got themselves involved and has managed to get 3 of the charities on board and each of those charities has now written to the executors revoking the agreement made in their earlier letters.

This puts the Executors in a very difficult position as, on one hand they have letters from each of the charities agreeing to the Independent Opinion but on the other hand 3 of the charities have seen fit to change their minds.

Is does not seem to be an honourable course of action by the 3 charities involved. The 3 charities do not seem to be moved by any request for them to be honourable....they seem to just ahve ££££ signs in their eyes.

I should add that I am not a benificiary, just to make it clear.

This should also be a warning for Executors to be very wary of thier dealings with Charities.

kazzah60

x332raqce wrote: »

I wonder if anyone can help me.

I am a lay person dealing with my Aunt's will.

The Executors saw that there was an ambiguity in the will and requested an Independent Counsel's opinion. The result of the Independent Opinion meant that the 9 charities listed in the will would effectively receive nothing.

The executors wrote to each charity explaining the situation and attaching a copy of the Independent Counsel's Opinion. Representatives of all the 9 charities wrote back agreeing to accept the Independent Counsel's Opinion. A significant proportion of the letters state that the Trustees and / or solicitors had been consulted.

Since then a firm of Solicitors has got themselves involved and has managed to get 3 of the charities on board and each of those charities has now written to the executors revoking the agreement made in their earlier letters.

This puts the Executors in a very difficult position as, on one hand they have letters from each of the charities agreeing to the Independent Opinion but on the other hand 3 of the charities have seen fit to change their minds.

Is does not seem to be an honourable course of action by the 3 charities involved. The 3 charities do not seem to be moved by any request for them to be honourable....they seem to just ahve ££££ signs in their eyes.

I should add that I am not a benificiary, just to make it clear.

This should also be a warning for Executors to be very wary of thier dealings with Charities.

Whilst I have no legal point of view to give, PLEASE don't assume that ALL charities are the same- I will assume that the three charities who have now reneged on their initial agreement are three of the "larger" well known charities - I work full time on a voluntary basis for a small charity - and whilst we have never been in this position, I do feel that your comment about being wary when executors deal with charities is rather unjust and unfair.

NOT all charities behave in such a money grabbing way - those who could benefit the most from legacy giving are those who can least afford to fight such a legal battle.

x332raqce

kazzah60 wrote: »

Whilst I have no legal point of view to give, PLEASE don't assume that ALL charities are the same- I will assume that the three charities who have now reneged on their initial agreement are three of the "larger" well known charities - I work full time on a voluntary basis for a small charity - and whilst we have never been in this position, I do feel that your comment about being wary when executors deal with charities is rather unjust and unfair.

NOT all charities behave in such a money grabbing way - those who could benefit the most from legacy giving are those who can least afford to fight such a legal battle.

Actually, the charities who have reneged on their initial agreement are 3 smaller charities.

The other charities mentioned in the Will have, so far, behaved impeccably, including a number of "larger" well known charities.

As I said, the 3 charities concerned do not seem to be interested in acting in an honourable manner.

PhylPho

Unless those written agreements contained somewhere within the text a conditional clause or reservation of position then the issue of revocation is a thorny one, leaving the Executors in an unreasonable situation where it would *seem* that no written confirmation signifies anything at all, and that, therefore, an agreement can be made on one day, withdrawn on another, reinstated the day after, and withdrawn yet again the day after that.

However: on the other hand, there's nothing to suggest in your post that Counsel has not made an error in some way or other, and that lawyers acting for the three charities have identified that error and are legitimately using it as grounds to challenge the opinion given and to revoke any and all agreements relating to it.

The issue, therefore, is not one of venality but legality.

You don't state the worth of the estate in this case (nor should you: this is an open forum) but that worth is clearly going to be impacted if a legal wrangle now ensues. You don't say (nor should you) what the value is of the individual bequests involved.

However, monetary considerations are very much to the fore here: a legal dispute over a £500 or £5000 bequest may seem sensible in principle though anything but in practice, whereas a dispute over a £50,000 or £500,000 bequest is a different kettle of fish indeed.

I don't think any Internet forum is going to be of practical help to you in resolving the legal issues here. However, there is nothing to prevent you -- as an executor -- from writing to the Charities Commission for their view (I doubt you'll actually get one, but placing this matter on record with the Commissioners is no bad thing):

http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/


As to your warning about dealing with charities, I can understand how you feel. But in this instance, the Will could just as easily have involved anomalous bequests to individuals as charities, in the wake of which those individuals agreed with Counsel's opinion but were then advised that as grounds existed for legal challenge, the agreement was null and void.

x332raqce

PhylPho...useful feedback. Of course the "new" solicitor is arguing that the Independent Counsels Opinion is flawed, but as the wording of the will is ambiguous and there have been no legal cases on this point, it is one legal persons opinion verses another.

Each of the charities involved had the opportunity to get solicitors advice on the legal point and it is telling that the larger charities listed have accepted the Independent Counsels opinion. It is only some of the smaller charities who have now reneged on their acceptance in writing.

In respect of the legal issues, what will be will be....that has to be left to solicitors.

I just cannot believe that charities would act in this manner...it does not seem very moral to me.

At the end of the day, it is likely that the Executors would have seen if they were able to make a donation to each charity in agreement with the other beneficiaries once this matter had been resolved to respect the wishes of the deceased

MrRedundant

The charities have every legal right to contest it in court if desired. Of course you are going to say they have no case.

What is the wording surrounding the ambiguity?

A court is likely to find in favour of the most likely meaning If I recall correctly.

The charities have likely agreed at the time based on the independent counsel being correct and have now been notified that there is a dispute on the accuracy of this position.

I dont actually see the problem. Surely if your relative intended to give the money to charity you where aware of this and will want to comply with her wishes?

kazzah60

I just cannot believe that charities would act in this manner...it does not seem very moral to me.


But please bear in mind, someone somewhere in those charities is saying " I cannot believe that the
executors of Mr/S XXXX's will have reneged on his/her decision to leave us £x in their will"

on a personal note, it seems odd to me that someone would leave an amount to charities and then someone else decide that the language is ambiguous - surely their intention of leaving a bequest to the named charities is obvious by the fact that the charities are named in the will.

PhylPho

x332raqce wrote: »

PhylPho...useful feedback. Of course the "new" solicitor is arguing that the Independent Counsels Opinion is flawed, but as the wording of the will is ambiguous and there have been no legal cases on this point, it is one legal persons opinion verses another.

Thanks for that, x332raqce. Your comment about "there have been no legal cases on this point" would seem to go to the heart of the matter.

It would appear, therefore, that a unique situation has arisen, and has been viewed by one practitioner in one way (the independent Counsel) but viewed in a different way by other practitioners (the legal representatives of the charities involved.)

So what seems to have started out as a matter of interpreting a deceased's wishes has turned into a matter of interpreting an issue with a direct bearing upon a point of specialist Law.

Obviously, I don't know the Counsel involved here nor the law firm contesting his / her opinion.

But if the latter is a legal practice of integrity which genuinely believes that the former's opinion is flawed and risks precipitating unintended consequences for probate Law as a whole, then they're actually doing their duty in challenging that opinion. (Where legal dynamite is concerned, there's nothing more volatile than a Last Will & Testament.)

Whether they're right and Counsel is wrong, or Counsel is right and they're wrong, is really important to resolve here.

It certainly transcends whatever view one may take of the charities' conduct in this, bearing in mind that they may be in receipt of the strongest legal advice possible that they should not accept a legal opinion which, for all I know, has implications for all bequests to all charities in the future.

This does seem so complex an issue that any judgment made about it by anyone not intimately acquainted with the essence of the legal disagreement is going to be premature. That includes any condemnation of the three charities concerned.

I'm just so sorry that you have been caught up in all this, and hope it's resolved soon. Good luck!