Only getting half expected inheritance?

buddy9

If you are able to post a redacted copy of the relevant parts of solicitor’s letter (missing out personal details) that might help to dispel the speculation.

theDon876

I'm in Scotland. My friends inheritance is being split between his brother and him. His dad died 6 months ago and they've already sold his dad's house. 

My friend has the option of a lump sum or to receive payments in a discretionary fund.

The estate is worth £370k after funeral costs. 

Here's a photo of the will.


Why does he only receive £92k . He was told he will get £92k if he takes it in a lump sum or £185k if in a trust.

The reason for a trust is that he's on benefits.

wmb194

Better to continue your other thread. It's probably not the correct forum, either.

Anyway, wasn't the conclusion that your friend needs to ask the solicitor? What do they say?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6531190/only-getting-half-expected-inheritance/p3

gravel_2

Legitim corresponds to what I mention earlier in this thread. This is the part that children can take REGARDLESS of what the will says.

This sounds like the dead did not want the two sons receiving half of the total. Instead the dead has recognised the legitim claim, nullifying any objections by the sons, and then allocated the rest (the residue) to a more complicated trust set up whereby the money is ring-fenced for 21 years.

Sounds like "tough luck" for the sons.

EDIT: it would be useful to know, of the parts you have censored, which mention son 1 and which mention son 2.

The Trust appears to be set up to induce son 1 (presumably your friend) to give up his legitim claim in order to attain the bigger share subject to the trust conditions. It's possible there is another document in the background between dead and trustees that dictates the particulars of how the trust is to be administered.

buddy9

The net estate is £370k. There is no surviving spouse, so providing that there has been no discharge of legitim prior to death, the legitim fund is correctly stated at £92.5k per son. 

Clause TWO of the will contains reference to ‘half the residue’ contingent on a legal rights discharge, then later contains a separate reference to the residue. It is not obvious how these references interact. Is it designed as a sequential interpretation attempt or a provision in case the contingency fails?

I am somewhat in agreement with gravel_2, that without knowing which of the redactions refer to which son it is difficult to interpret the will.