Heir Hunters refusing to hand over money from estate

pphillips

Malthusian said:

pphillips said:

Malthusian said:

pphillips said:

MobileSaver said:

pdel61 said:

I'd generate as much publicity as possible, MP, papers, local papers, social media and then fight them.

Sometimes I would agree but in this particular case life is too short; the Heir Hunters firm won't care about bad publicity and will counter that the OP would never have known about this windfall but for their time and effort.

The OP will almost certainly have to fight this in court with all the time, effort and stress that involves. I think that even if the OP wins the case, the magistrate will decide that the Heir Hunters were not being unreasonable in asking for their fees and so costs will not be awarded against them - in other words the OP will have to pay his own legal costs.

My advice, pay the fees with gritted teeth, enjoy your windfall and move on with your life. (As Shedman said you have nothing to lose by trying to negotiate a discounted fee but if they decline just immediately move on.)

In civil cases, the general rule is that the loser pays his own costs and the winners costs.

In civil cases, the general rule is that dodgy firms pay nothing because if you win, it turns out the firm has no assets to pay you with, and liquidates.

So in the worst case the OP would end up with worse than nothing as their £5k would have gone and they would have to pay their solicitors out of their own pocket.

It's a no-brainer. Take the £4k and enjoy spending it.

Isn't the £5k a trust asset that takes priority over the firms other debts?

If the firm has no assets after the liquidators have taken their fees it doesn't matter who has priority over their no money.

Which would almost certainly be the case given we are dealing with the kind of firm who will issue try-on demands for £1,000.

The OP's post suggests it hasn't been ringfenced. If it had been, the OP's solicitor could apply to whoever was holding the money directly and bypass the heir hunters, as the ringfenced account would be the estate's property and not the heir hunters'. That they haven't suggests "the actual money is with the Heir Hunters" means exactly that.

Yes, if the inheritance is mixed with the firm's other money it won't be considered a trust asset. I just didn't know if an heir hunter has to keep a separate client account like a solicitor does.

st999

One thing to consider, do the heir hunters want their fee before they release the money?