Dying relative - what next?

securityguy

elsien wrote: »

Relative has now passed away and it has transpired that the children have been using his money to subsidise themselves while he was in the care home. This not left enough cash to cover the funeral, or for any executor expenses that may arise land registry fees, or whatever), although there is still the house.
If the children decline to pay the extra funeral costs themselves, what can the executors do in the meantime

They should walk away. Elderly, inexperienced executors prone to stress versus a complex estate with accusations of fraud? Walk away.

elsien

Would telling the bank of his death count as intermeddling? I think that's all they've done so far. That, and picking up the death certificate.

securityguy

"Would telling the bank of his death count as intermeddling?"

No. You'll hear claims otherwise, but case law is pretty clear that is isn't. Holder v Holder [1967] EWCA Civ 2 (08 December 1967), which is still good law, establishes amongst other more substantial issues that mere "technical intermeddling" is not sufficient to prevent renunciation of an executorship.

The attack on the validity of the deed of renunciation was based on five alleged acts of administration or intermeddling in the estate by Victor: (1) by joining in the opening of an executors'account at Lloyds Bank, Ltd., at Cheltenham, and in the operation of it by signing nine cheques 3 (2) by allowing the endorsement of insurance policies in the names of all three of the persons named as executors; (3) by joining with the other two persons named as executors in instructing solicitors to act for the executors in the administration of the estate and continuing to retain them until August, 1960. There were two other grounds mentioned in the Statement of Claim, one relating to a Dutch barn and the other to the testator's stock at the farm, but these were not relied upon at the hearing of the action.

The three grounds that were relied on are so technical and trivial and not really the acts of Victor, who really simply complied with the directions of Mrs. Holder, that in my opinion they should not have the effect of preventing a renunciation of probate by an executor.

The case I cite is more complex, and the executor was held to have intermeddled because he said that he had, but the judgement is pretty clear about where the bar should actually be set.

Yorkshireman99

elsien wrote: »

Would telling the bank of his death count as intermeddling? I think that's all they've done so far. That, and picking up the death certificate.

It is not intermeddling. You can always get a copy of the death certificate if need be.

Flugelhorn

Can see they will never agree to sell the house and will owe money to anyone who tries to help them. executor should renounce and go on holiday, whole thing would be such a headache with all the things mentioned.