Cost of not having a will

neilmorgan

CwtchDweller said:

Not to be a misery guts here, but what happens if you and your wife die in the same fatal incident? Has she made a will? How much would your children receive if you both died intestate? 
Genuine queries - I've no idea about these things, as my situation is quite different to your own.
(Am wishing you both long and happy lives!)

Well technically you wouldn't both die at the same time even if you do. One is deemed to have died before the other.
If we do do wills we will do a mirror pair and ensure the clause is included about one surviving the other by 30 days etc. but even that can be badly worded.
They get an equal share of everything with or without a will. 

theoretica

How does someone demonstrate there isn't an unknown child who is also due to inherit under intestacy?

If you are in Scotland, I gather intestate estates need to take out insurance (I think against mismanagement, or not tracing all children or a will turning up later or something like that) and the insurers often insist a solicitor is employed.

getmore4less

neilmorgan said:

CwtchDweller said:

Not to be a misery guts here, but what happens if you and your wife die in the same fatal incident? Has she made a will? How much would your children receive if you both died intestate? 
Genuine queries - I've no idea about these things, as my situation is quite different to your own.
(Am wishing you both long and happy lives!)

Well technically you wouldn't both die at the same time even if you do. One is deemed to have died before the other.
If we do do wills we will do a mirror pair and ensure the clause is included about one surviving the other by 30 days etc. but even that can be badly worded.
They get an equal share of everything with or without a will. 

There are tax issues considerations as they are different to inheritance with  commorientes.

Not clear if you understand them.

There are no executor(s) if intestate.

neilmorgan

If you have 3 executors and one does not want to be involved they can simply reserve powers. No additional paperwork or costs involved. If your children foolishly wanted someone else to do the work then that would cause no more issues than if you died intestate. 

>Thanks, I was sure there was paperwork to do so I'd better read that again.

Following on from another comment, If I die first and wife remarries then my will is meaningless and she would have to have one to safeguard our children's inheritance whilst also taking into account her new husband's children and circumstances.

No you will would not be meaningless unless you were foolish enough to DIY it and not cover all the what if situations that a solicitor would discuss with you and cover in the will they would draft up.

> Well if I want to leave everything to my wife I need to trust that she would then have a will if she remarries. I wouldn't want her to be unable to sell the house and be happy in a newly bought shared home with a new partner or sell the house and buy a new one.  

It's not about saving money. I have seen 3 wills just in our extended family where it would have been simpler to deal with without the will because the will added restrictions that intestacy wouldn't have. 

Could you be more specific about what these restriction are ?
>One would have forced the sale of the house but one beneficiary had suggested the option of renting it out because the sale value wasn't very good at the time. Fortunately  after discussion the beneficiaries were happy with selling it.

Another inadvertently missed out a well loved relation which again the beneficiaries agreed to ensure they received a sum of money. Both wills written by professionals. Both didn't cover unexpected "what ifs" and both were only rectified will good will after the executors had dealt with the instructions of the wills.

All I'm asking is what are the EXTRA COSTS of dying intestate? 

As far as administration is concerned normally none, but there could be significant costs to the eventual beneficiaries if intestacy does not cover an unfortunate what if event.

> It seems more likely that a will wouldn't cover unexpected what ifs.
  

Keep_pedalling

neilmorgan said:

If you have 3 executors and one does not want to be involved they can simply reserve powers. No additional paperwork or costs involved. If your children foolishly wanted someone else to do the work then that would cause no more issues than if you died intestate. 

>Thanks, I was sure there was paperwork to do so I'd better read that again.

Following on from another comment, If I die first and wife remarries then my will is meaningless and she would have to have one to safeguard our children's inheritance whilst also taking into account her new husband's children and circumstances.

No you will would not be meaningless unless you were foolish enough to DIY it and not cover all the what if situations that a solicitor would discuss with you and cover in the will they would draft up.

> Well if I want to leave everything to my wife I need to trust that she would then have a will if she remarries. I wouldn't want her to be unable to sell the house and be happy in a newly bought shared home with a new partner or sell the house and buy a new one.  

It's not about saving money. I have seen 3 wills just in our extended family where it would have been simpler to deal with without the will because the will added restrictions that intestacy wouldn't have. 

Could you be more specific about what these restriction are ?
>One would have forced the sale of the house but one beneficiary had suggested the option of renting it out because the sale value wasn't very good at the time. Fortunately  after discussion the beneficiaries were happy with selling it.

Another inadvertently missed out a well loved relation which again the beneficiaries agreed to ensure they received a sum of money. Both wills written by professionals. Both didn't cover unexpected "what ifs" and both were only rectified will good will after the executors had dealt with the instructions of the wills.

All I'm asking is what are the EXTRA COSTS of dying intestate? 

As far as administration is concerned normally none, but there could be significant costs to the eventual beneficiaries if intestacy does not cover an unfortunate what if event.

> It seems more likely that a will wouldn't cover unexpected what ifs.
  

I did not use the word unexpected. A professionally drafted will will cover a number of what ifs even those with only an outside chance of it happening. It seems you are determined to stick to your guns despite the advice of the experienced people on this board, and you, dispute being asked, have failed to give a single example of a restriction in a will that causes a problem that intestacy would avoid.

neilmorgan

theoretica said:

How does someone demonstrate there isn't an unknown child who is also due to inherit under intestacy?

If you are in Scotland, I gather intestate estates need to take out insurance (I think against mismanagement, or not tracing all children or a will turning up later or something like that) and the insurers often insist a solicitor is employed.

I'm in England

neilmorgan

Keep_pedalling said:

neilmorgan said:

If you have 3 executors and one does not want to be involved they can simply reserve powers. No additional paperwork or costs involved. If your children foolishly wanted someone else to do the work then that would cause no more issues than if you died intestate. 

>Thanks, I was sure there was paperwork to do so I'd better read that again.

Following on from another comment, If I die first and wife remarries then my will is meaningless and she would have to have one to safeguard our children's inheritance whilst also taking into account her new husband's children and circumstances.

No you will would not be meaningless unless you were foolish enough to DIY it and not cover all the what if situations that a solicitor would discuss with you and cover in the will they would draft up.

> Well if I want to leave everything to my wife I need to trust that she would then have a will if she remarries. I wouldn't want her to be unable to sell the house and be happy in a newly bought shared home with a new partner or sell the house and buy a new one.  

It's not about saving money. I have seen 3 wills just in our extended family where it would have been simpler to deal with without the will because the will added restrictions that intestacy wouldn't have. 

Could you be more specific about what these restriction are ?
>One would have forced the sale of the house but one beneficiary had suggested the option of renting it out because the sale value wasn't very good at the time. Fortunately  after discussion the beneficiaries were happy with selling it.

Another inadvertently missed out a well loved relation which again the beneficiaries agreed to ensure they received a sum of money. Both wills written by professionals. Both didn't cover unexpected "what ifs" and both were only rectified will good will after the executors had dealt with the instructions of the wills.

All I'm asking is what are the EXTRA COSTS of dying intestate? 

As far as administration is concerned normally none, but there could be significant costs to the eventual beneficiaries if intestacy does not cover an unfortunate what if event.

> It seems more likely that a will wouldn't cover unexpected what ifs.
  

I did not use the word unexpected. A professionally drafted will will cover a number of what ifs even those with only an outside chance of it happening. It seems you are determined to stick to your guns despite the advice of the experienced people on this board, and you, dispute being asked, have failed to give a single example of a restriction in a will that causes a problem that intestacy would avoid.

No, I used the word. You can plan for known what ifs and I'm sure they will be covered in professionally written wills. The problem is with the unexpected ones.
My original question was asking what the additional costs are of dying intestate compared with having a will.
I still don't have an answer to that question except that in the absence of any examples I am left with the impression that there don't appear to be any.

I'm sorry I have upset you. Have a good evening.
  

Keep_pedalling

neilmorgan said:

Keep_pedalling said:

neilmorgan said:

If you have 3 executors and one does not want to be involved they can simply reserve powers. No additional paperwork or costs involved. If your children foolishly wanted someone else to do the work then that would cause no more issues than if you died intestate. 

>Thanks, I was sure there was paperwork to do so I'd better read that again.

Following on from another comment, If I die first and wife remarries then my will is meaningless and she would have to have one to safeguard our children's inheritance whilst also taking into account her new husband's children and circumstances.

No you will would not be meaningless unless you were foolish enough to DIY it and not cover all the what if situations that a solicitor would discuss with you and cover in the will they would draft up.

> Well if I want to leave everything to my wife I need to trust that she would then have a will if she remarries. I wouldn't want her to be unable to sell the house and be happy in a newly bought shared home with a new partner or sell the house and buy a new one.  

It's not about saving money. I have seen 3 wills just in our extended family where it would have been simpler to deal with without the will because the will added restrictions that intestacy wouldn't have. 

Could you be more specific about what these restriction are ?
>One would have forced the sale of the house but one beneficiary had suggested the option of renting it out because the sale value wasn't very good at the time. Fortunately  after discussion the beneficiaries were happy with selling it.

Another inadvertently missed out a well loved relation which again the beneficiaries agreed to ensure they received a sum of money. Both wills written by professionals. Both didn't cover unexpected "what ifs" and both were only rectified will good will after the executors had dealt with the instructions of the wills.

All I'm asking is what are the EXTRA COSTS of dying intestate? 

As far as administration is concerned normally none, but there could be significant costs to the eventual beneficiaries if intestacy does not cover an unfortunate what if event.

> It seems more likely that a will wouldn't cover unexpected what ifs.
  

I did not use the word unexpected. A professionally drafted will will cover a number of what ifs even those with only an outside chance of it happening. It seems you are determined to stick to your guns despite the advice of the experienced people on this board, and you, dispute being asked, have failed to give a single example of a restriction in a will that causes a problem that intestacy would avoid.

No, I used the word. You can plan for known what ifs and I'm sure they will be covered in professionally written wills. The problem is with the unexpected ones.
My original question was asking what the additional costs are of dying intestate compared with having a will.
I still don't have an answer to that question except that in the absence of any examples I am left with the impression that there don't appear to be any.

I'm sorry I have upset you. Have a good evening.
  

I did answer the question.

neilmorgan

getmore4less said:

neilmorgan said:

CwtchDweller said:

Not to be a misery guts here, but what happens if you and your wife die in the same fatal incident? Has she made a will? How much would your children receive if you both died intestate? 
Genuine queries - I've no idea about these things, as my situation is quite different to your own.
(Am wishing you both long and happy lives!)

Well technically you wouldn't both die at the same time even if you do. One is deemed to have died before the other.
If we do do wills we will do a mirror pair and ensure the clause is included about one surviving the other by 30 days etc. but even that can be badly worded.
They get an equal share of everything with or without a will. 

There are tax issues considerations as they are different to inheritance with  commorientes.

Not clear if you understand them.

There are no executor(s) if intestate.

Ok I've used the wrong term. I should have said Administrator.
My understanding is that with or without will the house, owned jointly, passes to the partner without tax implication.
If both of us die the house is part of the value of the estate but with a will & left to a child may extend the tax allowance.
I've not found anything definitive about that extended allowance applying with intestacy.
Have I missed something?

Mojisola

I see the main benefit of having a will is choosing the executors - especially in the event of us and our immediate offspring dying at the same time.

We've chosen which of our more distant relatives we would prefer going through all our belongings and paperwork.