Sale of property

pearl123

After a fast google found this from a UK website. And it's quite detailed.

What if the named Exectutor is not performing his duties properly.
A beneficiary or next of kin may question the Executor’s actions. If in doubt, the first step is always to write to the Executor and ask him to render an account of the administration of the Estate. If the beneficiary or next of kin is still not satisfied by the Executors’ explanation, then he or she may apply to Court to remove and substitute the Executor.
An attempt by the beneficiaries to remove the Executor is not an easy application. The beneficiaries must prove serious misbehaviour before the Court will even consider forcing an Executor to step down. In general, the Courts will only remove an Executor if the beneficiaries can show the following:

1. The Executor has become disqualified since the Deceased appointed him;
2. The Executor is incapable of performing his duties;
3. The Executor is unsuitable for the position.
   
4. Disqualification
   An Executor will only become disqualified if he has been convicted of a crime and sent to jail.
   
   
5. Incapable of performing duties
   An Executor will be seen as being incapable of performing his duties if the beneficiaries can prove that the Executor has a physical and mental disability, whether the disability is permanent or temporary, which is preventing the Executor from performing his duties.
   
   
6. Unsuitability
   An Executor becomes unsuitable to perform his duties if there is either a conflict of interest or some form of serious misconduct. As regards misconduct, this must be very serious in nature, leading to the Estate suffering as a result of the misconduct. The Court is likely to consider the following examples of misconduct:
   1. Stealing from the Estate
   2. Failure to keep accounting records
   3. Failure to obey a Court Order
   4. Wasting or mismanaging the Estate
   Misconduct is not always clear and may not always result in removal. For example, the Court is not likely to remove an Executor from his office if he has acted rudely or been unfriendly to the beneficiaries, or if he has repeatedly refused to give the beneficiaries information, or if he has been slow on settling the Will.
   How to remove and substitute an Executor
   
   
   If the beneficiaries have serious concerns regarding the ability of an Executor to perform his duties, the beneficiaries must firstly write to the Executor and ask him to explain his actions. If an explanation is not forthcoming or the beneficiaries are not satisfied by the Executors’ explanation, he or she may make an application to Court to remove or substitute the Executor.
   The High Court has a discretionary power under Section 50 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 to appoint a substitute personal representative or to terminate the appointment of a personal representative. Such an application must be made pursuant to Civil Procedure Rules 57.13. If proceedings regarding an inheritance dispute have already commenced, then such an application is made by application notice. However, if there are no proceedings, then a Part 8 claim needs to be made.
   The application must be supported by the following:
   1. A certified sealed copy of the Grant of Probate or Letters of Administration;
   2. A Witness Statement setting out the reasons why the removal or substitution of the Executor is sought (referring to his disqualification, incapacity or unsuitability as per above), particulars of the Deceased’s assets and liabilities, those who are in possession of documents relating to the Estate, names of beneficiaries and details of their interest and the proposed individual to substitute the Executor;
   3. Unless the proposed Executor is the Official Solicitor, his signed or sealed consent to act;
   4. A Witness Statement of the proposed Executor’s fitness to act in such capacity, if he is an individual.
   
   http://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/resources/articles/wtt_removing_substituting_executors.aspx

insur

pearl123 wrote: »

I see no evidence that the MIL was poorly adviced.

I agree that in pure legal terms MIL has been correctly advised.
However, when dealing with wills, money and family a little common sense is far more important.

I doubt in this case if MIL was informed of the possible pitfalls in terms of settlement and future family relationships.

A little common sense and practical advise can save a decade of
feuds and recriminations amongst once close family members.

While solicitors can recite volumes of case laws few seem able to demostrante an ounce of common sense.