Solicitor not carrying out our instructions

budgetdiyer

I have to say i got bored reading this thread part way through the second page, however i don't see why you wouldn't follow along with the solicitors suggestion.

If i was in the same situation (and i do have some similar circumstances in that i own my own business and my partner received a significant inheritance that helped purchase our house) i would follow the solicitors suggestion on the basis that:

1) my partners interests are looked after (in the event of a parting of ways)
2) that my child(s) interests are protected
3) if anything was to happen to my business it would not have an affect on 1 or 2 above and i'd still have a roof over my head.
4) your partner can ensure you are looked after in her will

I wouldn't want or expect the property to be in joint names if my partner was fully funding it.

bclark

Whilst I agree with a lot of people saying he was being professional in wanting to set it up so that in the event of a break up she is protected, I don't understand his insistence that she shouldn't will the house to him.

That is her own right and choice.

GDVS

bclark wrote: »

Whilst I agree with a lot of people saying he was being professional in wanting to set it up so that in the event of a break up she is protected, I don't understand his insistence that she shouldn't will the house to him.

That is her own right and choice.

If he inherits and marries someone else the child may not be looked after the way she might want. Making the child the beneficiary means whatever else he/she has the house the maternal grandparents paid for.

That may well be what she chooses to do, but the solicitor is absolutely correct to refuse to take this any further until he's spoken to her alone and gone through the various scenarios absolutely free of any other influence.

Tyler119

GDVS wrote: »

If he inherits and marries someone else the child may not be looked after the way she might want. Making the child the beneficiary means whatever else he/she has the house the maternal grandparents paid for.

That may well be what she chooses to do, but the solicitor is absolutely correct to refuse to take this any further until he's spoken to her alone and gone through the various scenarios absolutely free of any other influence.

Why would I not look after our child in the right way, that is just crazy talk . I guess technically it wasn't their money as it came from a policy which I managed to get the company to pay out as a trust outside the estate so that it would not be part of the inheritance tax.

If anything we want the wills to leave everything to each other and then to our child / children and that way they will benefit from two inheritance tax allowances. Our jaws hit the ground when we read it was 40%.

Tyler119

Anyway, thanks for the replies, even if some were a little hostile. I think this thread can be closed now as I have all the info that we need.

GDVS

Tyler119 wrote: »

Why would I not look after our child in the right way, that is just crazy talk .

Why would someone trust you to do the right thing when they can take the choice away from you and make certain themselves? That's just crazy talk.

If anything we want the wills to leave everything to each other and then to our child / children and that way they will benefit from two inheritance tax allowances. Our jaws hit the ground when we read it was 40%.

If all you're trying to do is avoid inheritance tax then tell the solicitor that, if it can be done legally and still protect the interests of the child and your partner he'll advise the best way.

You're talking about a large amount of money and the potential future of a child once their mother is dead. Emotion and trust don't come into it, it's too important for that.

foreign_correspondent

your partner's solicitor is doing exactly what they should do...

If you want to be seen to be fair, then perhaps what you should do is agree that you will own the house in the shares that you contribute, thus protecting your partner's contribution (her inheritance) in the event that you do bankrupt, die or split up.

You should then also draw up wills... to fail to do so leaves you, your partner and your child at risk should you or your partner die.

to be honest, you sound quite resistant to her seeing the solicitor alone, or to you two owning the property in any other shares than 50/50...

Tyler119

foreign_correspondent wrote: »

your partner's solicitor is doing exactly what they should do...

If you want to be seen to be fair, then perhaps what you should do is agree that you will own the house in the shares that you contribute, thus protecting your partner's contribution (her inheritance) in the event that you do bankrupt, die or split up.

You should then also draw up wills... to fail to do so leaves you, your partner and your child at risk should you or your partner die.

to be honest, you sound quite resistant to her seeing the solicitor alone, or to you two owning the property in any other shares than 50/50...

????? Not sure how you think that, I've never even hinted that she shouldn't see the man in the know. I even tried to book the appt for her. Am I fussed about the 50/50, no! I've never said I am. Just that we didn't like how the solicitor was going about it. If we do use another I'll expect her to listen to him too and make up her own mind.

Tyler119

GDVS wrote: »

Why would someone trust you to do the right thing when they can take the choice away from you and make certain themselves? That's just crazy talk.

If all you're trying to do is avoid inheritance tax then tell the solicitor that, if it can be done legally and still protect the interests of the child and your partner he'll advise the best way.

You're talking about a large amount of money and the potential future of a child once their mother is dead. Emotion and trust don't come into it, it's too important for that.

In our relationship trust is something that is fundamental too us! If we didn't trust each other fully then we would have deeper problems! I guess good old trust is a dying thing these days.

ValHaller

Tyler119 wrote: »

Who is paying the solicitor?

We both are, the cheque was drawn on our joint account. Surely that doesn't make an difference does it?

It does actually.

It means that you jointly are the client rather than your partner - but the solicitor is now proceeding to act in the interests of just your partner,

As has been pointed out, your partner is in part responsible for the solicitor being twitchy, because it may appear that she is being unduly submissive to you, which could be taken as a warning sign that you could be applying coercion.

As the solicitor is instructed by both of you, he should not be suggesting that your partner write a will excluding you from the value of the property - he should be refusing to continue with you both further as clients until your partner has taken independent legal advice. He should not himself be attempting to take your partner as client for that advice while acting for you both. (In my opinion)

I suggest that you find another solicitor and get your partner to take independent advice without you present from yet another solicitor. IMO, this solicitor owes you for extra costs for conveyancing arising from a change of solicitor - but not for the independent legal advice. But you would need to think through whether there is a claim.