Executor advice

lucyscarp

Would accessing his credit history in order to try to verify financial circumstances be seen as intermeddling?

Yorkshireman99

lucyscarp wrote: »

Would accessing his credit history in order to try to verify financial circumstances be seen as intermeddling?

Difficult for a private individual to do and in any case what useful purpose would it serve? As has benn said repeatedly do nothing further except notifying any creditors that the estate is insolvet and that you will NOT be administering it. There is nothing useful you can do. Repeat do nothing! Sorry for being blunt!

Margot123

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

Difficult for a private individual to do and in any case what useful purpose would it serve? As has benn said repeatedly do nothing further except notifying any creditors that the estate is insolvet and that you will NOT be administering it. There is nothing useful you can do. Repeat do nothing! Sorry for being blunt!

T'wud appear even being blunt is not working.

The OP will do what they do despite being given very sound advice to stand well back.

Jenniefour

Margot, people are here to get help, not to be judged. OP was simply asking a question and she did not say she was disregarding what's been advised.

Margot123

Jenniefour wrote: »

Margot, people are here to get help, not to be judged. OP was simply asking a question and she did not say she was disregarding what's been advised.

The clues are always there, when someone asks for advice, is told by many people not to touch something with a bargepole, and yet they ignore that and keep asking the opposite.

lucyscarp

Margot123 wrote: »

The clues are always there, when someone asks for advice, is told by many people not to touch something with a bargepole, and yet they ignore that and keep asking the opposite.

Honestly, as much as I appreciate and take all advice given onboard and am eternally grateful I can not abide people with that attitude. At what point did I say "I'm not doing that" or "thanks, but no thanks". I'm doing exactly what everyone has very blatantly told me to do. I put my hands up on numerous occassions to state I am out of my depth that in no way does not mean I can't pursue further questions for clarification.

I'm irritated enough as it is, so if you're of the opinion that moronic comments like that are doing any good at all based on the presumption within your own little world, I suggest pulling your head out of it.

Amongst anything else it's a learning curve, an unselfish one at that. Other people will have the same queries along the same lines and the information will always be helpful to others as well as myself.

Whatever your problem is, take it elsewhere.

Edit: Apologies, jennie, thank you for specific advice have been going back and forth through it.

Yorkshireman, reason I asked was within the question itself. I couldn't find an answer to; "Who can legally declare an estate insolvent?" The entire concept surrounding role of executor and insolvent estates seems absurd. Everything you need to potentially do to establish whether an estate is insolvent or not is deemed intermeddling. Seriously, is this joke? Am I missing something? I need to be 100% sure not 99.9% how is this possible in these circumstances? What if I'm wrong and I overlooked something and something else is unearthed down the line?

If the best advice, which it seems to be is to simply walk away after informing then that's exactly what will be done. I guess what is being overlooked is that, I'm not just an executor, this is my dad and sentiment can't simply be thrown aside as much as it may be the "the best legal route". I don't need people telling me, "fine, do what you want, throw yourself under those buses", I get it now, I genuinely do but if you can't understand why I would have further questions or why that wouldn't simply be "the end" of this thread, whole-heartedly, don't post in here anymore, sounds awful but a bluntness that I guess is needed all round.

So, taking the general advice. I walk away, I inform the creditors I'm not administering and leave the onus on them to collect his possession, which would be from myself. Are they going to ask for an inventory? Would this be intermeddling? If they ask and it is, do I ignore? Obviously I have genuine reasons for moving them initially but what is the likely scenario here?

What will happen to items with no monetary value? Do I discuss this with creditors or let them approach it?

Been reading through alot of previous posts of a similar nature on MSE and this;
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5424387

Without directly pointing, is the advice here correct? About removing items? Or is it literally like everyone most likely looks at the situation, a grey area, but who is going to know really?

If this is the case, what is the better choice, returning all removed items to the property then inform everyone of non-administration or just do it in current standing?