r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Nov 19, 2020 9:57:17 GMT
The donations to charities were a bit of a pain ....
Yes !
For all of you on here who are spinning negative vibes (unfairly IMHO !) about the professional services of solicitors, the real elephant in the room are charities.
Seriously, don't, just don't involve charities in your will, they behave like disgusting vultures picking over the remains.
Especially avoid the larger charities. They actually have departments of people dedicated to wills and ensuring the charity maximises its revenue, and it is certainly not unknown for them to involve the legal process in order to secure what they perceive (rightly or wrongly) to be "their rights".
(not knowing much about this) - why would a charity not enforce its rights, if its been promised a specific donation in someone's will? And is it possible for them to exceed what the will specified somehow?
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 2,750
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Nov 19, 2020 10:08:45 GMT
Yes !
For all of you on here who are spinning negative vibes (unfairly IMHO !) about the professional services of solicitors, the real elephant in the room are charities.
Seriously, don't, just don't involve charities in your will, they behave like disgusting vultures picking over the remains.
Especially avoid the larger charities. They actually have departments of people dedicated to wills and ensuring the charity maximises its revenue, and it is certainly not unknown for them to involve the legal process in order to secure what they perceive (rightly or wrongly) to be "their rights".
(not knowing much about this) - why would a charity not enforce its rights, if its been promised a specific donation in someone's will? And is it possible for them to exceed what the will specified somehow? For me, I am sure the deceased expected the charities to have a share in his money and the value of his house (at the % specified), I am equally sure it had never occurred to him that they would have rights over family items in his house, or that that would cause difficulties in sorting out his affairs. It had never occurred to me either, although it is obvious when you think about it.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Nov 19, 2020 10:34:19 GMT
For me, I am sure the deceased expected the charities to have a share in his money and the value of his house (at the % specified), I am equally sure it had never occurred to him that they would have rights over family items in his house, or that that would cause difficulties in sorting out his affairs. It had never occurred to me either, although it is obvious when you think about it.
All I'm saying is if people really feel a charity must get a mention somewhere in the vicinity of their will, they should do so in the form of a Letter of Wishes that is attached to your Will, not in the Will itself.
Leaving a fixed sum that you know will easily be covered by your estate is fine too.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,595
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 19, 2020 13:27:14 GMT
Yes !
For all of you on here who are spinning negative vibes (unfairly IMHO !) about the professional services of solicitors, the real elephant in the room are charities. Seriously, don't, just don't involve charities in your will, they behave like disgusting vultures picking over the remains.
Especially avoid the larger charities. They actually have departments of people dedicated to wills and ensuring the charity maximises its revenue, and it is certainly not unknown for them to involve the legal process in order to secure what they perceive (rightly or wrongly) to be "their rights".
How very dare they try to get what the will entitles them to... If the other beneficiaries are on percentage terms and charity is on a fixed sum, then the charity vultures will come calling, the vultures will contest the will. Cobblers. It's a basic tenet of wills that fixed sums are disbursed before percentages are calculated on the remainder. The only time they will "contest" the will is if the executors are playing fast and loose with the law in an attempt to get around the contents of it, usually by trying to do everything ahead of the charity to ensure there's nothing left, or by pretending that assets simply never existed. It's theft from the charity, by those who think the deceased did them wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Nov 19, 2020 15:30:25 GMT
Leaving a fixed sum that you know will easily be covered by your estate is fine too.
Not necessarily.
If the other beneficiaries are on percentage terms and charity is on a fixed sum, then the charity vultures will come calling, the vultures will contest the will. It has happened before and I'm sure the vultures will suffer no shame in doing so again ad-infinitum.
Hence as I said. Ideally avoid mentioning charities at all anywhere. But if you can't avoid it, second best is Letter of Wishes. Basically do everything to avoid them being in the Will itself.
I've been the executor of several wills with fixed sum charity donations. None of the charities have been anything other than courteous and grateful. Most didn't even ask for certified copies of the will.
|
|
slippery
Member of DD Central
Posts: 83
Likes: 61
|
Post by slippery on Nov 19, 2020 18:09:03 GMT
I received a letter in May 2020 telling me that a lady I knew many years ago had “recently died” (when I searched online I saw it was 6 months earlier) and had left me a gift of £500 in her will. I was touched and surprised, and started thinking about which charity I should donate it to. The solicitor’s letter said it would be some months before they would make payment, but they wanted to let me know about the gift. I went to the solicitor’s office, once Covid restrictions allowed, to show my passport & a utility bill as required for the identity certification. Some time later I received another letter telling me I had provided proof of my identity but could I arrange an appointment to provide proof of identity for “totally different forename+same surname”. This was the first time in the address or body of the correspondence that the correct initals/forenames of the beneficiary had been mentioned. The actual beneficiary died years ago, so I e-mailed the solicitor’s office to inform them. They then asked me to provide a death certificate. I pointed out that they should readily be able to check the death online, as I had supplied the date.
I wasn’t disappointed as it was a small legacy which I was going to pass on to the Salvation Army in memory of the deceased lady anyway, but it did annoy me that the solicitor had probably charged what I imagine was quite a small estate quite a bit for the sloppy correspondence. Had the legacy been a large sum and if I had been someone in dire financial straits the failure to address the letter properly could have been distressing.
I've handled a couple of family estates and found it much easier than being POA. However, taking the scrappy home made wills to the registry to get probate was a bit nail-biting, especially as the witnesses were long dead.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 972
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Nov 20, 2020 11:10:54 GMT
My current will names the solicitors who drew it up 20 years ago as my executors (along with my cousin and a friend). Is this a Good Thing?
Typically, searching the Web leads both to firms' websites suggesting that it's an absolutely splendid idea and to some horror stories. Indeed, it was a friend yesterday who had had a bad experience who recommended that executors from within the family should be left to choose a solicitor after I die.
One advantage is that they could then compare current fees and perhaps select a solicitor known to them. On the other hand it could be that they might appoint a crony of theirs who might act in their interests. Very unlikely in my case and I do not for one moment suggest that there's such a person as a dishonest solicitor. It might also be that an executor thinks (s)he can carry out probate without professional help, thus saving fees - or getting in a pickle - and again there's the chance of them exploiting their position.
Another advantage is that should both my "family executors" die and I do not have a chance to appoint replacements, then having named a solicitor as an executor provides a fallback position.
Thoughts, please.
Going back to the original question, my thoughts - having been an executor not long ago - are that I would (almost) never name a solicitor as executor in a will. They can and will gouge extortionate fees, quite unnecessarily. If you have friends/family that you can name, then as you say they can seek professional help as and when they want. The vast majority of estates are not hard to get Probate on. Heck, you can do the whole thing online. The hard stuff is, as some have said, managing/valuing/disposing of chattels, and no solicitor is going to get their hands dirty on that - they will just subcontract it, add their own supervision fee, and then VAT on top of the whole bundle. Much better, if someone is available, for someone who cares to choose their own contractors to help as required, which can of course include (Fixed Price!) legal support if something tricky comes up. For the estate I handled recently, I did all the paperwork myself - it wasn't a complicated estate - and hired contractors for various purposes. I bought a small amount of (fixed price) legal advice to check what I was doing, and if things had got tricky I would have just gone back to the same place and got more help. That said, it was quite a bit of effort, but I was one of the beneficiaries so it was worth my while. I would strongly favour making one or more of the beneficiaries into executors, where this is practical, and then they can make their own choices about how they want to spend their time/money. Admittedly this might be problematic if there could be trust or competence issues between beneficiaries! So if for example all the main beneficiaries are not trustworthy or competent, I can imagine a scenario where a solicitor might be the only choice. One other thought: if the will was drawn up 20 years ago, are there now other younger relatives available who are more likely to outlive you?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2020 11:30:01 GMT
The tricky people are the portals, the worse two are Virgin and Aviva. On the estates I have done (or advised my wife to do) they managed to achieve complete confusion by a mixture of the following
failing to use my address in any correspondence (sending mail to my neighbour for some reason),
always sending two letters when one would do on the same day and to the wrong address
trying to charge the estate for "re-issuing" dividends with the excuse that "that was normly practice" (ie that is what lawyers pay for not sensible people) requesting multiple copies of death certificates and probate "because you can't expect us to hold records of documents for more than one month" - failing to maintain good records and on one occasion actually claiming they had no account in that name or number which only photocopies of records finally sorted
frankly if your friend or family member has finance with these organisations I would ask them to simplify the estate by moving the money asap
however the worse, was a conversation with Lloyds "berevement service" who put on the phone a poor member of staff whose mother had just died, I ended up holding her hand down the phone line rather than her helping me. What a terrible management decision that was.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 20, 2020 11:58:11 GMT
...
however the worse, was a conversation with Lloyds "berevement service" who put on the phone a poor member of staff whose mother had just died, I ended up holding her hand down the phone line rather than her helping me. What a terrible management decision that was.
christ. Did you report that to Lloyds for senior level attention ? Absolutely beggers belief
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,595
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 20, 2020 12:20:14 GMT
They all seem to be utterly incompetent at times...
When my FiL died, Barclays were so utterly incompetent that we ended up having to escalate to the Chief Exec's office to get anywhere. It then took five visits to the branch to deal with the safe deposit box he had there - then, two weeks after we'd finally removed it, the branch phoned to ask if we knew it existed, and what did we want to do with it?
When my MiL was in a care home, Santander suddenly decided that they'd never ever seen the PoA that they'd been happily working with for several years. When she died, Barclays were suddenly very easy to deal with!
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 20, 2020 13:24:18 GMT
This is both an interesting and a sad thread. With regard to charities it triggered me to go back and check my will, which we last did 10 years ago. I recall trying to put something in as protection against charities causing difficulties for the exectutors. I couldn't find it in the will, but have found it in an associated "letter of wishes". I vaguely recall the solicitor telling me what I had proposed could not be legally incorporated into a will but could go into a letter of wishes. In case it is of any assistance to anyone, this is what I put in:
3. There are occasions when charities go to court in order to try and enforce their perceived entitlements from bequests. It is my intent that the executors and my estate should not be drawn into such a situation as a consequence of any gift in my will. It is my wish that the executors, taking due consideration of my will and letter of wishes, be able to exercise their judgement and have final say with regard to interpretation of any gifts to charities. In the event of a legal challenge from any named charitable beneficiary, this could include the option of diverting the gift from that charity to another charity which the executors feel are able to meet the original intended spirit of the gift or is a separately named charitable beneficiary of my will. While this Letter of Wishes has no formal legal standing, it is hoped and expected that in the unlikely event of such a dispute, its existence would have a significant influence in the event of any such challenge, and may also accordingly act as deterrent.
I drafted this myself, and don't recall whether the solicitor made any mods to it. I don't think they did. So it may not count for a lot, but my understanding is that a Letter of Wishes normally carries a fair bit of weight when it comes to interpretation.
I have left %age's of estate in my will: that my of course be a bad thing, but may not be if the above helps to give 'cover' for executor's cover to simplify.
On review, my will is I think too complicated. I certainly recall the sol trying to persuade me to simplify and leave absolute sums. But I was not inclined to want to go and revisit that regularly just because of inflation/changes of cirumstance.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 972
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Nov 20, 2020 13:39:08 GMT
They all seem to be utterly incompetent at times... When my FiL died, Barclays were so utterly incompetent that we ended up having to escalate to the Chief Exec's office to get anywhere. It then took five visits to the branch to deal with the safe deposit box he had there - then, two weeks after we'd finally removed it, the branch phoned to ask if we knew it existed, and what did we want to do with it? When my MiL was in a care home, Santander suddenly decided that they'd never ever seen the PoA that they'd been happily working with for several years. When she died, Barclays were suddenly very easy to deal with! Interesting - I guess it's pot luck as to the individual you find yourself dealing with. My experience was that the banks and big utilities were all fine - their bereavement departments all did their jobs. My really bad experience was with Fidelity (Fund Managers) who completely screwed things up - there was some kid who didn't know basic rules for ISAs as they then applied, which ultimately delayed my Probate application. I complained, initially without effect, and then more forcefully, which resulted in an immediate resolution and compensation. There's a moral in there somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by moonraker on Nov 20, 2020 19:13:28 GMT
Going back to the original question, my thoughts - having been an executor not long ago - are that I would (almost) never name a solicitor as executor in a will. They can and will gouge extortionate fees, quite unnecessarily. If you have friends/family that you can name, then as you say they can seek professional help as and when they want. The vast majority of estates are not hard to get Probate on. Heck, you can do the whole thing online. The hard stuff is, as some have said, managing/valuing/disposing of chattels, and no solicitor is going to get their hands dirty on that - they will just subcontract it, add their own supervision fee, and then VAT on top of the whole bundle. Much better, if someone is available, for someone who cares to choose their own contractors to help as required, which can of course include (Fixed Price!) legal support if something tricky comes up. For the estate I handled recently, I did all the paperwork myself - it wasn't a complicated estate - and hired contractors for various purposes. I bought a small amount of (fixed price) legal advice to check what I was doing, and if things had got tricky I would have just gone back to the same place and got more help. That said, it was quite a bit of effort, but I was one of the beneficiaries so it was worth my while. I would strongly favour making one or more of the beneficiaries into executors, where this is practical, and then they can make their own choices about how they want to spend their time/money. Admittedly this might be problematic if there could be trust or competence issues between beneficiaries! So if for example all the main beneficiaries are not trustworthy or competent, I can imagine a scenario where a solicitor might be the only choice. One other thought: if the will was drawn up 20 years ago, are there now other younger relatives available who are more likely to outlive you? Some interesting replies, and the above is the most relevant to my case. I note the confirmation of my suspicions in the first paragraph. Reference the last sentence, a cousin in the 40s has agreed to become an executor. She's academically brilliant and a respected criminologist, but not financially savvy.
One feature of that 20-year-old will was that it contains a lot of general legal guff but all the interesting stuff - bequests, that is - is in a Letter of Wishes, which I've been able to tweak myself (with witnesses to my signature).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2020 8:11:13 GMT
Just remembered that this year Virgin seem surprised that money in an ISA can remain in an ISA wrapper when transferring from a husband's estate to a wife.
Lloyd's... no, all too depressing at the time.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 2,750
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Nov 21, 2020 8:20:50 GMT
Just remembered that this year Virgin seem surprised that money in an ISA can remain in an ISA wrapper when transferring from a husband's estate to a wife. Lloyd's... no, all too depressing at the time. I thought you had to cash in, but you get an extra ISA allowance to cover what they had so you can re-invest it in your own ISA. But I guess it amounts to the same thing really, probably just done in the background if you ask for it to be transferred. Edit: I recall reading about this sometime ago, so not necessarily Gospel!
|
|