Intermeddling

[Whymeagain]

My question is.
Am I a higher priority for LOA as an Intermeddler with a legal interest over the other Beneficiary who has an equal legal interest but has not Intermeddled. In an Intestacy simple cash Estate.

Context
I have just found out that I Intermeddled.
So I am about to apply for LOA after 6 months of arguments and deceit from the other Ben. Totally locked against Thier refusal to act Jointly.

I started to Administer My Mother's Estate through Intestacy. There is one other Beneficiary. I advised him regularly of all actions and interim statements of account. Along with them agreeing all my actions.

It was a simple Estate, Banks would release funds, no issues. No LOA, keeping costs down.

The other Beneficiary behind my back solely applied for LOA. To a'protect themselves'.
They state the Solicitor advised not to tell me. Although it was obviously going to be a dispute when issued and he had the opportunity to jointly apply for LOA.

They also applied for one of the Bank funds without my knowledge which I did not know about until I applied as part of my administration. Bank now requires LOA.

He has continued to work against me totally ignoring any joint offers for admin and joint bank account.
Ignoring emails and now stating I am harassing him.
Only offering that I continue to let him Administrate through the LOA as the only option.

I entered a Caveat and He won't issue a Warning despite twice threatening. He has through a Solicitor issued a contract where I surrender the funds I have Lawfully obtained (to administer) and surrender my right to other bank funds

I now realise that they won't Warn me as they are aware I have Intermeddled. So protecting themselves by their LOA application.

That after 6 Months I am now legally the Intermeddler I will have to apply for LOA.

Until now I thought the reason he was not chancing a Warning was...

A conflict of interest

He administered the Estate received by my Mum.
He has advised there was fraud by my Mum by hiding funds to get Benefits. That this Estate is responsible for that fraud.

During that administration I wrote asking him not to hide money and put the Estate into one bank account not two. Otherwise my Mother would be in trouble.

I now realise and have advised him that it would be his administration that would be liable for any fraud. That he will not be able to make this Estate liable.

Separately does Legal Beagles have a Charity cause I can donate to?
I have approached local Solicitors who would not give this advice, but want £££ just to look into the case before deciding actions.
Thankyou

[Tofros]

If the other beneficiary has tried to access funds in deceased bank account that sounds like inter meddling too.

you can just renew the caveat at 6 months and engage in negotiations. Write down what you would like to happen, including repayment of any monies you have expended in administering the estate, and send it as a counter offer. Is te other beneficiary equally entitled to get LOA as you?

I thought from your other post the dispute was to do with a fathers estate.

If the other beneficiary is your Mums step child, but she did not legally adopt them and you are a bio child of your Mum then you have priority over them for LOA.

i

[Tofros]

In fact if the other person is a step child only and not an adopted child they have no rights under intestacy to anything from your mothers estate.

[Arfamind2]

Sorry

it's my Mums Estate we are both Joint beneficiaries.
the other Beneficiary solely administratored our Father's Estate which is the bulk of our Mother's Estate now.

I will issue another Caveat in February when due.

After Mum's death, he wrote that he could not live with himself knowing I may receive 'his' Fathers money, by not being blood.

He is currenlty classing the funds still in the bank as 'their' Fathers awaiting a new Executor. So I guess this will be his next idea.

My Mum was setup as an Executor of Dad's Estate by him. The bank account is is my Mums name as account holder but the account is labelled as -Executor account of ******(our Dad).

As Mum directly inherited through marriage, I consider it all Mum's howefer she was advised to hold it.

[Tofros]

What is the blood relationship or adoptive relationship of the other beneficiary to your Mum?

From what you say, it sounds like your Mums husband had a will which left everything to her and no other legacies or gifts if she was alive when he died. Is that correct?

Did your Mum leave a will? If so, who did she appoint as executor in that will. If she did not leave a will, then only a blood child or a formally adopted child would be entitled to be the administrator of her estate.

If your Mum inherited everything under her husbands will, any child of his who was not also her child or her adopted child would not be entitled to anything from your Mums estate unless she left a will which included him as a beneficiary. He would not be entitled to anything if she died intestate and would not be entitled to be administrator if he is not a blood child or adopted child of her.

[atticus]

Sorry, but is Arfamind2 the same person as Whymeagain ?