Solicitor refusing to distribute to executors - and refusing to refund overpaid IHT

Rialtos

Thanks in anticipation for any replies and help...

We are coming to the end of an extremely arduous experience with our probate solicitors. Long story short, we have complained about two major acts of negligence during the process that we discovered - plus the poor service and behaviour of our case handler. After thorough investigation their Complaints and Compliance Section have openly admitted their two acts of negligence in writing - along with acknowledging, also in writing, and apologising for the practitioner's poor behaviour and service levels. It was so cut and dried - with mountains of evidence to call on that we consider it an achievement to get this in writing from a Compliance Section so easily.

We now have two issues that I'd welcome advice/opinion on.

One of the admitted negligence issues was that they miscalculated the estate IHT liability - and sent HMRC £10,000 (ten thousand) from the deceased's bank account more than they should have done. They denied this negligence for weeks too - until we had the HMRC submissions professionally scrutinised and uncovered the cover-up. They held their hands up then.

They've admitted the overpayment negligence in writing now too - yet amazingly they now expect us to wait 'up to 12 months' for the refund from HMRC. We are contesting that stance with the fact that as they were negligent with the estate's money they should reimburse the estate account prior to distribution - and that the practice waits 12 months for the refund and not the beneficiaries .
So far they have stonewalled us on this request.

The second issue regards the distribution of funds to a beneficiary who lives abroad. They've said they must send the funds direct to the beneficiary's bank account abroad. I've contested that on the grounds that this would result in her suffering her bank's poor exchange rate (which the bank will 100% take advantage off) - and this will cost her around 30,000 (thirty thousand) euro. I've told them I consider we have a duty of care to help the beneficiary (my wife's sister) get the best rate possible.

I've therefore told them to send the beneficiary's money to myself and my wife (we are the joint executors) and we will work with the beneficiary to send her money via Currency Direct (or similar)

They are now playing silly beggars saying that they need the beneficiary's permission for this. We know they are just being plain awkward here (as these are the case-handlers who committed the acts of  negligence - and apparently were disciplined by HR) and appear now to be, foolishly,  on a power trip and after a little revenge on their part.

My view on this one is, we are the executors who were appointed (and trusted) by the deceased (mother in law)  to act in settling and distributing the estate when she died - and for this reason we can demand the monies are sent to us for distribution. It would be our legal responsibility to send the monies on - which we will clearly do.

I've pointed out to them that they are simply our hired-help (hired-hinderers would be more the case) and we are the estate executors.

I don't think we need the beneficiary's permission for them to send the funds to us - for us to redistribute on at a better rate than her bank offers.

Anyway thanks for reading so far. Any help or advise or opinions are appreciated thanks.

Hoenir

Rialtos said:

I've pointed out to them that they are simply our hired-help (hired-hinderers would be more the case) and we are the estate executors.

The solicitors presumably are also executors though

The_Unready

Why can't the beneficiary just provide her permission to what you have suggested? That would be a simple solution to the second issue.....

GrumpyDil

Hoenir said:

Rialtos said:

I've pointed out to them that they are simply our hired-help (hired-hinderers would be more the case) and we are the estate executors.

The solicitors presumably are also executors though

Not necessarily. Read the OP's post I suspect the OP has instructed solicitors to help with the process rather than the solicitor being an executor. 

Linton

Despite the history regarding the IHT I feel you could be somewhat unreasonable in demanding that they pass the beneficiary's money to you personally.  In principle if something were to happen to the money could they be seen as responsible for any loss.  eg what happens if you die in the meantime or smply decide not to pass the money on?  

Rialtos

Sorry I should have added the beneficiary is not in the best health physically and mentally and cannot cope with the stress of what might seem to most quite straightforward. We are simply trying to help her as we know  for certain this will affect her mental health if we trouble her. 

Rialtos

Hoenir said:

Rialtos said:

I've pointed out to them that they are simply our hired-help (hired-hinderers would be more the case) and we are the estate executors.

The solicitors presumably are also executors though

No..they are not executors at all...we are.

Rialtos

The_Unready said:

Why can't the beneficiary just provide her permission to what you have suggested? That would be a simple solution to the second issue.....

Under normal circumstances..yes. Sorry I should have added the beneficiary is not in the best health physically and mentally and cannot cope with the stress of what might seem to most quite straightforward. We are simply trying to help her as we know  for certain this will affect her mental health if we trouble her.

Rialtos

GrumpyDil said:

Hoenir said:

Rialtos said:

I've pointed out to them that they are simply our hired-help (hired-hinderers would be more the case) and we are the estate executors.

The solicitors presumably are also executors though

Not necessarily. Read the OP's post I suspect the OP has instructed solicitors to help with the process rather than the solicitor being an executor. 

GrumpyDil...thanks for that..you are correct in your assumption

Flugelhorn

Rialtos said:

Hoenir said:

Rialtos said:

I've pointed out to them that they are simply our hired-help (hired-hinderers would be more the case) and we are the estate executors.

The solicitors presumably are also executors though

No..they are not executors at all...we are.

in which case you should be the ones distributing the funds

Rialtos

Linton said:

Despite the history regarding the IHT I feel you could be somewhat unreasonable in demanding that they pass the beneficiary's money to you personally.  In principle if something were to happen to the money could they be seen as responsible for any loss.  eg what happens if you die in the meantime or smply decide not to pass the money on?  

Linton said:

Despite the history regarding the IHT I feel you could be somewhat unreasonable in demanding that they pass the beneficiary's money to you personally.  In principle if something were to happen to the money could they be seen as responsible for any loss.  eg what happens if you die in the meantime or smply decide not to pass the money on?  

Ive explained elsewhere she's not in the right state mentally or physically to do the simplest task. What if we died? It would get sorted out. What IF anything happened? What if the solicitors made another major financial error and sent the money elsewhere? Or embezzled it? If, if, if...Thanks for your contribution though