Gazette and local paper notice if executors are sole beneficiaries

muchembe

My sister and I are the only executors and also sole beneficiaries of our late father's estate. Is there any good reason to pay (approx £400) for the section 27 notices because while this protects us as executors, any creditors would be able to claim from us as beneficiaries in any case? It seems an obvious 'no' but despite coming up a few times in the forum I can't find a clear cut answer. There often seems to be someone who pops up and says it is worth doing 'to be on the safe side'. I can't see how the notice offers us any protection in this situation but am I missing something?

user1977

Absolutely none. The vast majority of estates aren't going to have surprise creditors (any reason to believe your father did?), and in practice how many of them are going to be scouring the Gazette for dad's name? Even if a creditor popped up (and had a valid claim), as you say it makes no difference whether you pay them with your executor hat on, or later as a beneficiary. 

Keep_pedalling

user1977 said:

Absolutely none. The vast majority of estates aren't going to have surprise creditors (any reason to believe your father did?), and in practice how many of them are going to be scouring the Gazette for dad's name? Even if a creditor popped up (and had a valid claim), as you say it makes no difference whether you pay them with your executor hat on, or later as a beneficiary. 

Agree, not required when an executor would carry the can for other beneficiaries.

muchembe

Thanks user1977 & Keep_pedalling, that's very helpful. Strange that the advice in places like the Which guide makes it seem like a must do when cases where executors & beneficiaries are the same people must be pretty common. We've no reason to think there are any unknown creditors and as the S27 notices don't seem to make any difference in our case I think we'll forget about it and get on with the rest of the estate admin stuff.

Sarahspangles

muchembe said:

Thanks user1977 & Keep_pedalling, that's very helpful. Strange that the advice in places like the Which guide makes it seem like a must do when cases where executors & beneficiaries are the same people must be pretty common. We've no reason to think there are any unknown creditors and as the S27 notices don't seem to make any difference in our case I think we'll forget about it and get on with the rest of the estate admin stuff.

We did put notices in the London Gazette because our understanding was that this is ‘insurance’ against a supposed creditor coming forward later in the process and claiming there were outstanding bills. If so, we could then refute them as they didn’t respond to the notice. We did feel a bit taken advantage of, and like it was a legacy process that no longer serves a purpose. But it was less than £100 inc VAT in each case and one less thing to have on our minds,

Keep_pedalling

Sarahspangles said:

muchembe said:

Thanks user1977 & Keep_pedalling, that's very helpful. Strange that the advice in places like the Which guide makes it seem like a must do when cases where executors & beneficiaries are the same people must be pretty common. We've no reason to think there are any unknown creditors and as the S27 notices don't seem to make any difference in our case I think we'll forget about it and get on with the rest of the estate admin stuff.

We did put notices in the London Gazette because our understanding was that this is ‘insurance’ against a supposed creditor coming forward later in the process and claiming there were outstanding bills. If so, we could then refute them as they didn’t respond to the notice. We did feel a bit taken advantage of, and like it was a legacy process that no longer serves a purpose. But it was less than £100 inc VAT in each case and one less thing to have on our minds,

Posting in the gazzette passes the risk from executors to residual beneficiaries, it is not a legacy process and should be used where you have different executors and beneficiaries. Solicitors will always use it when acting as executors.

user1977

Keep_pedalling said:

Sarahspangles said:

muchembe said:

Thanks user1977 & Keep_pedalling, that's very helpful. Strange that the advice in places like the Which guide makes it seem like a must do when cases where executors & beneficiaries are the same people must be pretty common. We've no reason to think there are any unknown creditors and as the S27 notices don't seem to make any difference in our case I think we'll forget about it and get on with the rest of the estate admin stuff.

We did put notices in the London Gazette because our understanding was that this is ‘insurance’ against a supposed creditor coming forward later in the process and claiming there were outstanding bills. If so, we could then refute them as they didn’t respond to the notice. We did feel a bit taken advantage of, and like it was a legacy process that no longer serves a purpose. But it was less than £100 inc VAT in each case and one less thing to have on our minds,

Solicitors will always use it when acting as executors.

Never encountered it when I worked for solicitors who were (or were acting for) executors. In the vast majority of cases any surprises are improbable, as the executors/family have likely been dealing with (or at least closely acquainted with) their finances for some time. Maybe different if you have e.g. somebody who was self-employed with chaotic accounts who dies suddenly.

Hoenir

London Gazette should suffice. Local newspapers are a thing of the past. 

Having dealt with both my (divorced) parents estates in the past in the capacity as executor. Was enlightening just how much they kept to themselves. 

buddy9

The guidance in the Gazette cannot be trusted.  The Gazette guidance for Scotland is totally incorrect. The Gazette editorial team knows that it is incorrect but have not changed the website. Makes you wonder.

Keep_pedalling

user1977 said:

Keep_pedalling said:

Sarahspangles said:

muchembe said:

Thanks user1977 & Keep_pedalling, that's very helpful. Strange that the advice in places like the Which guide makes it seem like a must do when cases where executors & beneficiaries are the same people must be pretty common. We've no reason to think there are any unknown creditors and as the S27 notices don't seem to make any difference in our case I think we'll forget about it and get on with the rest of the estate admin stuff.

We did put notices in the London Gazette because our understanding was that this is ‘insurance’ against a supposed creditor coming forward later in the process and claiming there were outstanding bills. If so, we could then refute them as they didn’t respond to the notice. We did feel a bit taken advantage of, and like it was a legacy process that no longer serves a purpose. But it was less than £100 inc VAT in each case and one less thing to have on our minds,

Solicitors will always use it when acting as executors.

Never encountered it when I worked for solicitors who were (or were acting for) executors. In the vast majority of cases any surprises are improbable, as the executors/family have likely been dealing with (or at least closely acquainted with) their finances for some time. Maybe different if you have e.g. somebody who was self-employed with chaotic accounts who dies suddenly.

As solicitors usually have little knowledge of the deceased persons finance I would be very surprised if they did not do so when acting as an executor.

muchembe

Thanks all. Looks like there is benefit in the Gazette entry and some doubt  whether the local papers thing is necessary. However, on my original specific question it seems clear there is no benefit at all in doing either if executors and beneficiaries are exactly the same people.