Urgent advice needed - contentious probate

Manxman_in_exile

SDel said:

... she said to me "He (solicitor) asked the questions and I answered them" a bit novel, as the notes were taken by a woman... I'd rather appoint a legal entity to do it, then I can't be accused of stealing.

First, what makes you assume that the person taking the notes is the person asking the questions?  Maybe it's best practice for the person asking the questions to take the notes as well, but if that didn't happen, as long as they can swear they were both present when the questions were asked and answered, then it's not much of an argument to contest a will on.  And presumably you'd be arguing one (or both) of them was lying?  Also, the fact your sister was unintelligible at times does not necessarily mean she didn't understand what she was doing.

Second - if you don't get the money out of your account to the executor PDQ, you do leave yourself open to be accused of stealing!

On the face of it, a 50/50 split seems perfectly reasonable.  Is there any particular reason that would help you establish your sister would have wanted everything to go to you with nothing to your brother?  I think you'd find it very difficult.

"Promises" and assurances about inheritances are absolutely worthless.

SDel

The probate issue is complex, and I don't want to go into it here in detail, but he actually told me he'd taken legal advice and we didn't need probate, which I knew was wrong.
I am not trying to secure the whole estate for myself, although I do have an issue with the way in which the will was changed, as I was falsely accused of stealing, the story fed to a frightened and confused old woman to alienate her from me, and then the will changed.  I do, however, need to maximise the benefit from the estate because of my health and financial situation.   I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time.  I would be happy to negotiate, but the whole reason for my original post was that I feel as though I am being steered away from a negotiation situation by my solicitors refusal to answer the questions my brother's solicitor is asking.  After today's conversation I feel I'm being steered towards a court case, which I don't want due to the cost, but I'm not sure what the procedures are in dealing with this type of issue, hence my original post.

Brynsam

SDel said:

The probate issue is complex, and I don't want to go into it here in detail, but he actually told me he'd taken legal advice and we didn't need probate, which I knew was wrong.
I am not trying to secure the whole estate for myself, although I do have an issue with the way in which the will was changed, as I was falsely accused of stealing, the story fed to a frightened and confused old woman to alienate her from me, and then the will changed.  I do, however, need to maximise the benefit from the estate because of my health and financial situation.   I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time.  I would be happy to negotiate, but the whole reason for my original post was that I feel as though I am being steered away from a negotiation situation by my solicitors refusal to answer the questions my brother's solicitor is asking.  After today's conversation I feel I'm being steered towards a court case, which I don't want due to the cost, but I'm not sure what the procedures are in dealing with this type of issue, hence my original post.

You are asking for advice on a very complex position, drip feeding information and now saying you don't want to go into it here in detail. Fair enough, but how on earth do you expect anyone here to comment helpfully? Clients who behave like this are a nightmare, because you never know if you've actually got all the relevant facts or whether they are (consciously or, just as often, sub-consciously) cherry picking. It's quite common to omit things in the hope of saving time/fees, when the reverse is almost always the case. 

Write yourself a shopping list of the questions you need to clarify with your solicitor and then go through it with him. Saying that you 'need to maximise the benefit from the estate' is a statement of the obvious; that's what any sane beneficiary would do. Trying to achieve that maximisation by accusing your brother, solicitor etc of wrongdoing probably won't achieve that objective.

pphillips

SDel said:

The probate issue is complex, and I don't want to go into it here in detail, but he actually told me he'd taken legal advice and we didn't need probate, which I knew was wrong.
I am not trying to secure the whole estate for myself, although I do have an issue with the way in which the will was changed, as I was falsely accused of stealing, the story fed to a frightened and confused old woman to alienate her from me, and then the will changed.  I do, however, need to maximise the benefit from the estate because of my health and financial situation.   I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time.  I would be happy to negotiate, but the whole reason for my original post was that I feel as though I am being steered away from a negotiation situation by my solicitors refusal to answer the questions my brother's solicitor is asking.  After today's conversation I feel I'm being steered towards a court case, which I don't want due to the cost, but I'm not sure what the procedures are in dealing with this type of issue, hence my original post.

The first step is getting a caveat which will postpone the administration of the estate, the second step is a trial in the chancery division of the High Court. If it goes that far, you are likely to get minimal benefit from the estate.

Manxman_in_exile

SDel said:

... I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time....

I think that as suggested you need to make a list of questions to ask your solicitor - including why he didn't answer all the other solicitor's questions as this is obviously concerning you.  Nobody here knows the answer(s).

It might be an idea to write everything down clearly so you can go through it all with your solicitor at the same time.  For example, you said your sister said she'd answered the questions her solicitor asked her, but you also said that the notes of the Q&A had been written by someone other than the solicitor.  Then you write the sentence I quote above - what does it mean?  That sentence could involve four people or only two.  Are you saying the solicitor who your sister says asked her questions wasn't present at the time?  Who has told you this?  Why is the solicitor's representative talking to you?

You need to present a clear story.  And what's this about previous accusations of theft?

pphillips

Manxman_in_exile said:

SDel said:

... I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time....

I think that as suggested you need to make a list of questions to ask your solicitor - including why he didn't answer all the other solicitor's questions as this is obviously concerning you.  Nobody here knows the answer(s).

It might be an idea to write everything down clearly so you can go through it all with your solicitor at the same time.  For example, you said your sister said she'd answered the questions her solicitor asked her, but you also said that the notes of the Q&A had been written by someone other than the solicitor.  Then you write the sentence I quote above - what does it mean?  That sentence could involve four people or only two.  Are you saying the solicitor who your sister says asked her questions wasn't present at the time?  Who has told you this?  Why is the solicitor's representative talking to you?

You need to present a clear story.  And what's this about previous accusations of theft?

The OP doesn't want to tell us the full story, as is their prerogative.

Gavin83

SDel said:

The probate issue is complex, and I don't want to go into it here in detail, but he actually told me he'd taken legal advice and we didn't need probate, which I knew was wrong.
I am not trying to secure the whole estate for myself, although I do have an issue with the way in which the will was changed, as I was falsely accused of stealing, the story fed to a frightened and confused old woman to alienate her from me, and then the will changed.  I do, however, need to maximise the benefit from the estate because of my health and financial situation.   I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time.  I would be happy to negotiate, but the whole reason for my original post was that I feel as though I am being steered away from a negotiation situation by my solicitors refusal to answer the questions my brother's solicitor is asking.  After today's conversation I feel I'm being steered towards a court case, which I don't want due to the cost, but I'm not sure what the procedures are in dealing with this type of issue, hence my original post.

If you aren’t trying to secure the whole estate for yourself but clearly want more than 50% what are you actually looking for as an outcome to this?

Or are you actually happy with the 50% but just aren’t happy with the way he’s administering the estate?

Manxman_in_exile

pphillips said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

SDel said:

... I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time....

I think that as suggested you need to make a list of questions to ask your solicitor - including why he didn't answer all the other solicitor's questions as this is obviously concerning you.  Nobody here knows the answer(s).

It might be an idea to write everything down clearly so you can go through it all with your solicitor at the same time.  For example, you said your sister said she'd answered the questions her solicitor asked her, but you also said that the notes of the Q&A had been written by someone other than the solicitor.  Then you write the sentence I quote above - what does it mean?  That sentence could involve four people or only two.  Are you saying the solicitor who your sister says asked her questions wasn't present at the time?  Who has told you this?  Why is the solicitor's representative talking to you?

You need to present a clear story.  And what's this about previous accusations of theft?

The OP doesn't want to tell us the full story, as is their prerogative.

I'm not suggesting they tell us.  I'm suggesting they do it so they can discuss it properly with their solicitor.

Brynsam

pphillips said:

SDel said:

The probate issue is complex, and I don't want to go into it here in detail, but he actually told me he'd taken legal advice and we didn't need probate, which I knew was wrong.
I am not trying to secure the whole estate for myself, although I do have an issue with the way in which the will was changed, as I was falsely accused of stealing, the story fed to a frightened and confused old woman to alienate her from me, and then the will changed.  I do, however, need to maximise the benefit from the estate because of my health and financial situation.   I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time.  I would be happy to negotiate, but the whole reason for my original post was that I feel as though I am being steered away from a negotiation situation by my solicitors refusal to answer the questions my brother's solicitor is asking.  After today's conversation I feel I'm being steered towards a court case, which I don't want due to the cost, but I'm not sure what the procedures are in dealing with this type of issue, hence my original post.

The first step is getting a caveat which will postpone the administration of the estate, the second step is a trial in the chancery division of the High Court. If it goes that far, you are likely to get minimal benefit from the estate.

Try and keep a sense of perspective...this isn't going anywhere near a courtroom. The story simply isn't coherent enough and nor, I wager, is the value of the estate high enough to warrant such expense.

pphillips

Brynsam said:

pphillips said:

SDel said:

The probate issue is complex, and I don't want to go into it here in detail, but he actually told me he'd taken legal advice and we didn't need probate, which I knew was wrong.
I am not trying to secure the whole estate for myself, although I do have an issue with the way in which the will was changed, as I was falsely accused of stealing, the story fed to a frightened and confused old woman to alienate her from me, and then the will changed.  I do, however, need to maximise the benefit from the estate because of my health and financial situation.   I have been told by the solicitor's representative that the notes were taken by someone else and only given to him for signing, he was not in the room at the time.  I would be happy to negotiate, but the whole reason for my original post was that I feel as though I am being steered away from a negotiation situation by my solicitors refusal to answer the questions my brother's solicitor is asking.  After today's conversation I feel I'm being steered towards a court case, which I don't want due to the cost, but I'm not sure what the procedures are in dealing with this type of issue, hence my original post.

The first step is getting a caveat which will postpone the administration of the estate, the second step is a trial in the chancery division of the High Court. If it goes that far, you are likely to get minimal benefit from the estate.

Try and keep a sense of perspective...this isn't going anywhere near a courtroom. The story simply isn't coherent enough and nor, I wager, is the value of the estate high enough to warrant such expense.

Solicitors can advise not to take it to court but they can't stop embittered people from doing so against all reason, particularly if the only thing that matters in the end is being right. The law reports are full of cases where the legal costs have either completely or substantially depleted the value of a disputed estate.