Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • userrobert
    • By userrobert 25th Sep 12, 1:06 PM
    • 21Posts
    • 4Thanks
    userrobert
    Solicitor refusing to communicate with executor
    • #1
    • 25th Sep 12, 1:06 PM
    Solicitor refusing to communicate with executor 25th Sep 12 at 1:06 PM
    I have a question which Iím hoping someone will know the answer too.

    I am the executor to my mumís will. Probate has been issued. My sister who Iíve always got on well with suddenly went to see a solicitor for advice. Since then she has asked her solicitor to not communicate with me. Every time I write to him regarding the estate he says his instructions are he is not to communicate with me direct on this matter, but only through a solicitor.

    Where do I stand here as I do not want or need to appoint a solicitor to represent the estate.

    Thanks,

    Robert
Page 3
    • Mojisola
    • By Mojisola 26th Sep 12, 3:59 PM
    • 31,184 Posts
    • 80,025 Thanks
    Mojisola
    If there is 50k and a house and the will leaves house to X, 25k to Y and 25k to Z then X, Y and Z should all suffer any shortfall. That sounds more like OP's scenario.

    Any beneficiary with a residual bequest gets hit first but, unless the will says otherwise, all beneficiaries with specific bequests should get treated equally. You need to make sure you do that all above board, so I would get the advice of a solicitor just to confirm your approach.
    Originally posted by rpc
    The way I understand it if a property is left to one and cash to another, the expenses will be taken out of the cash and what's left will be inherited. The property has to be passed on as it stands.

    Willing to be corrected.
    • rpc
    • By rpc 26th Sep 12, 4:10 PM
    • 2,308 Posts
    • 3,505 Thanks
    rpc
    The way I understand it if a property is left to one and cash to another, the expenses will be taken out of the cash and what's left will be inherited. The property has to be passed on as it stands.

    Willing to be corrected.
    Originally posted by Mojisola
    You and daska may be right - I don't have a reference to back up my statement but it is the way I understood it. It isn't a scenario I have run in to.
    • Mojisola
    • By Mojisola 26th Sep 12, 4:17 PM
    • 31,184 Posts
    • 80,025 Thanks
    Mojisola
    You and daska may be right - I don't have a reference to back up my statement but it is the way I understood it. It isn't a scenario I have run in to.
    Originally posted by rpc
    I'm sure there was a case on MSE where one sibling had been left a property and the other the contents of an account which were approximately the same value. All the costs were being taken from the second sibling's cash.
    • observations from a hill
    • By observations from a hill 27th Sep 12, 3:39 PM
    • 154 Posts
    • 154 Thanks
    observations from a hill
    OP, I think the solicitor means you should take legal advice about the method you are hoping to use in the purchase, ie not paying over all the price on completion & withholding the amount you reckon is your % share of the trust fund translated into your % share of the estate.

    Trusts don't actually work that way, & the trustees will need to be paid the full price. They then deduct the costs of sale, CGT liability & anything else they need to. They send you 3/5 of what is left. Their solicitors won't let them do it any other way (whatever the trustees may have agreed with you direct), & your lender's solicitor is not going to release any money when the arrangement is clear.

    Trusts can "attach" to property, & I daresay you don't want to go through all this just to find your sister still has a beneficial interest in your house and wants it realised straight away.

    I suppose in your capacity as mum's executor you could try to negotiate with the trustees that the whole 3/5 be paid over to the estate without any deductions, so your sister's share gets the same benefit as you. You'd still need some short-term borrowing though.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,083Posts Today

6,264Users online

Martin's Twitter