Property/Will question

Margot123

Sometimes a will states '1 Puddleduck Lane, or any other property owned soley by me at the time of my death'. If it doesn't cover a subsequent property, then the will may fail.

antrobus

Margot123 wrote: »

Sometimes a will states '1 Puddleduck Lane, or any other property owned soley by me at the time of my death'. If it doesn't cover a subsequent property, then the will may fail.

The specific bequest may fail. The will remains valid.

Anyway, given that the OP is the sole beneficiary, I don't think it matters.

nom_de_plume

Whilst the wording is crucial it's perhaps not so in this case if the OP is the sole beneficiary of the whole estate as the property would likely fall into the residual pot but that would make no difference to the distribution. The only likelihood of a problem is if there are any other beneficiaries named in the will.

reekishawnee

Hi

Thanks for all your replies regarding my post.

I'm sole beneficiary. Other children from previous marriage are named specifically in will but receive nothing (stated)

I've not seen will but no where it is in event etc ..... so therefore don't know exact wording regarding property as Margot pointed out. I will try to find out more info

Thanks again

Mojisola

reekishawnee wrote: »

I'm sole beneficiary. Other children from previous marriage are named specifically in will but receive nothing (stated)

That may not stop them challenging the will.

Keep_pedalling

reekishawnee wrote: »

Hi

Thanks for all your replies regarding my post.

I'm sole beneficiary. Other children from previous marriage are named specifically in will but receive nothing (stated)

I've not seen will but no where it is in event etc ..... so therefore don't know exact wording regarding property as Margot pointed out. I will try to find out more info

Thanks again

Your mother should consult a solicitor to check that will and get a new one drawn up if there is anything in it that could cause any part to fail, or make it easier to challenge.

Savvy_Sue

Some solicitors will do home visits in this kind of situation.

konark

So she's named people in a will specifically to give them nowt,......... seems a bit callous.

unforeseen

konark wrote: »

So she's named people in a will specifically to give them nowt,......... seems a bit callous.

A**e covering, especially if the reason for not giving them anything is stated. Less chance of arguing that they were accidentally forgotten.

Mojisola

konark wrote: »

So she's named people in a will specifically to give them nowt,......... seems a bit callous.

unforeseen wrote: »

A**e covering, especially if the reason for not giving them anything is stated. Less chance of arguing that they were accidentally forgotten.

This is common advice from a solicitor if you don't want to leave an inheritance to some people or are dividing your estate unequally between, say, children.

As the will becomes a public document after probate, it's usually best to keep explanations in the will fairly bland; much more detail can be given in a letter kept with the will. It gives the deceased a 'voice' if the will is challenged by the people who haven't been left anything.