fbpx

Half of Estate Value Goes in Fees When Will Lost and Family in Dispute

2nd July 2019 By Arman Khosravi

When a person is appointed executor of an estate, they are given a reasonable period to progress the estate administration but cannot procrastinate without adverse consequences being likely.

When a woman died intestate in 2012, she left behind a house and about £70,000 worth of other assets. Her estate stood to be distributed between her three children. She had made several wills, but none was valid.

One of the children took on the job of administering the estate and appointed a probate company recommended by her bank to assist. Probate was granted 15 months after the woman’s death. Then nothing happened. Two years later it was claimed that the daughter who was administering the estate continued to live in their late mother’s house, which was neither cleared nor rented out and had not been marketed for sale.

When this led to a claim, the daughter living in the house contended that she had a beneficial interest in the property as a result of having made a financial contribution to its purchase and that she had a claim against the estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. She later found a further will which gave her all but a small proportion of the estate. This was contested by one of her siblings. The third sibling lives in the Caribbean and took no part in the dispute.

The dispute was eventually resolved, but because of the complicated litigation history, the costs were very substantial – eventually representing half the value of the estate. The question then arose as to who should pay them. The judge ruled that the late discovery of the will was not a failing that could be laid at the door of any of the children. It was found in papers to which it was not related and the blame for it not being easy to find lay with the deceased woman.

The result was a costs order that placed all of the legal costs either on the estate or on the executor and the probate lawyers.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Award That Requires Borrowing Made Into Court Order

17th May, 2024 By

Disagreements between separating couples all too often result in litigation that substantially reduces the assets available to them, as was illustrated by a case that recently reached the High Court. At issue was whether awards made by arbitrators in financial remedy proceedings can be made into court orders even if that would require one of the parties to borrow money. The couple had previously had a relationship lasting a few years before resuming their relationship in 2015. They had two children before separating again in 2019. Following their separation, the...

Inheritance Disputes – Costs Risks Can Be Reduced

15th May, 2024 By

Arguments about what someone promised before their death can lead to significant legal costs. However, if faced with a claim against the estate, there may be steps the beneficiaries or executors can take to reduce the risks, as a recent High Court case illustrated. A man had left a farmhouse and agricultural land in Cornwall to his wife, with whom he had also jointly owned a neighbouring area of land. After his death, one of the couple's daughters and her husband claimed that he had told them he wanted them...

Share Rounding Error Does Not Prevent CGT Relief

13th May, 2024 By

There are often very specific rules that must be complied with in order to claim tax reliefs, but if a small mistake arises, the courts may be able to provide assistance. In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found that an investor was entitled to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the disposal of his shares in a company, despite owning one share fewer than he needed to qualify for it. The investor had agreed to purchase 5 per cent of the shares in the company for £500,000. He wished to own...

Wife Entitled to Maintenance Until Sale of Family Home

10th May, 2024 By

When divorcing couples disagree on how assets should be divided, the courts will seek to arrive at a fair outcome for both parties. In deciding how the proceeds of sale of a former couple's home should be apportioned, the Family Court agreed with the wife that she should receive maintenance payments until the sale took place. The couple had married in 2006. Following a brief separation, they had reconciled for two years before finally separating in 2022. The husband and wife both contended that they should be entitled to about...