Will / trust

Skint_yet_Again

Sorry to ask more questions regarding ISA’s and accrued interest. 

If the isa was opened in a previous tax year feb 25 and interest was due to be paid on maturity feb 27 is all interest still included on iht calcs for the whole period to date of death even though it is over 2 tax years and not paid until maturity or account closure 

Is ISA interest paid after death part of the estate? I believe it retains its tax free status for 3 years so does this mean it’s not included as income for the estate 

sorry am a bit confused 😵‍💫 🤯

probate_slave

Your father's estate at death should include accrued interest on the ISA, ie the proportion earned between February 2025 and his date of death (August?). So, about one quarter of the interest due on maturity. The ISA provider will hopefully have given you this figure.

Once you have probate and close the ISA, the entire interest paid (including the accrued amount) is tax-free income of the estate.

Cobbler_tone

Good article on the awareness of Trusts this morning on BBC Breakfast. Maybe a scandal for the future. Beware.

Skint_yet_Again

Do executors still need to put an ad in The Gazette / local paper? 

The will named the 3 beneficiaries as executors. One executor has renounced. There is a codicil, found after death not filed with the will, naming 3 further small bequests and naming 3 of the grandchildren, witnessed by two persons. 

Keep_pedalling

Skint_yet_Again said:

Do executors still need to put an ad in The Gazette / local paper? 

The will named the 3 beneficiaries as executors. One executor has renounced. There is a codicil, found after death not filed with the will, naming 3 further small bequests and naming 3 of the grandchildren, witnessed by two persons. 

Depends on the circumstances if the residual beneficiaries are also executors then it is pointless. 

RAS

The addresses of beneficiaries are not needed, as addresses are likely to change. What is required is that they can be identified uniquely.

"My grandson John Smith" is fine as long as the deceased did not have more than one grandson called John Smith.  

Skint_yet_Again

Sorry I must not post in the early hours when I am worrying if I’m doing things right. 

Thank you for your ongoing advice. 

Does it matter if the codicil doesn’t uniquely identify the beneficiaries. We (the executors) know who they are. This does not affect who the residual beneficiaries are. 

Savvy_Sue

Skint_yet_Again said:

Does it matter if the codicil doesn’t uniquely identify the beneficiaries. We (the executors) know who they are. This does not affect who the residual beneficiaries are. 

I am not quite sure what you mean, but the key question is, I think, this: YOU know who the beneficiaries are, but is there any possibility of someone else claiming that THEY are an intended beneficiary? 

RAS said:

The addresses of beneficiaries are not needed, as addresses are likely to change. What is required is that they can be identified uniquely.

"My grandson John Smith" is fine as long as the deceased did not have more than one grandson called John Smith.  

That's one example: another John Smith popping out of the woodwork to claim that they are also a grandson / the intended grandson. 

If it identifies eg "my grandchildren" or "my nieces and nephews" then it's only a question of being sure there aren't any you don't know about. 

Skint_yet_Again

Thanks @Savvy_Sue

The codicil says for example…. I leave “Joe bloggs” £3000

The name matches one of the grandchildren. We know it was intended to be left to the grandchild of that name but it isn’t specified. 

Not sure where this leaves us ? 

Edit to add Am I right in thinking there is no legal requirement to include specific details of beneficiaries but if any doubt the gift may fail and fall back to the residue of the estate or fall partly into intestate rules and go to the treasury 😔

Savvy_Sue

Skint_yet_Again said:

Thanks @Savvy_Sue

The codicil says for example…. I leave “Joe bloggs” £3000

The name matches one of the grandchildren. We know it was intended to be left to the grandchild of that name but it isn’t specified. 

Not sure where this leaves us ? 

I can't see a problem. It seems unlikely that an unrelated "Joe Bloggs" would pop up and say "Fred meant to leave that to me rather than to his grandson."

There has been recent reporting of (apparently) completely fraudulent wills, where a foreign national has produced an (alleged) will from a fairly isolated elderly person, which names "my dear friend Joannasz Bloggasz as my sole beneficiary and executor", when friends and neighbours have never seen or heard of this 'dear friend'. But if there are other bequests, it seems unlikely that individual bequests would be challenged in a similar way. 

Skint_yet_Again said:

Edit to add Am I right in thinking there is no legal requirement to include specific details of beneficiaries but if any doubt the gift may fail and fall back to the residue of the estate or fall partly into intestate rules and go to the treasury 😔

It's late, but if a will gives names of people who are known to the family of the deceased, I really can't see any problem at all. Are any of the names not known to you? Are there multiples of that name in the family? (I know some families pass names down through the generations.)