Very confusing situation regarding Dad's will.

Yorkshireman99

silvercar wrote: »

That would be true if the debt/ mortgage was in the name of one person only. If a debt/ property/ mortgage is in joint names, all are jointly and severely liable. This means that if one person dies the debt/ property/ mortgage becomes the responsibility of the remaining person. So a property held in joint names becomes the property of the remaining person. (Though a property held as tenants in common would be split according to the ownership split.) A joint debt becomes the debt of the person alive.

So the next question is whether the property was in joint names or held as tenants in common?

That does not seem correct. Any debts of the deceased, joint or sole, remain the responsibility of the estate. Of course a creditor may choose to enforce settlement of a debt against either party. The fact that the ownership of the mortaged property has become sole does not mean the debt devolves entirely to the remaining owner.

comeandgo

Children are entitled to share a third of fathers moveable assets, not half.

silvercar

https://www.landc.co.uk/insight/2015/01/who-is-responsible-for-a-mortgage-after-death/

Keep_pedalling

silvercar wrote: »

That would be true if the debt/ mortgage was in the name of one person only. If a debt/ property/ mortgage is in joint names, all are jointly and severely liable. This means that if one person dies the debt/ property/ mortgage becomes the responsibility of the remaining person. So a property held in joint names becomes the property of the remaining person. (Though a property held as tenants in common would be split according to the ownership split.) A joint debt becomes the debt of the person alive.

So the next question is whether the property was in joint names or held as tenants in common?

I can see that would make it more complicated, but an earlier post by the OP said it was his house and his mortgage.

Keep_pedalling

After all this speculation if the OP wants to claim then they should just tick the box saying that is the option he wants and send it back. I am pretty sure this places the obligation on the executor to distribute the estate as per the laws of Scotland, and the OP will get their inheritance without the need to engage their own solicitors or spend any of their own money.

itsanne

I'm in Scotland.

All you need to do is tick the box and return the form.

Between them, children are entitled to a third of the moveable assets, not half.

Not claiming is viewed as deprivation of assets for benefits purposes and benefits reduced as if the claim had been made. (I know you are not claiming benefits, but you asked about them.)

rachel230

I received 25% of movable assets (2 siblings so half of a half) so I was confused by the above and checked it out. Found the reason for the confusion!!

The legal rights of the children
The children are entitled to:
 one third of the remaining moveable estate split between them if the person who died
left a spouse or civil partner
 one half of the remaining moveable estate split between them if the deceased person did
not leave a spouse or civil partner

That clarifies it as when my parent died, there was no spouse hence the "half of a half"
If you PM me I will give you details of the Scottish solicitor I used. They were totally above board, diligent and gave simple and clear advice.
As I say, it is not a difficult process because it is clearly defined in Scottish law.

rachel230

Just to add to my previous post, the solicitor just told me what to do i.e. to inform the solicitor who was dealing with the Will that I was claiming my legal rights and to let me know when all relevant assets had been gathered. I then asked to see a copy, the solicitor worked out the amount I was entitled to, I checked it and agreed together with any interest and it was paid out. Took a couple of months.

dfgdfghxdfdzgv

So surely if the life insurance policy pays out, and it goes to his wife, it will, by definition, be made available to pay off the mortgage? She'll get the lion's share, so surely it's her choice? I mean, she could just default on it of course, but would risk losing the house as a result. As far as I'm aware, she's named on the mortgage.

As most have suggested, I will simply sign and return the letter. I've had quotes from solicitors who want north of £200 per hour to discuss this, but there's seemingly no point if it is as stated above.

Thanks for clarifying the half/third thing too - that now makes sense.