Recently found shares. Who should claim them?

getmore4less

If husband did not leave a will the all goes to wife is not a given for an intestate estate. 

xylophone

Elderly couple marry, second marriage for both with adult children from their previous marriages.
Man dies in 2004. Most things are in joint names which all pass to wife who is joint holder. A few things in just his name also pass to wife.
Not including the joint assets, estate is very small with no will, so letters of administration not applied for.

https://www.russell-cooke.co.uk/media/2083/the-laws-of-intestacy_jan_2009v2.pdf

The Intestacy Laws for Deaths prior to 1st February 2009

Husband leaves all to wife, 

No - he died intestate - see above.

Shelldean

getmore4less said:

If husband did not leave a will the all goes to wife is not a given for an intestate estate. 

In what case would it not all go to the wife?
My belief is that in 2004 when the husband died, the first amount went to the wife and anything above this amount was shared with any children. In 2004 that amount was £125,000. The deceased solo accounts were much lower than this.

Is this not correct? And are there other cases of intestacy where all of a low value estate doesn't pass to the spouse?

Shelldean

xylophone said:

Elderly couple marry, second marriage for both with adult children from their previous marriages.
Man dies in 2004. Most things are in joint names which all pass to wife who is joint holder. A few things in just his name also pass to wife.
Not including the joint assets, estate is very small with no will, so letters of administration not applied for.

https://www.russell-cooke.co.uk/media/2083/the-laws-of-intestacy_jan_2009v2.pdf

The Intestacy Laws for Deaths prior to 1st February 2009

Husband leaves all to wife, 

No - he died intestate - see above.

Sorry, yes that's what I meant he died intestate, but as his estate was below the threshold of £125,000 it all went to his wife.
He did leave it all to his wife, but only because it was a small estate that didn't go above the statutory limit at the time of £125,000.
Am I correct?

When a person dies intestate, the administrator applies for letters of administration, when a person does with a will, there is an executor. That's correct isn't it?

So I apologise and correct myself, when the wife died there wasn't an executor,but an administrator.

Shelldean

So can anyone tell me if the search company that contacted the administrator of the wife's estate, asking about her previously deceased husband, Is correct in asking for the husband's death certificate informant death certificate? (Assuming he is dead!! )

Or is the administrator correct in telling the search company, it's irrelevant and not needed?

xylophone

The administrator of Mrs X should simply advise the company that the whereabouts of the informant named  on  Mr X's death certificate are unknown.

Shelldean

xylophone said:

The administrator of Mrs X should simply advise the company that the whereabouts of the informant named  on  Mr X's death certificate are unknown.

This is what has been done.

getmore4less

Shelldean said:

getmore4less said:

If husband did not leave a will the all goes to wife is not a given for an intestate estate. 

In what case would it not all go to the wife?
My belief is that in 2004 when the husband died, the first amount went to the wife and anything above this amount was shared with any children. In 2004 that amount was £125,000. The deceased solo accounts were much lower than this.

Is this not correct? And are there other cases of intestacy where all of a low value estate doesn't pass to the spouse?

Now there are new assets that may not be the case.
The estate administration needs to be reopened to deal with the new assets. 

Shelldean

getmore4less said:

Shelldean said:

getmore4less said:

If husband did not leave a will the all goes to wife is not a given for an intestate estate. 

In what case would it not all go to the wife?
My belief is that in 2004 when the husband died, the first amount went to the wife and anything above this amount was shared with any children. In 2004 that amount was £125,000. The deceased solo accounts were much lower than this.

Is this not correct? And are there other cases of intestacy where all of a low value estate doesn't pass to the spouse?

Now there are new assets that may not be the case.
The estate administration needs to be reopened to deal with the new assets. 

But the person who dealt with the closure of the few things in solo names is now also deceased! Letters of administration were never applied for as the amount in the solo accounts were low, so not required!
So maybe letters of administration would need to be applied for and  granted?
Would they be needed whatever the amount of only if above a certain value? We currently have no idea of value! 
I'd presume the direct relatives of the husband, his son ( the informant) and his siblings would be the ones to apply?

Shelldean

UPDATE.
the company has come back and said the son who informed the register office of his father's death, is his next of kin.
Now I see two things incorrect with that statement.
1. Next of kin has no legal bearing? Might be incorrect on that?
2. If there was a next of kin surely it would be his wife?
The rules of intestacy say a wife comes before a child when inheriting, unless it's over a certain amount. So have absolutely no idea how they came to the conclusion the son is next of kin?

They want either the informants death certificate, or his address.
The executor knows neither his address not is he's alive or dead.
So executor has written back stating the above, and politely telling them to stop bothering him. As he can't fulfil what they want and he personally believes what I stated originally.

So the shares will go unclaimed unless the company finds the deceased son.