Death in service

kev25v6

After a bit of advice following a death about inheritance and death in service. 

Father in law died with no will and no real estate. There was a few small pensions and a large death in service payment. The funeral was paid for based on the payment being split equally between 4 kids.  Turns out the youngest has been nominated on the form years ago to get the lot but isn’t interested now in splitting it equally. 

Is there any point in trying to contest this payment just going to her and not being split equally between the 4 siblings?  

Thanks

kimwp

It's interesting that it's just the youngest nominated. The father would have known about the other children, so why didn't he put their names?

p00hsticks

It's worth a try, but I suspect that the insurance company involved will say that with the presence of a valid nomination form their hands are tied.

Are you aware of any reason why just the youngest was nominated ? If it was perhaps that at the time of the nomination they were not yet adult and the elder three were, perhaps that could be a reason to ask for the nomination to be reconsidered. 

kev25v6

To be honest it’s basically because he and her are/were selfish people (being very polite). It was probably signed 15/20 years ago when she was a child and he started at his job. He has now died and it’s come out that everything basically goes to her. She hasn’t been around for the last few years of his ill health but has now decided to keep all the payment to herself. 

Marcon

p00hsticks said:

It's worth a try, but I suspect that the insurance company involved will say that with the presence of a valid nomination form their hands are tied.

As this was a death in service, it's likely the decision will have been taken by whoever has been appointed by the employer to act as trustee of the DIS scheme - which almost certainly won't be the insurer.

Having a valid nomination form doesn't mean it can't be challenged - especially if no due diligence has been done. Simply relying on a form, particularly one signed many years ago (if that's the case), is asking for trouble.

So yes, it is worth querying. You need to ask what factors were taken into consideration, especially as the funeral payment was made on the basis that all four children would inherit equally. 

kev25v6

They had asked for all 4 siblings details and then said the youngest (27 now) had been nominated years ago and is now getting it all. She said she was going to split it all equally but has gone back on that and started spending it already. 

kimwp

kev25v6 said:

To be honest it’s basically because he and her are/were selfish people (being very polite). It was probably signed 15/20 years ago when she was a child and he started at his job. He has now died and it’s come out that everything basically goes to her. She hasn’t been around for the last few years of his ill health but has now decided to keep all the payment to herself. 

I'd be upset if I was in that situation, but it sounds like it was his intent and wish that it should all go to her and it was his to decide what to do with.

Flugelhorn

kimwp said:

kev25v6 said:

To be honest it’s basically because he and her are/were selfish people (being very polite). It was probably signed 15/20 years ago when she was a child and he started at his job. He has now died and it’s come out that everything basically goes to her. She hasn’t been around for the last few years of his ill health but has now decided to keep all the payment to herself. 

I'd be upset if I was in that situation, but it sounds like it was his intent and wish that it should all go to her and it was his to decide what to do with.

I sometimes think that funny things can happen with DIS benefits forms and nominations - do many people think through the implications of what they put at the time, do they consider the implications? do they go back and review the decision?

Remember my FA commenting that lots of people in the NHS don't ever put a name on the form and if they do they never seem to renew it hence can be way out of date.  Guess most of the time they just expect it go with intestacy rules or same as the will and much of the time that is OK - eg to surviving spouse.

My memory of completing a DIS years ago was that it was just a name on paper, one question in the midst of many others, not witnessed like a will etc 

LinLui

Marcon said:

p00hsticks said:

It's worth a try, but I suspect that the insurance company involved will say that with the presence of a valid nomination form their hands are tied.

As this was a death in service, it's likely the decision will have been taken by whoever has been appointed by the employer to act as trustee of the DIS scheme - which almost certainly won't be the insurer.

Having a valid nomination form doesn't mean it can't be challenged - especially if no due diligence has been done. Simply relying on a form, particularly one signed many years ago (if that's the case), is asking for trouble.

So yes, it is worth querying. You need to ask what factors were taken into consideration, especially as the funeral payment was made on the basis that all four children would inherit equally. 

Was it though? Did they actually agree that they would split the funeral payment four ways because they would all inherit equally - or was that an assumption? And is there any evidence of that agreement and the terms of it?

If this is anything like our death in service scheme, it is the pension fund provider who makes the decision. In the event of a dispute such as this, what they do is suspend the payment subject to a court ruling. You then get the opportunity to spend the lot and even more on fights in court, so the only people who inherit are the lawyers. It won't cost the younger sibling anything, because the action isn't against them - has to be against the pension fund holder - to force them to vary the person's nomination. So the costs will be funded by the three older siblings. 

I very much doubt that there is any win to be had here. 

GrumpyDil

I've always understood that nominations are simply an expressions of the individuals wishes but that schemes can take surrounding information into account and depart from the nomination if they see fit.

That said the time to have challenged this would have been before the money was paid out so I suspect the opportunity has been lost here. 

kimwp

Flugelhorn said:

kimwp said:

kev25v6 said:

To be honest it’s basically because he and her are/were selfish people (being very polite). It was probably signed 15/20 years ago when she was a child and he started at his job. He has now died and it’s come out that everything basically goes to her. She hasn’t been around for the last few years of his ill health but has now decided to keep all the payment to herself. 

I'd be upset if I was in that situation, but it sounds like it was his intent and wish that it should all go to her and it was his to decide what to do with.

I sometimes think that funny things can happen with DIS benefits forms and nominations - do many people think through the implications of what they put at the time, do they consider the implications? do they go back and review the decision?

Remember my FA commenting that lots of people in the NHS don't ever put a name on the form and if they do they never seem to renew it hence can be way out of date.  Guess most of the time they just expect it go with intestacy rules or same as the will and much of the time that is OK - eg to surviving spouse.

My memory of completing a DIS years ago was that it was just a name on paper, one question in the midst of many others, not witnessed like a will etc 

My annual statement had a reminder about it, I don't know if this is a new thing or unusual that my pension provider does it.