Wrong house named in will

System

I think that if there is no other mention apart from the house then the estate will be dealt with as per an intestate estate so will go to the children

getmore4less

this needs specialist help to see if there is a dependancy claim

why did he not include her as owner when they moved?

Mojisola

getmore4less wrote: »

this needs specialist help to see if there is a dependancy claim

This is probably the only hope - was she financially dependent on him when he died?

old_fat_biker_bloke

getmore4less wrote: »

this needs specialist help to see if there is a dependancy claim

why did he not include her as owner when they moved?

Although they were partners of 27 years each was financially independent of the other - they owned their own homes but cohabited a few days each a week

old_fat_biker_bloke

Mojisola wrote: »

This is probably the only hope - was she financially dependent on him when he died?

No - although they were partners of 27 years each was financially independent of the other - they owned their own homes but cohabited a few days each a week

Mojisola

old_fat_biker_bloke wrote: »

Although they were partners of 27 years each was financially independent of the other - they owned their own homes but cohabited a few days each a week

old_fat_biker_bloke wrote: »

My mum is sick with worry, she could well do without this at her time of life....

So what's the problem?

theoretica

old_fat_biker_bloke wrote: »

I cant remember 100% what it said but there were only three names - mum plus his son and daughter - said to the effect of

"to my dear friend (my mum) I leave 60% of the sum raised by the sale of (mentions specific address) and to my son and daughter 20% each"

I should mention it was a DIY will too, the kind you get from WH Smiths....

Even a DIY will should have a bit, probably at the end, which says everything else not specifically mentioned goes to ... this is what will happen with the new house.

old_fat_biker_bloke

Mojisola wrote: »

So what's the problem?

Umm, that her partner wished her to benefit from what he left behind when he died but that doesn't seem likely now via bad wording of his will - I think you may be interpreting 'financially independent' as rich, in which case you'd be wrong.

Mojisola

old_fat_biker_bloke wrote: »

Umm, that her partner wished her to benefit from what he left behind when he died but that doesn't seem likely now via bad wording of his will - I think you may be interpreting 'financially independent' as rich, in which case you'd be wrong.

No, I'm not. There are many people who just get by but are financially independent of other people.

Being financially dependent on him would be the only possible challenge to the money going to his children.

It's a classic case of "this is what someone would have wanted" but, if he didn't change his will, his wishes are not going to taken into account. Better to accept that now than try to fight a lost cause.

old_fat_biker_bloke

Mojisola wrote: »

No, I'm not. There are many people who just get by but are financially independent of other people.

Being financially dependent on him would be the only possible challenge to the money going to his children.

It's a classic case of "this is what someone would have wanted" but, if he didn't change his will, his wishes are not going to taken into account. Better to accept that now than try to fight a lost cause.

Indeed, that seems to be the case. I just hoped for her sake there was some quirk in the law that would have helped her - rather sad she will get nothing after their lives together whilst his children (who wanted nothing to do with him - it's complicated...) with get it all....

Hey ho, No justice and all that....