Beneficiary refusing inheritance?

6022tivo

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

Well he could always pay it then report the beneficiary for benefit fraud a few months down the line.

But how would the Executor know, the letter from the beneficiary does not indicate fraud of any type?

Yorkshireman99

6022tivo wrote: »

But how would the Executor know, the letter from the beneficiary does not indicate fraud of any type?

It is highly suspicious. Depending on the amount it might fall foul of the money laundering regulations as well. Whilst it is not certain if in doubt don't do it is the advice.

missbiggles1

securityguy wrote: »

There is no such rule. The annual spending issue arises when one is looking at IHT (gifts made out of income while maintaining your expected standard of living are not subject to the seven year rule).

If you choose to set about spending your savings in the manner of George Best ("I spent half the money on women and drink, the rest I just squandered") then there is no deprivation of capital issue. If you used it to buy capital assets which you still control, or you gave it away in a way which implies you might be able to get it back, that's different, but you can spend your money as you wish if the effect is not to conceal it while retaining some influence over it.

The "deprivation of assets" rules have been wildly over-inflated to scare the unwary. One might almost be left with the impression that councils could demand your thirty year old supermarket receipts to make sure you weren't buying expensive wine when you should have been saving it for your old age. What you can't do is engage in artificial transactions whose effect is to remove from your immediate assets things that you still retain some informal control over, and you can't do it when there is a real and immediate prospect of care home fees.

The idea that a 70 year old in good health can't take a cruise for fear it might count as deprivation (which I have seen suggested) is preposterous.

You're misunderstanding what's being asked. It's not about IHT but deprivation of capital when it comes to claiming means tested benefits.

If you've given away capital (or spent it on a high level of living) then you'll be treated as if you still had it and your benefits will be withdrawn.

The OP is looking for ways to cheat the DWP not the Revenue.

missbiggles1

wwl wrote: »

Why "Openly happen?" It is none of the executor's business how the money is used, as long as it goes to the correct person.
May be different if they are explicitly told the purpose is fraudulent, but it is not their business to enquire about this.

But by paying the money into an account which isn't in the beneficiary's name, they aren't paying it to the correct person, are they?

Mojisola

missbiggles1 wrote: »

But by paying the money into an account which isn't in the beneficiary's name, they aren't paying it to the correct person, are they?

As executor, I would only pay an inheritance into an account with the beneficiary's name on it even if he/she had signed paperwork asking it to go into another person's account.

wwl

missbiggles1 wrote: »

But by paying the money into an account which isn't in the beneficiary's name, they aren't paying it to the correct person, are they?

As long as you have a written request from the beneficiary to pay to a specific account, and they give a receipt it doesn't matter whose name the account is in, if you even know - all you need is a sort/account number. Maybe they decided to gift it directly. Maybe they are paying a debt. It's none of the executor's business.

Andypandyboy

6022tivo wrote: »

But how would the Executor know, the letter from the beneficiary does not indicate fraud of any type?

I assume that you are the refusik OP?

Solicitors have very stringent rules on making payments to stop them falling foul of mney laundering, these rules have been tightened in the recent past. I doubt that they will release funds meant for person x into an account which they cannot verify belongs to them. Nor should they.

missbiggles1

wwl wrote: »

As long as you have a written request from the beneficiary to pay to a specific account, and they give a receipt it doesn't matter whose name the account is in, if you even know - all you need is a sort/account number. Maybe they decided to gift it directly. Maybe they are paying a debt. It's none of the executor's business.

Tell it to the judge!

Yorkshireman99

wwl wrote: »

As long as you have a written request from the beneficiary to pay to a specific account, and they give a receipt it doesn't matter whose name the account is in, if you even know - all you need is a sort/account number. Maybe they decided to gift it directly. Maybe they are paying a debt. It's none of the executor's business.

That will not be regarded as a satisfactory defense if you end up in court for breaching the money laundering regulations.

getmore4less

which bit of the money laundering regulations apply to lay executors?

I could look them up but since you know you might as well point me to them.