Three Executors and small estate

hundredk

getmore4less wrote: »

This is not allways strictly true but quite difficult to do anything about it if not documented that the account was not as joint tenants.

Here is one example there are others.

http://www.thesolicitorsgroup.co.uk/Downloads/Articles/21Jun2012/DrakefordvCotton.pdf

If joint accounts are with B&M and B&D, can executors A and C obtain statements of these joint accounts?

Mattygroves2

hundredk wrote: »

If joint accounts are with B&M and B&D, can executors A and C obtain statements of these joint accounts?

They can certainly request the balance at death if they (or even one of them) write with a copy of the death certificate. You'll need the figures for the probate forms anyway. Whether you'll get statements for the period before death is probably up to the bank.

Once the bank is notified of a death on a joint account they will transfer it into the second name as a matter of course. I think you'd have quite a legal fight to get them to anything else. So you have no right to see statements after death as the accounts are then B's own unless you can prove the split should be anything other than joint tenants.

hundredk

Mattygroves2 wrote: »

They can certainly request the balance at death if they (or even one of them) write with a copy of the death certificate. You'll need the figures for the probate forms anyway. Whether you'll get statements for the period before death is probably up to the bank.

Once the bank is notified of a death on a joint account they will transfer it into the second name as a matter of course. I think you'd have quite a legal fight to get them to anything else. So you have no right to see statements after death as the accounts are then B's own unless you can prove the split should be anything other than joint tenants.

Part of the problem is that B is saying there is no need for probate as the estate is <£5k. As i understand, anything in the joint accounts (which in light of B's evasiveness may be considerable) goes to B so will not legally be part of the estate? The something happened with joint accounts with B&D over 4 years ago and he says the estate is wound up even though A ans C have seen nothing. Can he do this?

hundredk

hundredk wrote: »

Part of the problem is that B is saying there is no need for probate as the estate is <£5k. As i understand, anything in the joint accounts (which in light of B's evasiveness may be considerable) goes to B so will not legally be part of the estate? The something happened with joint accounts with B&D over 4 years ago and he says the estate is wound up even though A ans C have seen nothing. Can he do this?

Bump.

All three executors have met and the situation about how everything was and is being managed by executor B gets more suspicious by the minute. B tried to give A and C a nominal amount of pension saying that's each of your shares and that's all there is. When asked to account for how he arrived at this figure he simply said there are no records. He said its not possible to obtain closing statements as everything is in his name including the pensions and benefits paid.

B said he had called the probate office and was about to wind the estate up. When asked how he'd determined the estate is less than £5k he refused to account for it in any way. Finances aside there are other assets including some antique furniture and it now appears the estate may be worth more than £5k and B is trying to avoid probate.

B is also trying to change the trust which is held by A. I now believe the trust was set up with A to protect his interest from the much more dominant B.

B has repeatedly said they are too ill to progress things. A and C have offered to process things and report back to B but that needs records which B has kept to himself. When asked what has anyone got to lose by following the correct process B refused to answer.

I have repeatedly said the estate is not wrapped up until all executors agree. I have also said all executors need to agree and be able to account for whether the estate is more or less than £5k and subsequent need for probate. Are these two point legally correct? Any thoughts on how to progress when B is obstructive?

G6JNS

hundredk wrote: »

Bump.

All three executors have met and the situation about how everything was and is being managed by executor B gets more suspicious by the minute. B tried to give A and C a nominal amount of pension saying that's each of your shares and that's all there is. When asked to account for how he arrived at this figure he simply said there are no records. He said its not possible to obtain closing statements as everything is in his name including the pensions and benefits paid.

B said he had called the probate office and was about to wind the estate up. When asked how he'd determined the estate is less than £5k he refused to account for it in any way. Finances aside there are other assets including some antique furniture and it now appears the estate may be worth more than £5k and B is trying to avoid probate.

B is also trying to change the trust which is held by A. I now believe the trust was set up with A to protect his interest from the much more dominant B.

B has repeatedly said they are too ill to progress things. A and C have offered to process things and report back to B but that needs records which B has kept to himself. When asked what has anyone got to lose by following the correct process B refused to answer.

I have repeatedly said the estate is not wrapped up until all executors agree. I have also said all executors need to agree and be able to account for whether the estate is more or less than £5k and subsequent need for probate. Are these two point legally correct? Any thoughts on how to progress when B is obstructive?

There seems little doubt that B is trying it on. Does this link help?

http://www.step.org/tackling-troublesome-executors

pmlindyloo

G6JNS wrote: »

There seems little doubt that B is trying it on. Does this link help?

http://www.step.org/tackling-troublesome-executors

Was just going to post the same link.

From what you have said it seems that the troublesome executor needs a firm reminder of their duties and a threat of legal action if they do not cooperate.

Perhaps a formal letter written by yourself and/or from a solicitor would get things moving.

G6JNS

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Was just going to post the same link.

From what you have said it seems that the troublesome executor needs a firm reminder of their duties and a threat of legal action if they do not cooperate.

Perhaps a formal letter written by yourself and/or from a solicitor would get things moving.

No need for the cost of a solicitor. Just write and say if he does not play ball you will apply to the court to have him removed as executor and force him to disclose fully any assets of the estate. Remind him that you will ask for costs against him.

hundredk

G6JNS wrote: »

There seems little doubt that B is trying it on. Does this link help?

http://www.step.org/tackling-troublesome-executors

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Was just going to post the same link.

From what you have said it seems that the troublesome executor needs a firm reminder of their duties and a threat of legal action if they do not cooperate.

Perhaps a formal letter written by yourself and/or from a solicitor would get things moving.

Thanks that's a useful link.

As it stands it looks like a letter of some kind will have to be sent. I am trying to establish if the duty of personal representatives has a legal requirement for all executors to account for, inventory and subsequently agree the provisional value of the estate and therefore whether probate is necessary.

B has also said an original copy of the will is not required to administer the estate if it is less than £5k - do you know if this is correct or should the original will be withdrawn from the solicitors to start administration regardless of the value of the estate?...if yes and there's some legal reference this would help a lot because I could simply refer to the relevant legislation and challenge B on that.

g6jns_2

hundredk wrote: »

Thanks that's a useful link.

As it stands it looks like a letter of some kind will have to be sent. I am trying to establish if the duty of personal representatives has a legal requirement for all executors to account for, inventory and subsequently agree the provisional value of the estate and therefore whether probate is necessary.

B has also said an original copy of the will is not required to administer the estate if it is less than £5k - do you know if this is correct or should the original will be withdrawn from the solicitors to start administration regardless of the value of the estate?...if yes and there's some legal reference this would help a lot because I could simply refer to the relevant legislation and challenge B on that.

Administration of the will requires the original not a copy. B is lying or bluffing. All the executors or administrators are equally responsible. If B refuses to cooperate then he needs to be removed as executor.

hundredk

g6jns wrote: »

Administration of the will requires the original not a copy. B is lying or bluffing. All the executors or administrators are equally responsible. If B refuses to cooperate then he needs to be removed as executor.

I understood this to be the case, it seems to me that's the whole point of having a will. I think the next step is to write to him saying what you've said here. Do you know of anywhere I can reference that states original will is required even when administering <£5k as this is what B is claiming so I'd like to call his bluff backed up with legislation.