Wills and executors - the outcome..

[Harry Bloomfield]

Hi,

With help from uk.legal.moderated....

Just an update on the earlier thread...

The (2x) solicitors have agreed to renounce their involvement as joint executors along side me. I will now become the sole executor, but their letter of renouncement will cost £150 plus VAT and that is all of the costs I will need to pay them, to my surprise. I expected them to charge for the will storage and admin since 1997, but no charge mentioned. I think we got off lightly and much easier than I had anticipated.

The solicitor was unwilling to divulge from the notes, why they had been asked to act as joint executors, but we have our own thoughts on that point. My thanks to all who contributed to the earlier thread...

Here is what I wrote to the solicitor involved...

[Solicitor's name and address]

We, the undersigned, being all of the beneficiaries of the estate of the late [NAME and ADDRESS], having closely studied the will, jointly agree that the estate can and should be handled and executed solely by [My NAME], and would ask that you please renounce your joint executorships to enable this to happen.

All four of us the beneficiaries, are in complete agreement with the contents of her will, there are absolutely no disputes or disagreements between us, which makes additional executors entirely superfluous.

Further - unnecessary legal fees, would obviously detract from the need to have the estate value maximised for the benefit of those beneficiaries.

Mr [MY NAME] would of course turn back to you, for any help or advice with the execution and probate, should it be necessary.

Followed by 4x names, full addresses and contact numbers and each signed their names to the document, including me.

The solicitors were happy to just ring each in turn, to have them confirm they are happy for this to happen, which she is in the process of now.

[harry]

Glad it's going OK. £150 for a letter! Bloodsuckers.

[soup]

I wish my mum had done that she made my brother and I sole joint-executors.

Trouble was my brother was living in her home, we were to sell after ten months . A solicitor (or other uninvolved party) may have ensured it went that way. However as I was unwilling to evict him (he needed somewhere to live more than I needed the money, and he is my brother) perhaps this third party would have given him more of an impetus to move after the ten months, as I was unwilling to force the issue.

He is now buying my share (early next week is "the signing")so all is well just forty-seven months instead of ten.

As I stated before perhaps an uninvolved third party being involved stops all the decision making and ensure any will is followed to the letter.

[GB]

Ridiculous comment. They are giving up an executorship for which they could easily charge say £10k.

[stuart noble]

AIUI they can't do a thing (even charge £150) if the beneficiaries unanimously disapprove. Still, it's a good outcome

[Davey]

snip

Harry,

How do I contact the Moderator at uk.legal.moderated? I have sent two posts, on totally different subjects, and neither of them has appeared. I would at least appreciate knowing why; one of them was concerning the recent publicised case where somebody's will was overturned by her son. I thought that this might be a decent subject for discussion, but my post is not there. It has gone to him, my news service has confirmed that it went there.

[michael adams]

But surely executors are appointed in accordance with the wishes of the deceased ? What the beneficiaries may or may not decide subsequently, has no bearing on that.

The appointment an independent executor by the deceased is designed in theory anyway, to protect the interests of all the beneficiaries. Possibly from the actions of the other beneficiaries, if left to their own devices. Although presumably this wasn't an issue in this case

The ?150 charge is probably necessary as the solicitors might otherwise be liable if one or more of the beneficiaries cried foul, following their renouncement of their role. Presumably this needs to be properly nailed down with a watertight agreement of some kind, so as to satisfy their indemnity insurers.

michael adams

...

[Big Les Wade]

Davey posted

That I don't know.

You can check what has happened to individual posts at

I can't see any record of yours.

[Martin Bonner]

Apart from

you can also post to uk.net.news.moderation (which is unmoderated).

The moderators (there are several of them) tend to keep an eye on it.

It has been rejected, it should be on chiark (unless it was rejected as libelous).

That's certainly on topic (although it was actually a daughter).

If it's not on chiark, it has probably never actually got to a human moderator. (There's a robo-moderator which allows most posts by white-listed posters through automatically - dramatically reducing the moderation load). I suggest posting to unnm with some details of when you posted and what the title was. Somebody might be able to help.

[Tim+]

Did you cross-post it? I think cross posted messages don't get through, possibly automatically rejected before the mods ever get to see them.

Tim

[Harry Bloomfield]

At the time the will was written, there was a large element of instability and hostility in one of the beneficiaries lives and since. We all think this might have been the reason, but we will never know because we have no access to the solicitors notes.

The instability is still very evident, but not the open hostility.

[Harry Bloomfield]

It happens that Davey formulated :

I thought I had remembered reading something about that, are you sure it didn't appear?

Everything I have sent to the group has appeared, often after a bit of a delay on the initial posting. I have no idea how to contact the mod, but surely making a post to the group, but marked for the mod's attention would work??