Complex Probate materialistic step mother

poppystar

There doesn’t seem to be a life interest trust in that excerpt. It seems to say everything goes to the wife unless she fails to survive him by 28 days. Which bit do you think is the life interest part?

Bluenunn_in_the_north

Hi,

I'll redact and upload the rest of the Will. Yes, thats the section about everything left to her, ie PBs.

The LIT was in the first section.

Hold on.

Bluenunn_in_the_north

Here we are..

Keep_pedalling

Clause ii. Would appear to leave leave his entire estate to his wife. The important word here is absolutely. Apon Trust does not mean it is placed in trust (note that term is also used the other clauses including the one covering funeral expenses).

if his share of his home had been left to his children with a life interest to his wife you would have a couple of clauses specifically instructing that in the will.

I am afraid it looks like he made the mistake of relying on her will to have his assets passed as he wished after her death. That may still happen but there is nothing to stop her leaving the lot to who ever she wishes.

Bluenunn_in_the_north

Keep_pedalling said:

Clause ii. Would appear to leave leave his entire estate to his wife. The important word here is absolutely. Apon Trust does not mean it is placed in trust (note that term is also used the other clauses including the one covering funeral expenses).

if his share of his home had been left to his children with a life interest to his wife you would have a couple of clauses specifically instructing that in the will.

I am afraid it looks like he made the mistake of relying on her will to have his assets passed as he wished after her death. That may still happen but there is nothing to stop her leaving the lot to who ever she wishes.

I hear what you're saying but I don't see it like that.
If there's no bare trust for the property, why are trustees mentioned multiple times.

She has a right to occupy as set out in section 4.

Why is there a Form A restriction on the LR if she is the absolute beneficial owner?

A Form A restriction prevents her selling (TIC) without consent of all trustees.

"Form A (Restriction on dispositions by sole proprietor)

No disposition by a sole proprietor of the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an order of the court."

Are you a probate lawyer or just offering your opinion?

Thanks

RAS

All wills mention trustees multiple times.

It's just the term used to describe the executors between when they start administering the estate and they distribute it. In that period they hold the deceased assets in trust, for the future beneficiaries.

poppystar

Bluenunn_in_the_north said:

Keep_pedalling said:

Clause ii. Would appear to leave leave his entire estate to his wife. The important word here is absolutely. Apon Trust hdoes not mean it is placed in trust (note that term is also used the other clauses including the one covering funeral expenses).

if his share of his home had been left to his children with a life interest to his wife you would have a couple of clauses specifically instructing that in the will.

I am afraid it looks like he made the mistake of relying on her will to have his assets passed as he wished after her death. That may still happen but there is nothing to stop her leaving the lot to who ever she wishes.

I hear what you're saying but I don't see it like that.
If there's no bare trust for the property, why are trustees mentioned multiple times.

She has a right to occupy as set out in section 4.

Why is there a Form A restriction on the LR if she is the absolute beneficial owner?

A Form A restriction prevents her selling (TIC) without consent of all trustees.

"Form A (Restriction on dispositions by sole proprietor)

No disposition by a sole proprietor of the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an order of the court."

Are you a probate lawyer or just offering your opinion?

Thanks

You say earlier on that the Will is confusing and lawyers have looked at it and thought so too. What exactly did they conclude? They will have been able to see the entire Will so are far better able to give a legally sound answer. All anyone can do on here is work with the information we have been fed during the post, call on our own experiences and give our views based on that. 

The fact that the property was held as TIC is separate to any Will. There have been cases on here before where the tenancy has been severed but the Will not changed or made to leave the property to anyone other than where it would have gone if held as joint tenants. 

Executors are trustees so a Will will mention trustees throughout. 

Keep_pedalling

Bluenunn_in_the_north said:

Keep_pedalling said:

Clause ii. Would appear to leave leave his entire estate to his wife. The important word here is absolutely. Apon Trust does not mean it is placed in trust (note that term is also used the other clauses including the one covering funeral expenses).

if his share of his home had been left to his children with a life interest to his wife you would have a couple of clauses specifically instructing that in the will.

I am afraid it looks like he made the mistake of relying on her will to have his assets passed as he wished after her death. That may still happen but there is nothing to stop her leaving the lot to who ever she wishes.

I hear what you're saying but I don't see it like that.
If there's no bare trust for the property, why are trustees mentioned multiple times.

She has a right to occupy as set out in section 4.

Why is there a Form A restriction on the LR if she is the absolute beneficial owner?

A Form A restriction prevents her selling (TIC) without consent of all trustees.

"Form A (Restriction on dispositions by sole proprietor)

No disposition by a sole proprietor of the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an order of the court."

Are you a probate lawyer or just offering your opinion?

Thanks

It was just my opinion, apart from the LR rep there are no professionals on this board. I did however post based on the first part of the will you posted and before you posted the other bit. My opinion now is that you need professional advice.

Bluenunn_in_the_north

RAS said:

All wills mention trustees multiple times.

It's just the term used to describe the executors between when they start administering the estate and they distribute it. In that period they hold the deceased assets in trust, for the future beneficiaries.

Hi,

I understand what you're saying. We trying to determine if there's a formal deed of trust, but thats another story.

As my fathersshare of the assest cannot be distributed until my SM dies then, 10 years now, then I thought the property is held in an 'express' trust as set out in the Will. Maybe it's just semantics.

His share is clearly being held in a legal entity/concept of some kind, as it hasn't been disposed to his beneficiaries.

Thanks

Bluenunn_in_the_north

poppystar said:

Bluenunn_in_the_north said:

Keep_pedalling said:

Clause ii. Would appear to leave leave his entire estate to his wife. The important word here is absolutely. Apon Trust hdoes not mean it is placed in trust (note that term is also used the other clauses including the one covering funeral expenses).

if his share of his home had been left to his children with a life interest to his wife you would have a couple of clauses specifically instructing that in the will.

I am afraid it looks like he made the mistake of relying on her will to have his assets passed as he wished after her death. That may still happen but there is nothing to stop her leaving the lot to who ever she wishes.

I hear what you're saying but I don't see it like that.
If there's no bare trust for the property, why are trustees mentioned multiple times.

She has a right to occupy as set out in section 4.

Why is there a Form A restriction on the LR if she is the absolute beneficial owner?

A Form A restriction prevents her selling (TIC) without consent of all trustees.

"Form A (Restriction on dispositions by sole proprietor)

No disposition by a sole proprietor of the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an order of the court."

Are you a probate lawyer or just offering your opinion?

Thanks

You say earlier on that the Will is confusing and lawyers have looked at it and thought so too. What exactly did they conclude? They will have been able to see the entire Will so are far better able to give a legally sound answer. All anyone can do on here is work with the information we have been fed during the post, call on our own experiences and give our views based on that. 

The fact that the property was held as TIC is separate to any Will. There have been cases on here before where the tenancy has been severed but the Will not changed or made to leave the property to anyone other than where it would have gone if held as joint tenants. 

Executors are trustees so a Will will mention trustees throughout. 

Hi,

Yes, we've had a few freebie sessions over the years, not gone to formal engagement.

All of them have said it is worded poorly and ambiguous. Some of them have given slightly different answers but they agree more digginng has to be done, potentially with litigation.

My sister who is a Trustee/Executor is getting on the case.

Thanks for the input. A TIC cannot be severed unless all Executors agree, correct.?

My sister hasn't assented.