Messy probate situation with children fighting with stepmother!

getmore4less

carled wrote: »

W didn't KNOW about the codicil until 3 weeks after the funeral when she went to visit a solicitor for guidance. Her husband never bothered telling her or D1 & D2 that he'd done it.

It would be quite unusual for a solicitor drawn up will and codicil not be kept together.

carled

getmore4less wrote: »

It would be quite unusual for a solicitor drawn up will and codicil not be kept together.

She didn't have the will either - it was lodged at the "family" solicitor that D used. It was when she went for guidance to that same solicitor that she was told that there was a codicil. D didn't ever let W anywhere near finances/legal docs.

Edit: Sorry, to clarify that a bit - she had a copy of the original will from 2002 but when she went to the solicitor there was the original with the codicil attached. Her version in the box file at home did not have the codicil attached.

getmore4less

So they started without having a clue the copy was still a copy of the current will.

Mojisola

carled wrote: »

W starts to act as sole executor, shutting down some accounts belonging to D and putting them into a new account opened for estate funds. She uses some of the funds to pay for funeral expenses and other testamentary bits & pieces.

As the will is complex, W is advised by financial adviser to visit a solicitor for advice, which she does. At this point she is made aware of D1 & D2 being added as executors.

carled wrote: »

Edit: Sorry, to clarify that a bit - she had a copy of the original will from 2002 but when she went to the solicitor there was the original with the codicil attached. Her version in the box file at home did not have the codicil attached.

It's shocking that she started administering the estate on the basis of a copy of a will.

There could have been a completely new will made which didn't name her as an executor at all.

mrschaucer

Possibly unwise but not "shocking". They were husband and wife ...

getmore4less

carled wrote: »

She didn't have the will either - it was lodged at the "family" solicitor that D used. It was when she went for guidance to that same solicitor that she was told that there was a codicil. D didn't ever let W anywhere near finances/legal docs.

Edit: Sorry, to clarify that a bit - she had a copy of the original will from 2002 but when she went to the solicitor there was the original with the codicil attached. Her version in the box file at home did not have the codicil attached.

mrschaucer wrote: »

Possibly unwise but not "shocking". They were husband and wife ...

when they knew they had no idea?

Yorkshireman99

mrschaucer wrote: »

Possibly unwise but not "shocking". They were husband and wife ...

For anyone to think they can start to administer an estate without the original will beggars belief. Given the very confused situation with "new" "facts" being repeatedly disclosed it is difficult to work out if W is incredibly naive or devious and manipulative. Some of the "facts" really sound very odd. For example a plea and directions hearing is a preliminary hearing and a judge would be very unlikely to remove an executor without having a full hearing and with W being present.. As for W's trusteeship why have D1& D2 not taken proceedings to have her replaced by someone else? Given the way it is said D1 & D2 have behaved why has W not applied to have them replaced by an independent solicitor? The story has so many holes in it makes me wonder if is just an elaborate fantasy?

carled

How does ANYONE know for certain that any will they have is the most recent? What if he'd done another one just months before his death and had it witnessed elsewhere and lodged with, I don't know, the minister at church? Some of you need a bit of a reality check I think!

getmore4less

No one really knows they have the latest will but having no will(as in this case) is a known.

mrschaucer

Especially odd when the deceased seems to have written the codicil and then not told anybody about it: not just not told the wife but not told the children whom he wanted to act as executors. And the moral of the story is ...