anyone know about wills and if it might be invalid?

[DollyTwat]

If a will has been witnessed by two people, but it turns out that one person wasn't there the same time as the other, does that make the will invalid?

If it does, how do you go about stopping probate being granted?

There is a lot more to this but just wanted to find out this first. Thanks if you can help

I have also seen 2 references to the eggshell will but not citing any names. Is is a legal urban myth?
The privileged wills are where people need not sign and can be verbal is in the theatre of war (still need 2 witnesses) or written and not witnessed. Sort of when maybe dying type of thing iyswim

Am I dreaming or was it a very large egg, like an ostrich or something?

It definitely rings a bell but I qualified in 1988 and haven't had much call for non-paper Wills since then...

I just saw two references in books but no names mentioned. Just said signed and witnessed by two people. Either a large egg, or not much to leave!

As prh said at 14.38, the eggshell case was Hodson v Barnes 1926. From googling it is reputed to have been an ostrich egg.

Collaborate, did you mean to you'd get your goat (at 16.57)?

I think the cheque written on a cow was actually one of A P Herbert's misleading cases - "Board of Inland Revenue v Haddock". IIRC, A P Herbert received his final salary that way when he retired. But I wouldn't rule out Spike Milligan doing something like that.

And yes, the egg was Hodson v Barnes (1926) 42 TLR 71. It established the principle that a will can be written on any materials provided you end up with a permanent visual representation. Also, Re Berger [1989] 1 All ER 591 established that any code, language or symbols are acceptable provided the writing is decipherable. I would, nonetheless, recommend that wills are written on paper in English, using the normal English alphabet.

Still have no update from him, I expect the sister is trying to think of a way round it

You see even if she tried to say those were her mums wishes, you could argue that the will refers to everything except the house, as the mum believed the house already belOnged to the daughter. She was very old, frail and had at that time suffered a stroke. The will is not written in her own language but looks like it's been copied.

She clearly didn't understand what was going on

Doesn't matter if she had an audience with the Pope and told him what she wanted. If she didn't put it in a valid will, it's not happening. This is a timely reminder why wills need to be properly witnessed.

My dear old mum had her will witnessed but forgot to sign it herself!! Didnt matter though, my brother divided her property according to the will and was open and transparent about everything. Didnt need to show us though, we trusted him totally. So lovely to have family you love and trust!

DollyTwat These two web links have relevant info.

"What to do if a will isn't witnessed properly" :- www.iii.co.uk/articles/articledisplay.jsp?section=Property&article_id=2805939&catEnforce=PropertyBuyToLet

""Accidental" Intestacy" :- www.willswithoutpain.com/intest_accident.html

A valid will has to be witnessed by two witnesses who aren't beneficiaries, or spouses or civil partners of beneficiaries. And the witnesses don't have to be there together.

Civil partners are same sex couples :- www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Yourrightsandresponsibilities/DG_10026937

Wow! It looks like the will is probably valid because the sister's "partner", who was one of the witnesses, isn't her husband or her "civil partner", ie is just her bloke!

Wills Act 1837 :- Section 9 (a witness has to sign, or acknowledge his or her signature, in the presence of the testator, but not necessarily in the presence of any other witness) (the testator has to sign, or acknowledge his or her signature, in the presence of each witness) :- www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4and1Vict/7/26/section/9 Section 15 (no gifts to a witness or his or her wife or husband) :- www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4and1Vict/7/26/section/15 Section 35 (Act doesn't apply in Scotland, only in England, Wales, Northern Ireland) www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4and1Vict/7/26/section/35?view=extent

wasthatthatguy - you should read s9 more closely - from your own link:

No will shall be valid unless?
(a)it is in writing, and signed by the testator, or by some other person in his presence and by his direction; and
(b)it appears that the testator intended by his signature to give effect to the will; and
(c)the signature is made or acknowledged by the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses present at the same time; and
(d)each witness either?
(i)attests and signs the will; or
(ii)acknowledges his signature, in the presence of the testator (but not necessarily in the presence of any other witness),
but no form of attestation shall be necessary.

The will, therefore, is invalid.

Is anyone else wondering whether isthattheguy is a certain poster under yet another name change??

Wondering? No.

Pretty damned certain? Definitely.

I concur ref will being invalid and there being a namechanger around

I concur with the last 5 posts

Namechanging does not work melvin unless you also change your posting style. duh!!!

DollyTwat As you know, I am not a lawyer. How about this as a round about way of doing a valid will :-

1. Mother signs her will and daughter's unmarried partner signs as a witness in the mother's presence.

1. Mother and daughter take the will to a friend's house. Mother says that's my signature on my will and friend signs as a witness in mother's presence.

1. At some later date, all three of the mother and the two witnesses have a meeting. Mother says that's my signature on my will and each witness says and that is my signature on your will.

I think you said items 1 and 2 occurred. If item 3 also occurred, I think the will would comply with the conditions specified in section 9 of the Wills Act 1837, ie the will would be valid

If so, in order to prove the will invalid, the son would have to prove that item 3 did not occur, which may or may not be easy.

wasthatthatguy I'm not sure that he would have to prove that at all, I think it's invalid in law and that's that. The daughter took the mother round to the neighbour and he signed it, he didn't ever talk about it to her ever again. He thought it was strange the way the will was written, and was concerned for the mother. That's why he was willing to sign the witness statement.

I'll try to get an update from him, see if he's heard anything

wasthatguy as you've said, you are NOT A LAWYER so you really shouldn't be attempting to give people legal advice! Has it not crossed your mind why it takes so long to qualify as a lawyer? I would like to think that the majority of the lawyers on here have done more than a google search or watched an episode of Jeremy Kyle before dishing out advice

mos.

Wasthattheguy, maybe you should wander over to the Health Section and see what mischief useful advice on neurosurgery you can offer there.

ooh, I watched McDreamy do brain surgery on Grays Anatomy once. Does that make me qualified?

Oh, let him carry on. Every time he posts it seems he's digging that hole bigger and bigger.

TBH he's just coming across as a bit thick in this thread.

For Heavens sake M read the flaming post and you will see that item 3 did not occur, leaving the will invalid!!!

Ok I have an update, it gets more complicated.

The sister's solicitors have confirmed the will is in fact invalid. However, they are now saying that his mother signed a Trust Deed confirming that she held the legal estate of the property in trust for the sister and that at any time the property could have been transferred into the sisters name.

Apparently the trust deed sets out the terms in which the strict trust was held and the property must be transferred into the sisters name.

He's asking who witnessed this as well, not sure if the same rules apply as we suspect it was witnessed by the same people at the same time.

Anyone know about Trust Deeds?