Leaving money to charities in Wills

Primrose

My husband and I have mirror Wills which include a number of bequeats to some of the better known charities. However we have been appalled at the harrassing tactics of some charities to executors and wish to rewrite our wills, leaving money to local charities with which we are connected. We are concerned that naming any charity in a will could leave the survivor open to harrassment and are considering a Letter of Wishes instead.

However seeing how the late Princess Diana's wishes were blantently ignored in this respect we wonder whether our exexutors could easily override the surviving spouse's wishes if we go this route. All assets are ledt to the surviving spouse initially. The charitable bequests, along with other legacies kick in on the death of the remaining apouse. We have no children.

So it seems a dilemma between leaving the surviving spouse possibly open to harrassment from charities or potentially having their wishes overridden. Is there any answer to this? We can't give the money away now. We may need it for care as we are ageing.

Keep_pedalling

Why do you think this is going to be a problem? You die, the executor gives the bequest to the charities, end of story.

nom_de_plume

My experience of dealing with a will which contained bequests to charities was that it was the bigger (national) charities that approached me. The smaller local charities did not seem to have the same search facilities to establish any impending bequests.

If you wish to include larger charities in your respective wills you could perhaps consider removing them from your wills for now and then add them to the survivors will on the first passing.

TBagpuss

If the charities will be residuary beneficiaries after the second spouse dies then you don't need to worry about them harassing the survivor as there won't be a survivor at the time they come into the picture.

If you are worried about your executors getting post / requests from the charities for ever after then you could name solicitors as the executors, or ou could simply let your executors know that you would not wish them to be harassed and that it would be absolutely fine for them to instruct a solicitor to deal with the will when the time comes.

If the charities will be the major beneficiaries on the death of the second spouse then you could get you wills drawn up naming the appropriate officers of one of the charities as the executors. (i.e. the will would appoint your spouse as executor and sole beneficiary but if they die before you, appoint 2 officers of [Charity] as executors and leave the money to charities x, y and z.

Go and see a solicitor and get some proper advice about how to achieve what you want. Executors cannot easily over ride your wishes provided that the will is properly drafted. Obviously if you chose to give your executors discretion then they can exercise that discretion and may not do so in the way you anticipate.

getmore4less

Primrose wrote: »

My husband and I have mirror Wills which include a number of bequeats to some of the better known charities. However we have been appalled at the harrassing tactics of some charities to executors and wish to rewrite our wills, leaving money to local charities with which we are connected. We are concerned that naming any charity in a will could leave the survivor open to harrassment and are considering a Letter of Wishes instead.

However seeing how the late Princess Diana's wishes were blantently ignored in this respect we wonder whether our exexutors could easily override the surviving spouse's wishes if we go this route. All assets are ledt to the surviving spouse initially. The charitable bequests, along with other legacies kick in on the death of the remaining apouse. We have no children.

So it seems a dilemma between leaving the surviving spouse possibly open to harrassment from charities or potentially having their wishes overridden. Is there any answer to this? We can't give the money away now. We may need it for care as we are ageing.

There is nothing to harass about if the spouse gets everything.

Remaining spouse can do what they like the wishes of the first to die are no longer relevent to the one that administers the second estate.

Key will be the choice of executor(s) in both cases.

jackyann

I am sympathetic to Primrose, having experienced charity bombardment. I would say:

a Letter of Wishes is a good idea - depending on the executor. It allows a charity to be named who helps you towards the end of your life, or supports a close friend or similar.

Local charities are much more likely to respect your wishes, as they rarely do the kind of mailing / phoning that national charities do, and rely on local goodwill. They are, however, more likely to fall by the wayside.
There will be some sort of Voluntary Bodies co-ordinator at your local council - they may be able to inform you of local foundations that it may be useful to leave your money to, as they are used to distributing funds.

You can inform the major charities that any hint of harassment will result in their being excluded - this will bother some and not others.

I hope you can arrive at something that suits you, as it is a comfort in later years to know that one's money will be doing some good.

Arthog

You may be able to use/modify a clause that Frank Sinatra apparently had in his Will. Any Beneficiary who contested his Will could not inherit. As a result his Will was swiftly dealt with.
You could state that any Beneficiary who contacted the Executors to hasten their bequest would lose it and that it is to be made clear to them from the start.
You are right to be concerned. There have been incidents eg of a Charity bullying Executors into accepting a lower offer for the property to hasten their bequest.

g6jns_2

Primrose wrote: »

My husband and I have mirror Wills which include a number of bequeats to some of the better known charities. However we have been appalled at the harrassing tactics of some charities to executors and wish to rewrite our wills, leaving money to local charities with which we are connected. We are concerned that naming any charity in a will could leave the survivor open to harrassment and are considering a Letter of Wishes instead.

However seeing how the late Princess Diana's wishes were blantently ignored in this respect we wonder whether our exexutors could easily override the surviving spouse's wishes if we go this route. All assets are ledt to the surviving spouse initially. The charitable bequests, along with other legacies kick in on the death of the remaining apouse. We have no children.

So it seems a dilemma between leaving the surviving spouse possibly open to harrassment from charities or potentially having their wishes overridden. Is there any answer to this? We can't give the money away now. We may need it for care as we are ageing.

The important thing is to choose your executor(s) wisely. Executors must distribute the estate according to the will. They don't usually have any discretion. A letter of wishes is a bad idea as it leaves some doubt. Be concise in the wording. Until the will is admitted to probate nobody can see what is in the will unless the executor decides to tell anyone which they really should not do. There therefore be no reason for anyone to be harassed. If you can't find a private individual that you can trust as executor then appoint a solicitor. This will cost more of course. don't use a will writer or bank.

getmore4less

The problem with mirror wills is the first death exposes the charity names publicly.

If you leave them out you have issues as it makes the assumption the second will can be changed.

no1catman

Interesting thread I'm in a similar position - no children, when both of us go - balance divided into four charities - presumably that may be scope for a partial early distribution (before the house is sold), to keep them quiet!?

G6JNS

no1catman wrote: »

Interesting thread I'm in a similar position - no children, when both of us go - balance divided into four charities - presumably that may be scope for a partial early distribution (before the house is sold), to keep them quiet!?

There is no good reason for an executor to do that or even disclose that there is a legacy. Since it costs £10 to get a copy of the will how many charities are going to go searching the lists and getting copies on the off chance they will get a legacy? The whole idea sounds like an urban myth to me.