credit card debt

getmore4less

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

An executor's duty is to administer the estate in a way that is fair and reasonable to all concerned. That includes creditors who are entitled to the full amount due. The only reason the OP can have for trying to deprive a creditor of their lawful claim is to benefit another beneficiary. That is a breach of trust by the executor. Doing so is illegal.

Asking for interest to be frozen is not illegal as would any other negotiation on a liability

You are saying that a creditor that is prepared to accept less than they could be due under the terms of their agreements with a deceased are acting illegally.

or if a creditor said we will write a debt off even partialy it would be illegal for the administrator to accept that offer.

Yorkshireman99

getmore4less wrote: »

Asking for interest to be frozen is not illegal as would any other negotiation on a liability

You are saying that a creditor that is prepared to accept less than they could be due under the terms of their agreements with a deceased are acting illegally.

or if a creditor said we will write a debt off even partialy it would be illegal for the administrator to accept that offer.

Of course not. What I am saying is that it is illegal for the executor to lie to the creditor in an attempt to get them to reduce the amount due. It is also a breach of the executor's duty not to administer the estate in a way that benefits a beneficiary at the expense of a creditor. This is also fraud.

getmore4less

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

Of course not. What I am saying is that it is illegal for the executor to lie to the creditor in an attempt to get them to reduce the amount due. It is also a breach of the executor's duty not to administer the estate in a way that benefits a beneficiary at the expense of a creditor. This is also fraud.

Now you are changing/adding to your story/concept and introducing lying.

negotiation(which Is what this is about) does not need to include any lying or any misleading.

Yorkshireman99

getmore4less wrote: »

Now you are changing/adding to your story/concept and introducing lying.

negotiation(which Is what this is about) does not need to include any lying or any misleading.

The form of "negotiation" the O/P is contemplating is telling the creditor that the estate is insolvent. To do that would clearly be fraudulent. Whichever way you look at it this is illegal. The only variable is the particular offence that is being contemplated. Indeed it is likely that more than one offence is being contemplated. As well as fraud let's add breach of fiduciary duty. Let me spell it out. An executor has a clear duty to deal with creditors and beneficiaries in an honest and even handed manner without bias one way to the other. I am astonished, and a little saddened, that you should even contemplate suggesting that it is anything but pure dishonesty.

Manxman_in_exile

I suppose negotiation is always a possible option. But how would you achieve a successful outcome unless the creditor thought there wasn't enough in the estate to satisfy the outstanding debt? Why would they think that? The executor can't tell them that or imply it.


It's nearly 40 years since I graduated but I would have thought that might be in danger of falling foul of what was s.2 (?) of the 1978 Theft Act which dealt with "deceiving" a creditor into foregoing part or all of a debt. I suspect the 1978 Act has been superseded by now, but I'd be surprised if whatever the current relevant legislation is doesn't retain a similar provision.


I don't know anything about the law of executorship but I think(?!) I remember a little criminal law.

Yorkshireman99

The Theft Act has been replaced by the Fraud Act 2006 but the offenses are much the same. I suspect you are thinking old "obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception" offense. Certainly what the OP is contemplating doing falls foul of several pieces of legislation quite apart from being a breach of fiduciary duty.

Manxman_in_exile

Thank you.


I seem to recall that under the old legislation "obtaining a pecuniary advantage" was restricted to the receipt of services but perhaps the Fraud Act has extended this.


I'm pretty certain that the 1978 Act had a provision specifically relating to dishonestly getting debts written off or "foregone" through deceit. I think I answered an exam question on it! But a looooong time ago.

getmore4less

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

The form of "negotiation" the O/P is contemplating is telling the creditor that the estate is insolvent. To do that would clearly be fraudulent. Whichever way you look at it this is illegal. The only variable is the particular offence that is being contemplated. Indeed it is likely that more than one offence is being contemplated. As well as fraud let's add breach of fiduciary duty. Let me spell it out. An executor has a clear duty to deal with creditors and beneficiaries in an honest and even handed manner without bias one way to the other. I am astonished, and a little saddened, that you should even contemplate suggesting that it is anything but pure dishonesty.

All I have done is point out that negotiation can be perfectly legal and is not uncommon.

Yorkshireman99

Negotiation is not the problem as you well know. Lying to facilitate it is not as should be obvious.