Probate/intestacy stalemate query

rpc

getmore4less wrote: »

Dependant minor would possibly have a claim under the 1975 act which trumps Intestecy

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/63

But that needs resolved by a court or Deed of Variation. The decision cannot be made by the personal representative and certainly not a partner with no immediate entitlement to the estate (although the partner may also have a claim under the same act)

This is made clear by the act:

that person may apply to the court for an order under section 2 of this Act on the ground that the disposition of the deceased’s estate effected by his will or the law relating to intestacy, or the combination of his will and that law, is not such as to make reasonable financial provision for the applicant.

In deciding such a case, it would need to be shown that the portion of the estate left by the rules of intestacy was not enough.

troubleinparadise

getmore4less wrote: »

Dependant minor would possibly have a claim under the 1975 act which trumps Intestecy

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/63

So OP needs to take legal advice, given that details such as where the deceased lived and value of the estate aren't given here.

Whatever, you just shouldn't sign something that you know to be inaccurate or untrue.

getmore4less

Presumably this is the PA1.(if not that raises further questions)

http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/pa01-eng.pdf

This would require the relationship of the proposed administrators to be specified(C7).

If may be that it is just a mistake.
If it was deliberate there would be no need to even ask the OP(son) and their sibling.

From the post there are 3 eligable administrators one being the minor(B2a).
I think this would get picked up by the court.

No where does the PA1 mention benifitiaries.

I don't think errors on the PA1 actualy change the legal distribution.
they are there for the court to assess the application and make sure coorect people are applying.

madbadrob

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/63 very true but that would require a court to make that decision based on what the minor's share would be and whether that can justify saying the other children are not entitled.

Non married spouses can make a claim under the same act but they would need solid arguments to get any court to accept it. One such being they had been domiciled together for a number of years and that the deceased was the only breadwinner in the relationship because the partner stayed at home to care for the children.

Has the OP was asking about signing a document that gave all to the minor my point still stands and the OP should NOT sign this form as that would be fraudulent

Rob

getmore4less

madbadrob wrote: »

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/63 very true but that would require a court to make that decision based on what the minor's share would be and whether that can justify saying the other children are not entitled.

Non married spouses can make a claim under the same act but they would need solid arguments to get any court to accept it. One such being they had been domiciled together for a number of years and that the deceased was the only breadwinner in the relationship because the partner stayed at home to care for the children.

Has the OP was asking about signing a document that gave all to the minor my point still stands and the OP should NOT sign this form as that would be fraudulent

Rob

it is importamt to forwarn the OP which direction this could go if the partner or child claimed they were dependant.

It would not require the father to have been the only breadwinner.

AIUI the claims have become a lot easier since the introduction of the some other partner legislation the name of which escapes me.

madbadrob

getmore4less wrote: »

it is importamt to forwarn the OP which direction this could go if the partner or child claimed they were dependant.

It would not require the father to have been the only breadwinner.

AIUI the claims have become a lot easier since the introduction of the some other partner legislation the name of which escapes me.

Not for a minor child I agree but for the non married partner is would require to show he was the breadwinner and she had been the stay at home mum. I will try and dig out the case I am thinking of if I can remember its name

Rob

posttokev

For some reason, I've not been getting notifications about updates to this thread, thus I've not been aware of all the activity...

So anyway, bringing it back to my situation...

A lot has been going on this week, whereby my mother has been asking her solicitor for information to be sent by email, as opposed to a phone call or meeting, as she feels more comfortable with having a tangible record of what's being said that she can refer back to.

For reasons best known to himself, her solicitor has been extremely reluctant to commit answers to our questions to an email, which has concerned her greatly.

Her solicitor has been pushing the point hard that we are on a tight deadline and have to commit to paying him £3,600 to file a Defence, so we can then get to see the Will file and any other supporting documents. (Ultimately, this means that, if my mother then decides it would be in her best interests to withdraw following the disclosure, she could be liable for all costs. This would be approximately £16,000, which the solicitor was attempting to portray as just £3,000 - the cost of filing the defence, before VAT, and ignoring the other costs to our side thus far and the full costs of the other side.)

However, after copying his partners into her emails, my mother has, finally, got most of the answers she sought. This has taken from last weekend and she has a very lengthy email trail to show for it. Her solicitor, who has been so reluctant to engage, then proceeded to call my mother at 07:45 yesterday, despite her repeated requests for an email response to her queries, and was extremely unpleasant to her.

He was also extremely disingenuous during this call, an example of which is highlighted by his claim that "I cannot be expected to reply to emails at 10:30 at night" because an email had been sent to him at that time. At no point was an immediate response requested, and the email was only made necessary in the first place by his refusal to get back to my mother and address her questions.

When his phone call did not have the desired effect with my mother, he then proceeded to call her husband, my stepfather, to see if he would have more luck as my stepfather is less prepared to argue in these kinds of matters as he does not feel able to. I remain very angry at the psychology behind this action and the underhandedness I deem it to represent.

Because he is on holiday as of Wednesday evening, the tone of urgency has now changed and the matter can, according to him, wait until he returns to the office next Tuesday. This was not the impression he had been giving my mother as he tried to pressure her to part with another substantial trance of cash upfront.

If I pasted the full email trail here, I think you would all be shocked at how my mother's solicitor conducts himself. At one point he tells her he feels there is no merit in answering her questions! The very fact fact his client has queries surely renders those questions of merit. My mother and I were absolutely staggered at that.

The point we are still seeking clarity on is regarding Pre-Action Disclosure. Her solicitor has claimed that he never asked for this because:

"consistently throughout you have not wanted to issue proceedings and your husband specifically stated that you did not wish to take any pre-emptive steps. We have of course asked them for the information."

We dispute this and there is absolutely no logic in this argument. Why on earth would we not want all the information needed to make a proper judgement at the earliest possible opportunity as to how to proceed with the case? This would have saved thousands of pounds!

Also, to us, this gives the impression that my mother could only have asked for Pre-Action Disclosure if she herself had been issuing proceedings, rather than the other side. (Her brother.)

However, after seeking clarity, she got this response from her solicitor's colleague:

"...any party can apply for pre-action disclosure."

which seems to contradict what had been said previously. She has since replied:

"Please could you clarify the reason as to why we did not make an application for Pre-action Disclosure as, if I am interpreting this term correctly, this is what we have been requesting from the outset and I cannot understand why this was not done."

We do not expect a reply until after the Easter break.

In summary, it seems like my mother will have to let the matter drop imminently as she seems to be confronted by negligence from solicitors on both sides, both reluctant to provide information when requested, both acting unprofessionally, both attempting as best they can to cover up their own negligence and both attempting to prolong this case to their own financial benefit.

It is absolutely galling, but the stress of the last week has been immense and neither my mother nor myself (I have been doing as much of the legwork for her as I can) can tolerate this for much longer. The massive injustice of my uncle being awarded that which we feel is not rightly his will hopefully fade in time, but from where we are now after such a rough week, we do not have a great deal of fight left in us, not least when we're having to fight with her solicitor who refuses to answer our repeated requests for information as he does not deem them "of merit."

My mother's solicitor has had over £4,500 from her thus far and continues to push for more monies to push this up to £8,000 by pressuring her with false time limits he subsequently decides can be discarded. As twee and as naive as this may sound: it really should not be this way.

NAR

posttokev, irrespective of the merits of your case, the handling of it all by this solicitor speaks volumes of his incompetence. He is supposed to do his best for his clients and advise as such. Not wait for you to specifically ask for info, which I gather you did anyway (and he ignored). His partner's input also speaks volumes, reading between the lines.

No matter how you decide to progress I think you should complain about your solicitor to the senior partner, using their complaints process. You may at the very least receive an apology and maybe a reduction in costs.

posttokev

I think that may well be the best we can hope for now. He's actually the Managing Partner, so top of the hierarchy as far as I am aware.

In his phone call to my stepfather yesterday, he was playing on the fact he's known my stepfather for over 20 years, which has absolutely no relevance (although for someone he's had over 2 decades' experience of, I would've expected much better service), plus he was telling him that all our questions were really stressing him out. A solicitor who's falling to pieces at this stage wouldn't perform very well for us in a courtroom as far as I can see.

We have had to literally drag information out of him at every stage and he has served only to make an already very stressful and upsetting situation even more so.

securityguy

posttokev wrote: »

We have had to literally drag information out of him at every stage and he has served only to make an already very stressful and upsetting situation even more so.

Why on earth have you persisted with an incompetent solicitor whom you know to be incompetent? Other solicitors would, I'm sure, be more than glad of the business.