Will wording made understandable

Castlesprings

Needing some help to undertand my uncle's last will and testament . I am thinking he may have left a trust? But at the same time i haven't got a clue. I don't understand it all.

Last will and testament of xxxxxxx

1. I revoke all former wills and testamentary dispositions.

2.a I appoint PERSON A to be the executrix and trustee of this my will

B. In this will the expression my trustees includes the trustees for the time being of this my will and of the trusts arising under it

C. I wish the firm xxxxxxx solicitors to be employed in connection with my estate abd if at my death the firm no longer exists i wish the firm which carries on its practise to be employed asforesaid.

3. I GIVE all my property both moveable and immoveable whatsoever and wheresoever ( except property otherwise disposed of by this will or any codicil hereto) to my trustees upon trust:-

A. To sell call in and convert the same or such part thereof as shall not consist of money with full power at their discretion to postpone such sale calling in and conversion without being responsible for loss.

B. To pay all my debts and testamentary expenses and any legacies given by this will or any codicil hereto and (except otherwise provided by this will or any codicil hereto) to pay all inheritance tax estate duties snd other imposts payable on or by reason of my death ehich are levisble in any part of the world in respect of my estate (whether moveable or immoveable) passing under this will or any coficil hereto

C. To hold residue (hereinafter reffered to as 'my residuary estate") upon the trusts hereinafter declared.

4. MY TRUSTEES shall hold my residuary estate and income therefrom ad to both capital and income absolutely for PERSON A if living at my death with the provision that if PERSON A fails to have survived me but not otherwise i direct that my trustees shall hold my residuary estate and income therefrom in equal shares for PERSON B and PERSON C.

Why does it mention trustee?
Trusts arising under it?
Postpone such sale?

Keep_pedalling

All professionally drawn up wills contain such wording, it does not mean the assets are being left in trust. The executors are the trustees of the estate and assets are in trust only while the estate is being wound up. 

RAS

As above, the executor holds the assets in trust until such time as they are distributed. 

Sneaking IMO of the solicitors to have written in that they should be employed. I'd try and do probate without them. Easy enough for a lot of people and you'd have to identify assets anyway. And generally quicker as well.

poseidon1

RAS said:

As above, the executor holds the assets in trust until such time as they are distributed. 

Sneaking IMO of the solicitors to have written in that they should be employed. I'd try and do probate without them. Easy enough for a lot of people and you'd have to identify assets anyway. And generally quicker as well.

I agree, the solicitor's firm inserting a requirement that their services must be used, is unconscionable especially since this is nothing more complex than an absolute gift over to the residual beneficiary.
In this regard it is definitely not standard wording of a Will by a reputable firm. OP should strenuously object, taking the matter to the Law Society if the firm does not back off.

tacpot12

I think the correct regulator to take the form to if they will not relinquish the work is the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). 

Newly_retired

I can't see any need for a solicitor in such a non-complex will.

mattojgb

Doesn't say what they are to be employed for. Can't see there would be any issues if named executor was able to obtain probate without their help.

mattojgb

Newly_retired said:

I can't see any need for a solicitor in such a non-complex will.

Conveyancing probably.

Keep_pedalling

poseidon1 said:

RAS said:

As above, the executor holds the assets in trust until such time as they are distributed. 

Sneaking IMO of the solicitors to have written in that they should be employed. I'd try and do probate without them. Easy enough for a lot of people and you'd have to identify assets anyway. And generally quicker as well.

I agree, the solicitor's firm inserting a requirement that their services must be used, is unconscionable especially since this is nothing more complex than an absolute gift over to the residual beneficiary.
In this regard it is definitely not standard wording of a Will by a reputable firm. OP should strenuously object, taking the matter to the Law Society if the firm does not back off.

It is not a requirement, it is a wish and can be ignored by the executors.