probate and inheritance question about the rules please.

[des8]

Just post up what the will says...exact wording please

[M.Cox]

Just post up what the will says...exact wording please

Hi, Yes I will do from now on. I have looked out the will so fire away with any question you like. Michael

[ostell]

Does it mention "real estate"?

[M.Cox]

Does it mention "real estate"?

I don't think so. But were do I look on the will? Michael

[des8]

just post up the complete document but cover up identifying details and anything you don't want on public view eg names, addresses etc

[EnglandPi]

M.Cox If you need help you need to do as DES8 asks instead of drip-feeding one-line sentences and expecting answers.

Everyone is here to help you but cooperation is needed on both sides.

[M.Cox]

M.Cox If you need help you need to do as DES8 asks instead of drip-feeding one-line sentences and expecting answers.

Everyone is here to help you but cooperation is needed on both sides.

All sent, With thanks. Michael

[des8]

For the sake of others I have now seen a copy of Michael's mother's will.

It does not mention the house at all.
Personal chattels are left (without binding obligations on the trustees) according to wishes expressed in various ways (which are expressed on other documents not seen).

OP was not sole executor, but co executor with the firm of solicitors who drew up the will.
The same firm of solicitor's are dealing with Michael's father's will.

As the siblings don't appear to be getting along with each other, i think there could be a conflict of interest for the solicitors, and my recommendation is that Michael finds another solicitor.
I could well be wrong, but to me the situation is far from clear.
Find a solicitor who specialises in contentious litigation and ask for a fixed fee consultation to see what your options are.



Forgot to add that beneficiaries are not named except as Descendants, spouses of descendants, surviving spouses of descendants and anybody added by trustees with consent of any 2 beneficiaries

[EnglandPi]

Thanks for the update

[M.Cox]

For the sake of others I have now seen a copy of Michael's mother's will.

It does not mention the house at all.
Personal chattels are left (without binding obligations on the trustees) according to wishes expressed in various ways (which are expressed on other documents not seen).

OP was not sole executor, but co executor with the firm of solicitors who drew up the will.
The same firm of solicitor's are dealing with Michael's father's will.

As the siblings don't appear to be getting along with each other, i think there could be a conflict of interest for the solicitors, and my recommendation is that Michael finds another solicitor.
I could well be wrong, but to me the situation is far from clear.
Find a solicitor who specialises in contentious litigation and ask for a fixed fee consultation to see what your options are.



Forgot to add that beneficiaries are not named except as Descendants, spouses of descendants, surviving spouses of descendants and anybody added by trustees with consent of any 2 beneficiaries

Hi again des8, I can help a bit. The list of items is with the original will "copy" that I have and when I asked the probate office they said that they did not do/include this as it was not part of the will itself? why not.

And I did go to a solicitor about this will in: 2016 and he said that the beneficiaries bit was an example IE: "Definitions" of who could be a beneficiary in a will he said.

And also if you read part 8. It does say me only IE: sole trustee in the "default clause" as the solicitor told me.

Michael

[ostell]

So if the solicitor is hinting OP has some of the house then it may be that it was tenants in common?

[des8]

Expressions of wishes are not part of the will, and so will not be included in grant of probate

And i have just noted the default clause which says the trust fund [created by the will] is to be held for Michael.
Didn't notice it earlier because a default clause is normally used as longstop in the event all other beneficiaries have predeceased.

If Op is concerned about the uncertainty around the house, and his possible share, he should consult another solicitor to
see what his options are.
perhaps he should be challenging the will, or considering a claim under the Inheritance (provision for family and Dependants) Act.

[M.Cox]

Hi all, I have now spoken to the probate office and they told me to issue a "Caveat" so I can sort things out wth my sister. Michael

[twohoots]

Expressions of wishes are not part of the will, and so will not be included in grant of probate

And i have just noted the default clause which says the trust fund [created by the will] is to be held for Michael.
Didn't notice it earlier because a default clause is normally used as longstop in the event all other beneficiaries have predeceased.

If Op is concerned about the uncertainty around the house, and his possible share, he should consult another solicitor to
see what his options are.
perhaps he should be challenging the will, or considering a claim under the Inheritance (provision for family and Dependants) Act.

Good luck with that! Someone placed a caveat on my probate application. At the suggestion of Probate Office I wrote to them and included relevant paperwork hoping that this might lead to an agreement to stop this and they have never replied. yours seems more complicated than mine.

[Manxman]

Before Michael goes to the expense and effort of finding and trying to explain this to his own solicitor, is it not worth while trying one more time to ask a simple question of the solicitors who drew up his parent's wills, or will they not answer because of a conflict of interest?

Surely it's worth asking a straightforward question ie: "Can you explain to me what interest I have in the property? I was under the impression that it was held by my parents as tenants in common and that when my mother died she left her half of the house to me. Is that not correct?"

I've just read straight through this thread and the OP, despite having been asked some quite specific questions, doesn't seem to have a grasp of this quite basic issue. They seem to have been under the impression that their mother left her half of the house to them under her will, but her will does not appear to bear that out - if I understand this thread correctly. (And that has only been teased out after 50+ posts).

I'm concerned the OP may waste a lot of time (and money!) with their own solicitor just establishing the basic facts again if they still don't know how the property was held and what their interest in it is.

Once the OP has got a response from the solicitors who drafted both wills and executed/are executing both wills (or if the solicitors cannot answer him because of a conflict of interests) then is the time to find and instruct his own solicitor.