Disputing a Will after a grant is issued.

[Pantodame]

The claim by a potential beneficiary against a will, that they are not mentioned (possibly forgotten) is stronger than if the the beneficiary is mentioned and a small pecuniary gift is left to them

nteresting. I was told that unless mentioned there is little hope. Can an excluded beneficiary apply for a Lark request? Yes I know I can get specialist advice, but we all want to know the reasoning asap

[Pantodame]

Hello. Can anyone suggest a course of action when a grant has been issued but there is a dispute over the Will? The grant has been issued very quickly before a caveat could be submitted.

No, it’s not the executors contesting anything, they are the issue.

[Pantodame]

The general feeling is it’s lost cause, the only claim we would have is coercion but proving that is going to be difficult.

I have received a different view, not being mentioned apparently demonstrates an intent? However, since then the funeral has taken place and the eulogy expressed undivided love for all children and grandchildren although this is incongruent with the content of the Will. Other information has come to light suggesting the testator has been manipulated. Things just don’t make sense or add up.

[Pezza54]

Not sure what you mean by "demonstrates an intent"
An intent to forget?

[Pantodame]

I have received a different view, not being mentioned apparently demonstrates an intent? However, since then the funeral has taken place and the eulogy expressed undivided love for all children and grandchildren although this is incongruent with the content of the Will. Other information has come to light suggesting the testator has been manipulated. Things just don’t make sense or add up.

Intended to exclude beneficiaries. What doesn’t add up is the eulogy at the funeral expressed a deep affection for all children and grand children which is not expressed in the Will.

[Pantodame]

I have received a different view, not being mentioned apparently demonstrates an intent? However, since then the funeral has taken place and the eulogy expressed undivided love for all children and grandchildren although this is incongruent with the content of the Will. Other information has come to light suggesting the testator has been manipulated. Things just don’t make sense or add up.

Intended to exclude beneficiaries. What doesn’t add up is the eulogy at the funeral expressed a deep affection for all children and grand children which is not expressed in the Will.

[Pezza54]

In Scotland the deceased's children may have a claim (court action not required) under Legal Rights
No such legislation in England or Wales

[Pantodame]

Intended to exclude beneficiaries. What doesn’t add up is the eulogy at the funeral expressed a deep affection for all children and grand children which is not expressed in the Will.

Yes that seems to be the case but I can’t provide all details on this forum, we are making a Larke application to see what was said.

[Pantodame]

Intended to exclude beneficiaries. What doesn’t add up is the eulogy at the funeral expressed a deep affection for all children and grand children which is not expressed in the Will.

Did you not say there is a stronger case where a potential beneficiary hasn’t been mentioned in the Will?

[PallasAthena]

I'm geting confused by this thread.

Is it being argued that the Will was (may have been) invalid - the deceased lacked capacity when the Will was made, or someone had exerted undue influence over the deceased for example? In which case Larke v Nugus letter would be the starting point.

Or is it an Inheritance Act claim? In which case there is 6 months from date of probate to submit it.

I don't understand the relevance of what was said in the funeral eulogy. The eulogy is what the chief mourner(s) say, their opinion, usually the deceased's children if there is no surviving partner.

Pantodame the advice was given nearly a week that this was urgent and you needed to consult a specialist solicitor. Have you done that yet? Otherwise you are just wasting time faffing about on online sites asking non-professionals what they think. Especially when you post cryptic comments like "it's not the executors contesting anything, they are the issue" and "I can't provide all details on this forum" and "the parties involved cannot attend any appointments" without explanation.

[Pezza54]

Not necessarily
An example of a strong claim would be 4 siblings where 3 share the deceased's estate whilst the fourth is completely left out and not mentioned in the will
To prevent the child who the deceased was estranged and fallen out with making a claim against the will, the deceased should bequeath that child a small pecuniary. This shows that child has been considered and not forgotten

[Pantodame]

Did you not say there is a stronger case where a potential beneficiary hasn’t been mentioned in the Will?

Apologies for the confusion, sometimes I’m not quite sure where to reply, I suppose I am getting used to the forum.

Without explaining everything which would take up too much space, information is coming out all the time which may or may not be relevant. When you say I should seek professional advice I have and if you read my replies I am getting conflicting replies. Since submitting the initial question we have obtained a copy of the Will which omits potential beneficiaries. The relevance of the Eulogy, approved by the executors, it does not concur with the Will content. That is the reading painted a totally different picture. The individuals excluded were not estranged in any way, in fact there was contact the day before death. This is why there is doubt as to the validity. The behaviour of the executors has been controlling. When you say faffing around trying to get a general consensus maybe. I am asking opinions so thatching am informed as much as possible. Yes I am seeking some clarity but I am also responding to replies.

Am I claiming the Will is invalid? It doesn’t appear so, however the circumstances in which the Will was instructed does raise questions. No, there isn’t an intention to claim under the 1975 act. As I have stated we are submitting the Larke request. But that said, there does seem to be inconsistencies in advice and we are conscious to pursue the right course of action.

Yes the advice was given nearly a week ago, but information has become available that wasn’t then. But do you know, it’s hard just to know who to trust. Having never done this before we a trying to get a feel for who to choose. There are any number who are willing to be instructed but this isn’t about having a tap fixed. So, I appreciate your interest and replies and thank you.

[Pantodame]

Not necessarily
An example of a strong claim would be 4 siblings where 3 share the deceased's estate whilst the fourth is completely left out and not mentioned in the will
To prevent the child who the deceased was estranged and fallen out with making a claim against the will, the deceased should bequeath that child a small pecuniary. This shows that child has been considered and not forgotten

Hello. It seems I am confusing others so can I just clarify the situation first.

There are certain details I don’t wish to divulge on the basis that it would identify the parties.

When I made the initial query we didn’t know as much as we do now. The executors, who we didn’t know for sure were the executors as they claimed not to know the whereabouts of the Will. We now have a copy of the Will. Your example isn’t far off, however the excluded potential beneficiaries were not estranged, in fact there was contact with the deceased the day before the death. It has come as a real shock and without any explanation.

We do know the deceased was misled over things historic, but she made a new Will shortly after losing her husband, within a short time. The Will wasn’t then executed for a couple of months as the testator went into hospital.

At the funeral there was a eulogy prepared by the Executor where a declaration was made regarding her children and Grandchildren. It has been said that the eulogy has no bearing, but to refer to children and grandchildren in a positive way without preference to any over the others contradicts the content of the Will. The Will provides for some siblings with their children only as substitutes.

There are other anomalies which we suspect could be explained with access to the Will file hence the Larke request.

Just to be clear, there are a number of siblings, half have not been referred to at all in the Will. They are not estranged and we cannot get any answers. The executors however have adopted a very aggressive stance and unexpected behaviour.

As you say, is it possible there has been an error, or was this intended. We just don’t know hence the questions.

We have made enquiries and are getting conflicting information, that could be due to the lack of detail and we appreciate this is urgent, but it’s difficult knowing who to instruct.

Thank you for your replies, I appreciate it, but your suggestions conflict that being ignored or forgotten conflicts with others suggestions that not being named is in its self proof enough as to the wishes of the deceased.

Finally, I may have been replying in the wrong place hence repeated replies, but I think I have it now.

[Pantodame]

Not necessarily
An example of a strong claim would be 4 siblings where 3 share the deceased's estate whilst the fourth is completely left out and not mentioned in the will
To prevent the child who the deceased was estranged and fallen out with making a claim against the will, the deceased should bequeath that child a small pecuniary. This shows that child has been considered and not forgotten

Hello. It seems I am confusing others so can I just clarify the situation first.

There are certain details I don’t wish to divulge on the basis that it would identify the parties.

When I made the initial query we didn’t know as much as we do now. The executors, who we didn’t know for sure were the executors as they claimed not to know the whereabouts of the Will. We now have a copy of the Will. Your example isn’t far off, however the excluded potential beneficiaries were not estranged, in fact there was contact with the deceased the day before the death. It has come as a real shock and without any explanation.

We do know the deceased was misled over things historic, but she made a new Will shortly after losing her husband, within a short time. The Will wasn’t then executed for a couple of months as the testator went into hospital.

At the funeral there was a eulogy prepared by the Executor where a declaration was made regarding her children and Grandchildren. It has been said that the eulogy has no bearing, but to refer to children and grandchildren in a positive way without preference to any over the others contradicts the content of the Will. The Will provides for some siblings with their children only as substitutes.

There are other anomalies which we suspect could be explained with access to the Will file hence the Larke request.

Just to be clear, there are a number of siblings, half have not been referred to at all in the Will. They are not estranged and we cannot get any answers. The executors however have adopted a very aggressive stance and unexpected behaviour.

As you say, is it possible there has been an error, or was this intended. We just don’t know hence the questions.

We have made enquiries and are getting conflicting information, that could be due to the lack of detail and we appreciate this is urgent, but it’s difficult knowing who to instruct.

Thank you for your replies, I appreciate it, but your suggestions conflict that being ignored or forgotten conflicts with others suggestions that not being named is in its self proof enough as to the wishes of the deceased.

Finally, I may have been replying in the wrong place hence repeated replies, but I think I have it now.

[Pantodame]

A letter from a solicitor to the executor or executors warning them that there may be a legal challenge to the will, should prevent the executor(s) from distributing any more funds from the estate

We know the main asset hasnt