Benficary rejecting money.

Brynsam

AnotherJoe wrote: »

Why does one beneficiary not cashing a cheque affect the others ?

Because it isn't possible to quantify the final costs of winding up the estate when there may well be further costs due to a solicitor or other professional to sort out the mess being created by the non-responding beneficiary. Any costs are normally a legitimate charge on the estate generally, rather than just on the one individual who appears to be the fly in the ointment.

Brynsam

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

Unless I am very much mistaken it is NOT the executor that is a fault but a particularly stupid beneficary. Unlees of course the solicitor is delaying payment to others because of this. Perhaps the OP coild please clarify? TIA Always best to check!

I think you probably are very much mistaken. The executors need to deal with the situation as they find it, which unhappily includes costs arising from potential beneficiaries who aren't exactly acting in their own best interests. Fees are normally a general charge on the estate in much the same way the cost of tracing someone would be charged to the estate, not taken off the share of the 'missing' person.

Yorkshireman99

Thanks for correcting me.. I will rte read the whole thread to see if I can understand exectly waht the issue is.

AnotherJoe

Brynsam wrote: »

Because it isn't possible to quantify the final costs of winding up the estate when there may well be further costs due to a solicitor or other professional to sort out the mess being created by the non-responding beneficiary. Any costs are normally a legitimate charge on the estate generally, rather than just on the one individual who appears to be the fly in the ointment.

So the solicitor retains a small amount to cater for holding this sum in a bank account until such time as the beneficiary claims it and if thats never, so be it. The cost of managing that is hardly going to break the bank if its never claimed.

TBagpuss

Except that the executors will still be responsible. The solicitor would need to write to them periodically to update the, so there would be an ongoing cost. And as executors, they have a duty to distribute the estate.

AnotherJoe

TBagpuss wrote: »

Except that the executors will still be responsible. The solicitor would need to write to them periodically to update the, so there would be an ongoing cost. And as executors, they have a duty to distribute the estate.

Hence my thought of 5% to cover a once a year letter.

t0rt0ise

Send him a cheque. If he doesn't cash it so be it. Job done either way.

LobsterMemory

t0rt0ise wrote: »

Send him a cheque. If he doesn't cash it so be it. Job done either way.

Don't think it is - executors wouldn't have evidence he received it.

BrassicWoman

LobsterMemory wrote: »

Don't think it is - executors wouldn't have evidence he received it.

They can photograph the cheque, film themselves putting it an an enelope, and get proof of posting. If they ever need evidence, which they don't, so long as the money is still sitting there all cosy.

Robin9

Could the Executors renounce their roles in favour of a solicitor and let him at a cost to the remains of the estate pursue the matter =.