Will

[1971]

Can a will be lawful if it simply names an executor and beneficiary (one in the same) while at the same time disposition instructions are contained in a separate and hidden document?

How is one to know if the last will and testament directions are being properly followed?

[davenewbergr]

I have never come across this point, so I cannot be definitive. But it seems to me that a Court would not allow such a will to be proved, since it is incomplete without the other document. I cannot point to case law but I think such a person is likely to be deemed to have died intestate. The whole point about a will is that it is a public document (that's how we know Ann Hathaway only got Shakespear's second best bed) and you can't conceal it in this way.

There are what are called 'secret trusts', in which the will says "£100,000 to X", and then in a side letter the testator says that X is to accept the £100,000 on behalf of A, B and C, or similar - but that's a world of difference to saying nothing at all about any bequests.

I'm struggling also to think how the 'side letter' would not be a will anyway, and therefore have to be registered. What else could it be? It could be a letter of wishes - but then they are not binding on the executors, and so that won't do either.

Are you planning to write such a will?

[1971]

Can a will be lawful if it simply names an executor and beneficiary (one in the same) while at the same time disposition instructions are contained in a separate and hidden document?

How is one to know if the last will and testament directions are being properly followed?

The will in question is for my brother-in-law.
We are uncomfortable not knowing what his instructions are.
Should I simply notify the probate office of this deficiency to see if they can bring a cure/sunshine?

[Peridot]

Hi 1971,
I suspect this may be a secret trust type situation where it would not be possible to obtain a copy of the 'document' with the possible trust set out. Or as previously mentioned there may be a letter of wishes although this would not be legally binding on the executor but carry strong moral weight. It is perfectly acceptable to have the executor and beneficiary one and the same person so that would not in itself enable any claim to be brought for example. Even if there was a potential beneficiary allowed to bring a claim against the estate under the Inheritance (Provision for family and Dependants) Act it does not mean that the contents of a secret trust would ever be revealed.
Ultimately if the Will states the beneficiary to receive the whole estate and there is no question over the validity of the Will and if you don't have a potential claim against the estate (although as mentioned above you would not find out the contents of a secret trust even in those circumstances) there would be no way of establishing what instructions had been left by the testator.
I assume the testator had not discussed his will contents with the family or had he and that is why there is some surprise at the will content?
Have you asked the executor/beneficiary?