Inheritance Query

Savvy_Sue

g6jns wrote: »

Executors have no powers to incur expenditure before the testator dies. It would be up to the testator to get advice before they make a will.

In that case, since the testator can't do that now, I'd wait for the person to die and take the legal advice then, before deciding whether to administer the estate or not!

Mojisola

g6jns wrote: »

Executors have no powers to incur expenditure before the testator dies. It would be up to the testator to get advice before they make a will.

The executor-to-be could take legal advice before the death but he/she would have to pay for it personally.

System

I read it as there is not sufficient cash to pay the bequests PLUS there is also a charge on the house for care costs.

Mojisola

nom_de_plume wrote: »

I doubt your solution of the beneficiary being able to put in cash to sway the estate in his favour is correct as this IMO is unfair as it favours someone who can lay their hands on funds and so is not a level playing field.

What part of life is fair when it comes to money?

The charge against the house is to secure the payment of the care home fees. If the son (or anyone else) is able to settle the debt with the care home, the charge would be removed and the estate could be divided as planned in the will.

I hope the OP's grandmother is claiming all the benefits she's entitled to.

Tuesday_Tenor

!!!!!! wrote: »

I read it as there is not sufficient cash to pay the bequests PLUS there is also a charge on the house for care costs.

LA starts constributing to care costs when savings have reduced to, I think, £23K. The remaining savings will continue to diminish as care costs continue.

Depending when the testator dies, the charge on the house may still be relatively small and there may still be some money to deal with funeral , and to distribute (abate) to the cash beneficiaries. Or there may be enough to pay off the charge on the property, but not enough for the bequests.

Without understanding the law fully it would be easy to get this wrong. I think the executor must take legal advice as it is their responsibility to get this right,otherwise they become personally liable for any mistakes.

Whatever the legally-required position is, though, the distribution can be changed if all affected beneficiaries agree. A solicitor-drawn Deed of Variation would be required. So if they all agreed is was important to keep the house in the family (perhaps with % owned by the people who should have been cash beneficiaries), the executor can arrange this. Conversely, if they all agree the house should be sold, and the proceeds distributed evenly (or some agreed proportions) then this too can be arranged.

But if the siblings are unlikely to all agree to any change that might be fairer in the bigger picture, but undoubtedly to the detriment of someone, then Executor must stick to the legal position. My understanding would be that if there are sufficient cash funds the estate will pay off the charge on the property and the funeral. The son will then get the house, the cash beneficiaries will get reduced bequests. If the charge on the house can't be paid from the estate , or some other means, then the house will have to be sold.

Good luck. There will be a clear legal position, which you will confirm.
I hope the siblings accept that mum got the care she needed, and they accept that a somewhat out-of-date will isn't an ideal thing for the poor executor to deal with, and all manage to make the best of the position.

sleepless_saver

Tuesday_Tenor wrote: »

LA starts constributing to care costs when savings have reduced to, I think, £23K. The remaining savings will continue to diminish as care costs continue. .

It's not when the savings reduce to £23000 that they start contributing without expecting repayment, it's when her total capital including the value of the house has reduced to £23000. It's an important distinction in this case.

I assume that what has happened here is that the local authority is effectively lending the money to the grandmother and will be repaid when funds become available when the estate is settled. They are making sure of this by putting a charge on the property.

Once the total value of her capital (including the house) minus the charge is less than £23000 then the local authority will not expect that capital to be eroded further (though they will still take most of the pension and rental income). By that point most of the inheritance has gone obviously.

edited to ask - how much is the house worth and how much is the charging order for?