Joint Tenants(JT) vs Tenants In Common(TIC), simple

[1452_kc]

Husband(H) and Wife(W) walk into a Solicitors(S) to make the W Will, both H and W are present in the same room at the Will writing. W has been unwell for a number of years and will, just a few weeks from now pass away. H and W have lived separate lives for many years, separate beds, separate rooms and if finances would have allowed, seperate houses. They have no children, H has no children, W has adult children from a prior relationship. H and W bought a house together over a decade earlier, the house they live in, the bulk of the purchase was made with W money, which included inheritance from W parents and blood relatives. However they own the house 50/50. H is somewhat controlling and abusive.

W tells S she wants to leave her half share in the house to her children, S adds to the Will, i assume after informing W this is what would be needed, that 'there was to be no restriction on the sale of the property' and 'no life interest for the H'. The point of these statements was to ensure the children got the W share in the house upon her death, not decades(?) later when the H dies. The H has significant funds of his own after inheriting his own fathers house.

During this meeting about the Will, the S asks these laypeople(H and W) 'is the house held as JT or TIC', what layperson know the ramifications of that? Anyway, S states in his notes that the(who responded?) response was 'TIC'. As the house is held as TIC what W has put in her Will, ie leave her share in the house to her children, is valid. Anyone can check the Land registry for a few £'s to find out the answer to JT, TIC, why didn't the S or S secretary do so? Why even ask the question? S should confirm with the source(Land Registry). Lazy, negligent, stupid, in on it? The H and S were both male, same age, etc.

Around a week later H walks back into S office and asks 'what if the property is not held at TIC?', S states, ' you will need to discuss that with your W'. S does not contact W. H does not talk to W.

A few weeks later W passes.

Turns out property as documented at the Land Registry is held as JT. Therefore W share passes to H and Will is worthless.

There may be paper work at the property that severed the JT, but that cannot be accessed.

So the issue is the TIC vs JT. Many argue a course of action can severe a JT without any formal paper work explicitly severing the JT. If you apply for divorce it's likely you don't want to leave your share to your soon to be ex partner. Equally if you make a Will in front of your partner that states you want to leave your share to your kids, not them, surely that severs the JT. It's just common sense. Another point is, both(we will never know) H and W stated the property is held as TIC during the Will writing, that's a mutual agreement right there, a bit like saying 'i do' in the church.

So why does H now own 100% of the house? What a bs legal system. Deliberately grey, it should be a flow chart.

So how do we go back and get JT changed to TIC, so the Will is effective and the children can get their inheritance.

Thanks

[1452_kc]

fyi, solicitors firm who created the Will have said 'it's not our fault'. But they still want you to trust a solicitors to put your Will together.

[atticus]

It seems to me that the question is whether the solicitors should have investigated the basis on which the property was held. The question was asked at the first meeting, and a clear answer given that H and W owned the property as tenants in common. I am not sure that the question later asked by H gives rise to a duty on the solicitors to investigate.

If you want to take this further you will need to take advice from lawyers specialising in professional negligence cases.

[1452_kc]

No professional should be asking their client about a technicality that the professional specialises in and the client is a layperson in. They certainly shouldn't be asking that of a client who may have made that decision over a decade earlier, when the home was purchased, and who is currently only weeks from death.

In this case, the Solicitor(S) asked that question during the Will prep; although we only have the solicitor's word after the fact that the question was ever asked; this was the first failure in their duty of care. The S was given a second chance, when the Husband(H) spoke to that same S little over a week later and asked the question 'what if the property is not held at TIC?' Again, the S failed in his duty of care to the client, by not finally checking the Land Registry website for TIC/JT, and informing the W that her Will was worthless. Land Registry check takes 2mins, cost £7, anyone in the world can do this on any property in the UK.

The Wife(W), has already summoned the strength to have that very awkward Will prep meeting with the H present, who is of course not happy with his W decision. You have a vulnerable individual, the W, and it raises serious questions about the adequacy of the legal advice given and the need for a simple land registry check when dealing with what for most people, will be the only thing of financial value they leave behind.

Woeful service from a large legal provider who is still operating today.

The Law Society once tried to regulate the Will writing service, to make it so ONLY solicitors could write Wills. They did a blind test, asking various organisations to write Wills. The Wills put together by the solicitors had the same number of mistakes as those put together by Joe bloggs Will writing firms etc..I think the failure rate was 1 in 5. They didn't bother trying to regulate it after that study.

When a solicitor can't do something as basic as check the Land Registry for a single family home you've got to worry. Let's remember back to when solicitors didn't even check id before preparing legal paperwork. Ridiculous.

[1452_kc]

It seems to me that the question is whether the solicitors should have investigated the basis on which the property was held.

Of course they should, its a house, like all houses in the UK its worth £100k's; for 99% of the population it the only thing they are leaving of financial value, it's the point of the Will. And the check is easy, cost £7 and takes 2mins.

The question was asked at the first meeting, and a clear answer given that H and W owned the property as tenants in common

We don't know the question was asked, we only have the solicitors word after the fact on that, and the pointlessness of asking that question has been proven, ie the Will was worthless. Don't ask, just check.

I am not sure that the question later asked by H gives rise to a duty on the solicitors to investigate.

We will agree to disagree on that, i'd like to a straw poll on that, i think you will find it will fall in my favour.

[atticus]

A straw poll on an internet forum will not get you what you want. I have given my suggestion for what you should do if you wish to take this further.

[PallasAthena]

Are you one of the W's "adult children from a previous relationship" who had expected to inherit W's 50% of the house?

I agree with Atticus that you need to instruct a specialist professional negligence solicitor to see if you have a claim against the solicitor who advised your mother and drew up her Will.

It is nowhere near as obvious as you suggest.

If the solicitor's notes taken at the time record that they asked H & W if JT or TIC and were given the express answer that it was TIC then it won't be easy for you challenge the accuracy of the solicitor's notes. You weren't there and it seems unlikely H will dispute their accuracy. If they weren't sure they should have said so.

Whether the solicitor should have checked anyway I can't say, that's why you need expert professional advice.

Personally I don't agree with your assertion that the JT/TIC difference is a technicality that few couples would know about. Most couples I know are aware of it and know how they own their house. Whether they understand all the implications is a different matter.

[1452_kc]

If the solicitor's notes taken at the time record that they asked H & W if JT or TIC and were given the express answer that it was TIC then it won't be easy for you challenge the accuracy of the solicitor's notes

The solicitors notes have a single comment 'TIC' ,it doesn't say anyone was asked, the S stated after the fact, once they were approached after the Will had failed, it was at this point S stated 'he asked'. But you don't ask, it's the only crucial bit of info the S has to confirm, and they failed. You don't ask a vulnerable, dying women about something that happened over a decade earlier and may have been changed since, this is why you pay a professional to cross the t's and dot the i's. It takes 2 minutes to check it. Anyone can do it, S should have done it. Before you put a solution in place (the Will), you confirm you understand the problem, 101 work.

https://www.gov.uk/get-information-a...opies-of-deeds

Personally I don't agree with your assertion that the JT/TIC difference is a technicality that few couples would know about. Most couples I know are aware of it and know how they own their house. Whether they understand all the implications is a different matter.

Your a VIP member on a legal forum, my guess, that's your circle, other legals, so yes they probably do know if they are JT/TIC. You said it, would they understand the implications? That's a strong no. Another straw poll?

[PallasAthena]

Your guess is hopelessly wrong. I don't know any lawyers.

Arguing with everyone who responds to your posts because you don't like what they say is pointless. Consult a specialist lawyer.

[1452_kc]

Your guess is hopelessly wrong. I don't know any lawyers.

Arguing with everyone who responds to your posts because you don't like what they say is pointless. Consult a specialist lawyer.

No one is arguing, this is fact finding and opinions.

[1452_kc]

no one mentioned an rx1 yet?

[atticus]

That has indeed not been mentioned so far. Please make your point.