administrator- but not next of kin

Yorkshireman99

getmore4less wrote: »

Even if you hand it over to solicitors you will end up doing quite a bit of the work and some of it is simple stuff so you don't relay need to be paying £200 an hour to deal with some of it.

It may be that you are just too busy to take on the learning curve and the day to day of dealing with an estate but it may be worth becoming the administrator and using solicitor for some of the specific like collecting assets dealing with the IHT but keep control over things like dealing with the property.

A DOV is likely to be needed and it makes sense to have a good think about how best to use the assets especially as there is a property.

You have a couple of years to sort that bit out so no rush and once the property is secured you could take your time dealing with everything.

Solicitors are good at using up the "executors year" so even if busy you could do the work quicker with a bit of help with the IHT forms.

Since the estate is likely to attract IHT then the LOA application needs to be done much quicker and the IHT paid within six months subject to some possible delay in order for the property to be sold.

Tuesday_Tenor

Yes, you can be the Administrator. If you read the PA2 notes that go with the PA1 Probate Application form, you will see than in an intestacy situation the spouse has first right to act, then children, then parents, then siblings. But if these people don't exist, or don't want to do it, then the next in order of priority can do so. So, yes that's you, if you are willing.

As regards using a solicitor, I would try to avoid this.
If this death has happened at a time in your life when it's just impossible to give the time, then fair enough. And the inheritance is something none of the rest of you would have received if he'd had his own family. And if he'd had his own family you wouldn't have been 'burdened' with it the task at all, so perhaps his own funds would be well-used to tie up the sad ending.
But as others have said:
- you will be doing a lot of up the information collecting and passing on to a solicitor anyway
- you will be doing a lot of the house clearing anyway
- the solicitor will cost a lot
- you can always consult a solicitors if there is any particular aspect you don't understand; this will cost a great deal less than letting them do everything
But above all, the solicitors will be slower. Firstly, they will HAVE to do the Gazette notices for unknown creditors. You knew your brother and will know whether you are confident about the possibility of unknown debts. Secondly, even if you don't have much time, you will notice if an institution doesn't reply and will chase it up. Whereas the solicitor will only open the file once a month, so any hold-ups won't get resolved quickly.

It will be a learning curve for you, but as presumably you will eventually have to deal with your parents estate now your brother is sadly gone, it will be a process well worth learning about.

There are also many things to help you:
- the gov.uk website pages on probate
- the guidance notes to the PA and IHT forms. The latter can look daunting, because they have to cover all sorts of exceptional situations. Go through the notes crossing out all the sections that don't apply to yon brother's estate. You'll probably cross out about 80% and will never need to look at them again. You'll find the remaining 20% is actually both straightforward to understand and manageable to do.
And if you have queries, ask this forum, or ask to the Probate Office Helpline first, before assuming you need a solicitor.

Hope that's reassuring!

getmore4less

^^^^^
TT has a good point about using this time to learn the process.

If not sure have a trial run through IHT205 then a full IHT400.
at each section do the read of the notes and then a yes/ on if you know the answer need to find it or need to try to understand better.

go all the way through once before getting bogged down in the details of any one section.
if you take your time probably around a 1/2 day to work through the first time and digest.

As TT says you will have a list of things to do for each section, some will be nothing(not relevant), some easy(make a list of bank accounts) some may need a bit of research because you are not sure what they mean(nil rate bands) others research( is the pension in the estate or not as he may have nominated a beneficiary).


The bulk of the time spent on actual administration is the tedious stuff of getting final accounts checking interest up to DOD, closing utilities and getting final bills etc, with a lot of waiting time between letters.
you get a period of activity then nothing

from a personal time point of view I think of it as a solicitor may be able to do stuff in a hour and that will costs say £200 even if it takes me 5hrs to do the same thing because i have to learn about it that's still £40ph the equivalent of over £70k so depending what I am earning even if I have to take a week off I could be getting a better return than going to work.

You don't say how old your kids are? elderly parents could mean they are adults so may be able to help.

GDB2222

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

Children cannot inherit directly so the funds have to be held in trust until they are 18. They cannot be prevented from inheriting when they are 18.

Surely, that depends on the terms of the trust? Of course, you are right if it's just a bare trust.

However, the following would do the trick:
Interest in possession for the child to age 23 (say).
Capital and income to the child at age 23, provided the child survives to age 23, or to the OP if the child does not survive to that age.

That gives just enough leverage to the OP to stop the child getting the capital at age 18.

Please say why you think that would not work. It's obviously a bit of a faff, but it may be better than having an 18 year splurge the lot and then regret it later.

Yorkshireman99

GDB2222 wrote: »

Surely, that depends on the terms of the trust? Of course, you are right if it's just a bare trust.

However, the following would do the trick:
Interest in possession for the child to age 23 (say).
Capital and income to the child at age 23, provided the child survives to age 23, or to the OP if the child does not survive to that age.

That gives just enough leverage to the OP to stop the child getting the capital at age 18.

Please say why you think that would not work. It's obviously a bit of a faff, but it may be better than having an 18 year splurge the lot and then regret it later.

An ingenious scheme but AIUI whatever is done the child cannot be prevented in inheriting at 18 and any trust that purports to do that is not effective. The lawyers might do well out of arguing the toss. I would like to hear from them.

da_rule

@GDB2222 - It's an interesting one, as what you seem to suggest is akin to making a gift that is dependent on the beneficiary reaching a certain age, almost like a survivorship clause. But, as YM99 says, the asset would have to be held on trust, and the beneficiary of most trusts can access the capital as soon as they reach 18.

In the OP's case, the trust (if there is one) would be a statutory one, as it is created under the intestacy rules, so the children could inherit at 18 or when they get married (if they get married before the age of 18).

GDB2222

da_rule wrote: »

@GDB2222 - It's an interesting one, as what you seem to suggest is akin to making a gift that is dependent on the beneficiary reaching a certain age, almost like a survivorship clause. But, as YM99 says, the asset would have to be held on trust, and the beneficiary of most trusts can access the capital as soon as they reach 18.

In the OP's case, the trust (if there is one) would be a statutory one, as it is created under the intestacy rules, so the children could inherit at 18 or when they get married (if they get married before the age of 18).

The trust would be created under the DOV. I don't see any constraints on the trusts the DOV can create.

Yorkshireman99

GDB2222 wrote: »

The trust would be created under the DOV. I don't see any constraints on the trusts the DOV can create.

Any trust set up to hold assets for a minor that purports to stop the funds being released after the person reaches 18 fails to do that.

SevenOfNine

The DoV could set up a Discretionary Trust with the minors as beneficiaries & a couple or 3 named trustees. Decisions on payments made from the trust would be at the discretion of the trustees eg school trips, Uni fees etc. With the trust to be wound up & all remaining assets distributed by age 25. Many other potential 'clauses' as the elderly parents think fit (with the help of OP), given that they will be the ones setting up the DoV preferably with a STEP solicitor.

This is about the only thing that will work if you really don't want 18 year olds inheriting a fat sum - & this information comes straight out of the mouth of a STEP member solicitor.....in writing.

There are of course a few complications, one arises with tax implications for the trust asset if it 'appreciates', the trust has to be declared to HMRC & tax returns completed annually.

Plus, it's nigh on impossible to find a financial organisation willing (nowadays) to open a Trust account - by that I don't mean a piddling children's a/c with parents or granny as trustee. I mean a Trust a/c ........"John Smith & Jane Smith trustees of the Peter Smith Discretionary Trust". (Peter being the deceased.)

So, it certainly IS possible to prevent minors from getting their mitts on it by age 18, but it does involve a headache when trying to set it up in compliance with the DoV & ongoing work.

Yorkshireman99

SevenOfNine wrote: »

The DoV could set up a Discretionary Trust with the minors as beneficiaries & a couple or 3 named trustees. Decisions on payments made from the trust would be at the discretion of the trustees eg school trips, Uni fees etc. With the trust to be wound up & all remaining assets distributed by age 25. Many other potential 'clauses' as the elderly parents think fit (with the help of OP), given that they will be the ones setting up the DoV preferably with a STEP solicitor.

This is about the only thing that will work if you really don't want 18 year olds inheriting a fat sum - & this information comes straight out of the mouth of a STEP member solicitor.....in writing.

There are of course a few complications, one arises with tax implications for the trust asset if it 'appreciates', the trust has to be declared to HMRC & tax returns completed annually.

Plus, it's nigh on impossible to find a financial organisation willing (nowadays) to open a Trust account - by that I don't mean a piddling children's a/c with parents or granny as trustee. I mean a Trust a/c ........"John Smith & Jane Smith trustees of the Peter Smith Discretionary Trust". (Peter being the deceased.)

So, it certainly IS possible to prevent minors from getting their mitts on it by age 18, but it does involve a headache when trying to set it up in compliance with the DoV & ongoing work.

This sounds plausible and don't doubt what you have been told by a STEP member. However, HMR&C are very hot on schemes contrived to circumvent the rules and the tax inplications could be costly. Any executor whom decides to do this needs a written guarantee from their professional advisor that the scheme is legal and effective. It does seem to be straying way outside the responsibilities of the executor. Fascinating idea though!