Intestate situation

doodling

Hi,

marc3 said:

thank you for your posts a few months back .

bumping this back up and looking for any additional 'contributions'.

because  the  amount to be received (because of a unique set of circumstances) is totally disproportionate to any entitlement (and some may even question any ) legal advice is that even though Intestacy is pretty clear cut ,this should and can be challenged .
(one is wary of solicitors simply fee building/stress and potential benefit v costs ).

seemingly this would come under a 'proprietary estoppol' challenge  ' which is seemingly  quite common where there is a will, but rare where there isnt one and Intestacy law kicks in -but it can and has been done apparently .  

i simply wonder whether there is anybody out there who has experience of this -and what it takes/success /failure -either in the case where there is a will -or maybe in the rarer case where there isnt one ,such as this instance .
Obviously i/solicitors can research case histories -but for now -taking the lazy route and putting it ot there on this forum

I'm really sorry but if the amount is what is set out in law then it cannot possibly be "totally disproportionate to any entitlement" as the law governs that entitlement.

It is very difficult to argue against clearly drafted statute law.  I don't see how they will be making an argument for "proprietary estoppel" which doesn't appear to be supported by anything you have said in your original post.  In order to make that argument, your wife would need to demonstrate that her father promised to leave her something in his will and that she significantly changed her behaviour to benefit her father, to her own cost, as a result.  Did that actually happen?  Can it be proven?

The classic "proprietary estoppel" case is a member of a farming family who works on the farm for very little money on the basis that "one day all this will be yours" only to discover that the farm has been left to someone else - is your wife's case like that?

I can perhaps see the "one day all this will be yours" bit (although it would need to be proven) but I don't understand what your wife did in response that disadvantaged her and benefitted her father.

Legal action in a situation like this can be horrifically expensive, to the point where there may not actually be any inheritance after the lawyers have taken their shares and it is certainly something which is not to be entered into lightly or with false hope.

Can you live with an outcome where the granddaughter gets their legal entitlement and your wife gets nothing as her share has all been spent, fruitlessly, on lawyers?  Is pursuing this only going to delay closure of the issue and lead to more pain on all sides?

I am not a lawyer - if you want to pursue this, you will need to consult several highly skilled (i.e. paid!) ones.  You will definitely need a second opinion on the likelihood of success and you need to make sure that the solicitors you are using have the necessary skills and experience for cases like this.

bobster2

doodling said:

Hi,

I'm really sorry but if the amount is what is set out in law then it cannot possibly be "totally disproportionate to any entitlement" as the law governs that entitlement.

It is very difficult to argue against clearly drafted statute law.  

@doodling has nailed it.