Executors dispute over will and bank account

Jibber123

We have an issue with our late parents will. Originally it was only 2 siblings named on the will as beneficiaries and executors, we began the process of opening a joint account and transferring the various savings and fund into the new account, paying bills and tying up any loose ends. Then a newer will came to light, now including all 3 siblings as executors and beneficiaries, the new sibling is being a little awkward regarding things now and has appointed a solicitor to liaise with us going forward. They insist that the executors account is held in all 3 names jointly, however it only allows 2, we have agreed to provide them with monthly statements and keep them informed of all transactions regarding the estate going forward, but they are refusing to move forward with probate until they are included on the bank account. Is this a legal requirement or just a preferred situation? 

Robin9

I think you are correct - there can only be two signatures on the account. All he is doing is delaying the process and him receiving his inheritance.


Is a way forward for one of two original signatures to step down and be replaced by the 3rd ?

Linton

Ask the sibling to propose an alternative accuunt?  If they come up with something sensible then you all should be able to work together..  Otherwise they will be in a weaker position.

Brie

Is the third sibling paying for a solicitor that is working on his/her behalf?  Or are they expecting the money to come out of the estate?

Hoenir

Why can't the other 2 executors accomodate the request and one drop off. After all it's only to sign cheques which has to be performed by both account signatories. Not surprising if the 3rd party is suspicous given that matters were pushed forward on the basis of an old will. Trust needs to be rebuilt.  The fact you are discussing a simple matter to resolve with strangers suggests there's far more to the tale. 

Marcon

Jibber123 said:

We have an issue with our late parents will. Originally it was only 2 siblings named on the will as beneficiaries and executors, we began the process of opening a joint account and transferring the various savings and fund into the new account, paying bills and tying up any loose ends. Then a newer will came to light, now including all 3 siblings as executors and beneficiaries, the new sibling is being a little awkward regarding things now and has appointed a solicitor to liaise with us going forward. They insist that the executors account is held in all 3 names jointly, however it only allows 2, we have agreed to provide them with monthly statements and keep them informed of all transactions regarding the estate going forward, but they are refusing to move forward with probate until they are included on the bank account. Is this a legal requirement or just a preferred situation? 

Blithely saying that 'a new will came to light' must have come as a considerable surprise to all 3 of you!

It's their preferred situation - and to be honest it's not that hard to see why. As suggested above, couldn't one of the two current signatories step down and be replaced by the 'newcomer'? In their shoes I'd be pretty unhappy with the way things originally panned out, and a bit of goodwill now could save a lot of problems as the administration of the estate meanders on.

Mands

Marcon said:

Jibber123 said:

We have an issue with our late parents will. Originally it was only 2 siblings named on the will as beneficiaries and executors, we began the process of opening a joint account and transferring the various savings and fund into the new account, paying bills and tying up any loose ends. Then a newer will came to light, now including all 3 siblings as executors and beneficiaries, the new sibling is being a little awkward regarding things now and has appointed a solicitor to liaise with us going forward. They insist that the executors account is held in all 3 names jointly, however it only allows 2, we have agreed to provide them with monthly statements and keep them informed of all transactions regarding the estate going forward, but they are refusing to move forward with probate until they are included on the bank account. Is this a legal requirement or just a preferred situation? 

Blithely saying that 'a new will came to light' must have come as a considerable surprise to all 3 of you!

It's their preferred situation - and to be honest it's not that hard to see why. As suggested above, couldn't one of the two current signatories step down and be replaced by the 'newcomer'? In their shoes I'd be pretty unhappy with the way things originally panned out, and a bit of goodwill now could save a lot of problems as the administration of the estate meanders on.

This appears to be a continuation of the OP's thread late last year. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6490369/missing-will-terminal-illness/p1

To summarise: the OP's mother went to hospital, her condition deteriorated, she was given a terminal diagnosis ... and then her house was broken in to, a safe stolen which held her will. There seemed to be a reluctance to tell her of the break-in, or the loss of the will. The thread was never updated. 

I ... have questions. Many questions. 

MeteredOut

Mands said:

Marcon said:

Jibber123 said:

We have an issue with our late parents will. Originally it was only 2 siblings named on the will as beneficiaries and executors, we began the process of opening a joint account and transferring the various savings and fund into the new account, paying bills and tying up any loose ends. Then a newer will came to light, now including all 3 siblings as executors and beneficiaries, the new sibling is being a little awkward regarding things now and has appointed a solicitor to liaise with us going forward. They insist that the executors account is held in all 3 names jointly, however it only allows 2, we have agreed to provide them with monthly statements and keep them informed of all transactions regarding the estate going forward, but they are refusing to move forward with probate until they are included on the bank account. Is this a legal requirement or just a preferred situation? 

Blithely saying that 'a new will came to light' must have come as a considerable surprise to all 3 of you!

It's their preferred situation - and to be honest it's not that hard to see why. As suggested above, couldn't one of the two current signatories step down and be replaced by the 'newcomer'? In their shoes I'd be pretty unhappy with the way things originally panned out, and a bit of goodwill now could save a lot of problems as the administration of the estate meanders on.

This appears to be a continuation of the OP's thread late last year. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6490369/missing-will-terminal-illness/p1

To summarise: the OP's mother went to hospital, her condition deteriorated, she was given a terminal diagnosis ... and then her house was broken in to, a safe stolen which held her will. There seemed to be a reluctance to tell her of the break-in, or the loss of the will. The thread was never updated. 

I ... have questions. Many questions. 

I wonder if that was the original will with 2 beneficiaries, or the later revealed one with 3 beneficiaries? Or another one altogether!

Marcon

Mands said:

Marcon said:

Jibber123 said:

We have an issue with our late parents will. Originally it was only 2 siblings named on the will as beneficiaries and executors, we began the process of opening a joint account and transferring the various savings and fund into the new account, paying bills and tying up any loose ends. Then a newer will came to light, now including all 3 siblings as executors and beneficiaries, the new sibling is being a little awkward regarding things now and has appointed a solicitor to liaise with us going forward. They insist that the executors account is held in all 3 names jointly, however it only allows 2, we have agreed to provide them with monthly statements and keep them informed of all transactions regarding the estate going forward, but they are refusing to move forward with probate until they are included on the bank account. Is this a legal requirement or just a preferred situation? 

Blithely saying that 'a new will came to light' must have come as a considerable surprise to all 3 of you!

It's their preferred situation - and to be honest it's not that hard to see why. As suggested above, couldn't one of the two current signatories step down and be replaced by the 'newcomer'? In their shoes I'd be pretty unhappy with the way things originally panned out, and a bit of goodwill now could save a lot of problems as the administration of the estate meanders on.

This appears to be a continuation of the OP's thread late last year. 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6490369/missing-will-terminal-illness/p1

To summarise: the OP's mother went to hospital, her condition deteriorated, she was given a terminal diagnosis ... and then her house was broken in to, a safe stolen which held her will. There seemed to be a reluctance to tell her of the break-in, or the loss of the will. The thread was never updated. 

I ... have questions. Many questions. 

Thank you - but that doesn't alter my answer.