Deed of variation and proprietary/promissory estoppel

Namu

Just to try and clarify my Aunt had no children and was a widow so due to the unsigned will the next of kin are myself my brother and my cousin and his sister. My cousin was to have been the sole beneficiary had the will be signed. The acting solicitor drew up a deed of variation broadly dividing the proceeds of her estate 4 ways. We all agreed and signed the deed. Subsequently he has decided he wants more money. The deed of variation states that once signed it is irrevocable. Now the acting solicitor seems to think because my cousin is demanding more he can use  "proprietary/promissory estoppel" to over ride this deed? My question was is this correct because if this is it makes an absolute mockery of the deed of variation and its wording.....just a legal useless process to achieve what?. Its becoming like Jarndyce Vs Jarndyce with the only beneficiaries being the legal team.  !Exasperated

Flugelhorn

Sounds like it would have been much better if you had all just gone for the intestacy
Solicitor (or someone) has been making it far too complicated. 

Keep_pedalling

This does not make a lot of sense. She died intestate therefore the four of you are entitled to 25% each under intestacy laws so a DoV was not necessary to split the estate equally four ways.

To win a case the claimant is going to have to come up with more than the unsigned will as evidence, for example if they spent her last years caring for her based on a promise that they would be rewarded with an inheritance they would have a strong case.

The three of you need to take separate advice from a solicitor who is not acting for all four of you.

poppystar

Flugelhorn said:

Sounds like it would have been much better if you had all just gone for the intestacy (as was actually the case) without DoV - the original beneficiary would have got 50% - so better than under the new deal but not as good as the will would have been. Then the three of you would have got a sixth each - more than you expected, more than aunt intended, but not as much as  the DoV woudl have given. 
Solicitor (or someone) has been making it far too complicated. 

Surely now OP has clarified there are two stems with two children in each the intestacy would have actually given 25% each? So there would be no need for a deed of variation. 

OP - what was the reason given for the DoV by the solicitor? 

Flugelhorn

Keep_pedalling said:

This does not make a lot of sense. She died intestate therefore the four of you are entitled to 25% each under intestacy laws so a DoV was not necessary to split the estate equally four ways.

To win a case the claimant is going to have to come up with more than the unsigned will as evidence, for example if they spent her last years caring for her based on a promise that they would be rewarded with an inheritance they would have a strong case.

The three of you need to take separate advice from a solicitor who is not acting for all four of you.

agree - the DoV appears to be exactly what intestacy would have achieved?

My grandmother failed to sign her will having left everything in it  to one of her 5 children - under intestacy the other four should have had 20% each but all agreed that the wishes in the will were appropriate and DoV was signed to give everything to the one sibling. 

Spendless

You've put cousin and his sister? Isn't she also your cousin? 

If she's a half sister to your cousin, maybe not a biological niece  of deceased Aunt and not adopted by Aunts sibling? in that case under intestacy cousin would inherit 50% in place of their parent. You and brother would receive 25% and cousins sister nothing. Is this the reason for the, DoV? 

Can you further clarify relationship to Aunt. Are you all blood/adopted children of her siblings? 

missnosey122

As I understand it properity estoppel won't meet the 3 criteria needed unless the cousin was promised the estate did something in exchange like take care of the Aunt and that they gave up something like a job based on the promise - which you don't clarify here.

They cd try financial provision but its expensive & all beneficiaries circumstances will be taken into account, finances health etc . 

"guess is along the lines that Aunt wasn't married and had no children but had 2 already deceased sibling"

So there's
Aunt
sibling1
Sibling 2

Aunts estate wd be split between siblings 1&2 @ 50% each

Each sibling died so their share goes to their children

Sibling 1 has 1 child who receives 50%
Sibling  2 has 3 children who receives approx 16.66%

Sibling 1 child is entitled under succession rules of intestate to more however they all agreed to a deed of variation & I believe the Deed of variation is binding once it's signed.

Speak to your own solicitor.

missnosey122

One other thing

Who is the official administrator that holds the letters of administration the solicitor or a family member?

Goose_Grass

Namu said:

 The acting solicitor drew up a deed of variation broadly dividing the proceeds of her estate 4 ways. We all agreed and signed the deed. Subsequently he has decided he wants more money.

@Namu doesn't say four equal ways, but four ways, which could be unequal but something agreed to be fair/cautionary under the circumstances.  This would not be according to intestacy rules, hence the need for the DoV. 

In other words, perhaps the two cousins and sister agreed to give him more, but he wants more again.  And because he had enough grounds for the first DoV to be agreed this feels to his/their/a solicitor like a claim with a chance of success.  

It does sound like at least two solicitors should be consulted here, with respect to the claim on its merits, as well as the power of the "irrevocable" clause in the DoV.

Namu

Thank you all for your opinions in this matter , the D o V was drawn up because in the unsigned Will she wanted a small amount of money to go to her neighbours who looked after her. We 4 agreed to this and the balance of the estate to divide between us.
I was just staggered that despite the deed saying it is irrevocable once signed he now wants more and according to our acting solicitor he can possibly make a claim using  propriety estoppel.....i think at the end of the day because of potential legal costs we might have to try and settle on an extra amount for him. Happy Days :::):