Conflict of interest query

maximumgardener

badmemory wrote: »

Surely if the business was a going concern then your late brother was taking out more than £300 and therefore the business accounts should be in a better state than they were before, so she is probably not reducing anyones actual inheritance. As his ex sister maybe you should just spend a moment wondering why your oldest sibling living abroad was made executor and not a UK based sibling, which is what most of us would do to make things simpler. Also a cousin & a niece. That would seem to be an unusual arrangement in view of all the siblings which would not be anyones first thought. Have you considered that this payment may have been discussed with the other executors by your late brother and that they are fulfilling his wishes for his (not ex) partner.

Thanks for your comments.
My late brother was very careful with money and very stubborn (i'd say he may have taken out 150 per week max) but of course he is not here now.
The choice of executors was made by him and as you say...its "interesting" & not necessarily simple. The payment (salary) was not discussed with other executors previously or written down in will or anywhere else. It was decided by sister 1 alone and presented as a fait acomplis to the other executors just after my brother died.....ie at a very emotional time for all. This new position and payment was only revealed about 4 weeks after the funeral.
The cousin executor and my brother were very close indeed . That explains that one. He also had POA when he was alive . Sister 1 in USA also had a close bond with my brother..She also struggles with the admin that far away but she is stubborn just like our brother. families eh!

Yorkshireman99

One executor cannot authjorise such a payment on their own. They are personally liable to the estate for the payments. They need to be stopped at once,

securityguy

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

One executor cannot authjorise such a payment on their own.

I don't think the "one executor authorising" part is actually the main problem. In most wills, the executors are joint and several: they can act independently, but assume liabilities for actions of them all. Having lots of executors increases the risk of one of them incurring liabilities for which all are liable; it doesn't prevent one from doing something wrong. This is a reason to refuse an executorship if you don't trust your fellow executors, of course.

Assuming they are jointly and severally executors, then either it's not permitted even if all the executors agree, or it is permitted and therefore any of the executors can agree to it solely. And given joint and several liability, if one agrees when they shouldn't, then all are nonetheless liable. It's a hideous mess.

POPPYOSCAR

Apologies if I have missed it somewhere but have you been told that the payments are for carrying out executor duties?

Could they not be for helping the business keep going until it is sold?

What would your brother's partner live on otherwise as presumably he was paying for them both while he was alive?

maximumgardener

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Apologies if I have missed it somewhere but have you been told that the payments are for carrying out executor duties?

Could they not be for helping the business keep going until it is sold?

What would your brother's partner live on otherwise as presumably he was paying for them both while he was alive?

thats ok. yes when we queried the payments we were told it was for security duty and general admin. i.e. a new position was created
thing is thats pretty much what you may expect an executor to do but that would be unpaid
we believe the 4 executors and 2 staff can easily keep business going till its sold .
my late brothers partner could have requested some of her bequest early if she was short ?
would seem less conflicting ?

securityguy

maximumgardener wrote: »

thats ok. yes when we queried the payments we were told it was for security duty and general admin. i.e. a new position was created
thing is thats pretty much what you may expect an executor to do but that would be unpaid

No, you wouldn't expect an executor to house-sit and act as security as part of their role as an executor, unless they happened to be living in the premises for other reasons. You can't pay non-professionals for administrative duties as an executor (well, you can, but you can't do it from the estate, it would be the executors doing it personally) but security of property you can. The "new position was created" is irrelevant of itself, as prior to the testator's death the testator wasn't dead, amongst other differences.

It sounds like a very large, and very complex, estate. This "job" sounds dubious. But in the overall context of sorting the whole thing out, is it a significant amount of money? The phrase "choose your battles" springs to mind.

getmore4less

What sort of business, sole trader, ltd, other.....

Yorkshireman99

securityguy wrote: »

No, you wouldn't expect an executor to house-sit and act as security as part of their role as an executor, unless they happened to be living in the premises for other reasons. You can't pay non-professionals for administrative duties as an executor (well, you can, but you can't do it from the estate, it would be the executors doing it personally) but security of property you can. The "new position was created" is irrelevant of itself, as prior to the testator's death the testator wasn't dead, amongst other differences.

It sounds like a very large, and very complex, estate. This "job" sounds dubious. But in the overall context of sorting the whole thing out, is it a significant amount of money? The phrase "choose your battles" springs to mind.

I am inclined to agree about the battles. What would concern me is what other "irregularities" might be contemplated by a "rogue" executor. A close eye needs to be kept out.

mark55man

I think its been established that the payment are business related not executor related

(if not as others have advised) it is dodgy ground legally, and must be stopped.

if it is the case its business related then I really wouldn't make a fuss. It will be self limiting as its in everyone's interest to sell the business for as much as possible, as soon as possible as likely to go downhill without your brother's driving force. The last thing you want to is antagonize people.

You could write asking for confirmation - or you could write offering complete understanding that the partner needs to be involved in the business and offering to help rather than being really rather unhelpful

On an estate of £1,000,000 £300 a week will take 6 years before even 10% is gone. Inter sibling inheritances are quite uncommon, so although this sounds harsh you are doing well to get anything at all - and maybe you need to cut some slack here.

getmore4less

maximumgardener wrote: »

the will states my late brothers estate to be sold . it will be sold as a going concern rather than piecemeal.

If the business is to be sold as a going concern then employment laws kick in for the employees.

Talk of redundancy payments is probably premature.