Writing wills - what does more money get you?

waveyjane

Partner and I are thinking of getting wills drafted now we're responsible adults. We have a kid, a house, two cats and a fair bit in savings (cash, shares etc.) and are both in good health. Might want to put a legacy or two in for charities, but otherwise the residue goes to each other or our kid.

Chatting to a couple of solicitors on the phone and both have fixed fees for mirror wills, with one about double the cost of the other. They describe their processes as pretty similar (eg consultation, unlimited edits, signing/witnessing, storage).

What does extra money get you in this case? I'm always wary of choosing the cheapest option in most contexts, but unless we've got kids from previous marriages, multiple properties or potentially spendthrift progeny, is it just a case of cheapest wins?

RAS

I'd be inclined to store wills with the HMCTS. They've got a decent chance of lasting longer than the law firm.

Malthusian

If you have confidence in both then I would go with the cheaper one. 
Hopefully both will tell you to ensure any legacies to charity should be in £ amounts and not a percentage of the estate. (But beware of the £ becoming a much larger share of your estate if the overall value goes down, e.g. due to care costs.)

user1977

Better coffee when you visit them?

There's not necessarily any great logic to it - the cheaper firm might have a more streamlined process, or assume clients will have straightforward requirements, or treat it as a loss leader to upsell additional services, or have cheaper/more junior staff doing the work, or have cheaper rent on their offices....

boingy

waveyjane said:

What does extra money get you in this case? 

It means you get to sit in a shinier solicitor's office in front of a bigger desk. 

Some solicitors treat wills as a sort of loss leader, with a view that if you use them for your will you will probably call them first for other legal stuff in the future. The cheaper of the two will be fine as long as you feel they are listening to you. Before you meet them make sure you have both sat down with a bit of paper (or a spreadsheet if you are a geek like me!) and written down broadly what you want. Keep it as simple as possible. 

And be prepared to learn some new words or phrases. "Per stirpes" amused me, for no good reason. 

waveyjane

Malthusian said:

If you have confidence in both then I would go with the cheaper one. 
Hopefully both will tell you to ensure any legacies to charity should be in £ amounts and not a percentage of the estate. (But beware of the £ becoming a much larger share of your estate if the overall value goes down, e.g. due to care costs.)

Hah - off topic already, but hey. Why not percentage? I note that 10% gets you IHT at 36%.

RAS

Neither is entirely safe. Your lawyer may explain that one may encourage charities to push for the highest value, the other risks the charities getting a large percentage if the value of the estate is eroded before death.

boingy

We went for percentages for everything, charities and family members. It makes much more sense to me because the estate could easily be worth double or half (or less) of what it is today by the time we shuffle off.

I don't see how a charity can push for a higher value unless they are the executors, which I think is a bad idea anyway. The charities in our wills don't know they are in our wills and they'll get what they are given by the executor according to those percentages. 

Richard1212

So long as you know  that they offer the same services, it seems likely that most folk would choose the cheaper offer. There's a lot of snobbery in the world of solicitors---those who see themselves as the "bees' knees" in a particular town ( such as the firm dates back to the Magna Carta or have the plush Listed Building office premises) charge much higher fees than the young bloke starting out on his own just round the corner.

Don't forget that it is very very easy to write your own Will, especially a simple mirror Will. And don't forget that this month ( and March) is 

Free Wills Month and provides people with an opportunity to have a simple will written for free.

Savvy_Sue

boingy said:

We went for percentages for everything, charities and family members. It makes much more sense to me because the estate could easily be worth double or half (or less) of what it is today by the time we shuffle off.

I don't see how a charity can push for a higher value unless they are the executors, which I think is a bad idea anyway. The charities in our wills don't know they are in our wills and they'll get what they are given by the executor according to those percentages. 

However, some charities keep a close eye on legacies, even the ones they only find out about after probate has been granted. And since any property will only be sold after that, they might hassle a) to receive their bequest faster than the executor is proceeding and b) ask why their bequest isn't larger - which might happen, for example, if a house sells for less than it's probate valuation or there are unexpected debts.

To the OP, you could also ask each firm who will be doing the work on your will. One might have an experienced person who specialises in wills and probate, while the other might have a generalist just out of law school.

doodling

Hi,

waveyjane said:

Malthusian said:

If you have confidence in both then I would go with the cheaper one. 
Hopefully both will tell you to ensure any legacies to charity should be in £ amounts and not a percentage of the estate. (But beware of the £ becoming a much larger share of your estate if the overall value goes down, e.g. due to care costs.)

Hah - off topic already, but hey. Why not percentage? I note that 10% gets you IHT at 36%.

If there was a significant value due to a charity in a will and it was expressed as a percentage of the estate then I would probably choose to employ a solicitor to do all the legwork for me rather than doing it myself, or possibly even renounce my role as executor.

That way the solicitor can have the discussion with the charity about why the house contents are only valued at £500 rather than £5000, why that value for the contents wasn't realised as cash, why the car was sold for £9000 and not £10000, why the house is taking so long to sell, why the house isn't for sale at a higher price, why that wording which, when interpreted by someone whose interpretation of English is "unusual", says they get everything doesn't actually mean they get everything, why a solicitor has been employed to do a lot of the work, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

The net result is that money gets spent on solicitors rather than going to the beneficiaries.

Of course, I suspect that not all charities are like that, but the larger ones with in-house legal teams are notorious for it.