Death without a will and co habitation

[RonaldMcDonald]

What happens nowadays if you die without having made a will and you were co habiting?
This has happened to my friend.
He has made financial provision for his children but has made no new will since he started to co habit with his new girlfriend
She says that she gets 2/3s of the money and the children the rest split between them
Sounds a bit unfair as his kids are young

Any ideas? She has called the insurance co to tell them she is the next of kin.
Help if poss would be v gratefully received
Ta

Green grow that is so true - but equally (and maybe slightly off point) I would add when do we get away from the notion in our society that a man is not responsible for the financial cost of children once he leaves a relationship?

GF doesn't seem to think that resources from his estate should be there to raise and support his children.

OP - you really do need a solicitor at this point. I don't think the insurance co/GF are going to be straightforward about this. Depending on them to do the right thing may not be straightforward.

This is nonsense OP. How can the insurance company a) admit they've lost a key piece of paperwork, b) ignore a key piece of paperwork they are shown - the will, c) favour a girlfriend of two years over the needs of young children deprived of a parent. You need to get tooled up with armed and dangerous solicitors. You are being far too passive about this. Did your friend expect his kids to be left with practically nothing? That's the question you need to concentrate on. Ignore the girlfriend. BTW I'm really curious to know if this was an 'expected death'?

This is nonsense OP

No it isn't.

The whole point of life insurance written in trust is that it is not part of the deceased's estate. It is therefore not subject to inheritance tax and cannot be claimed by people to whom the deceased owes money if they are in debt at the date of death. The trustees (NOT the insurance company - if this was a death in service benefit the trustees may well be senior staff or directors at the deceased's employer) are therefore not bound by the deceased's will, nor are they bound by the deceased's nomination of beneficiaries. They would normally follow the deceased's nomination but they are entitled to conclude that it is inappropriate and do something different. For example, if a married man nominates his girlfriend as beneficiary and excludes his wife the trustees may well feel that is inappropriate and reward most, if not all, of the money to the widow. Similarly if the nomination is old and/or the deceased's personal circumstances have changed significantly the trustees are entitled to take the view that the nomination is no longer applicable.

Like it or not, the OP cannot force the trustees to distribute the insurance money to the deceased's children. That is entirely a decision for the trustees.

Isn't it that mother of his children should write to trustees asking if some money can be allocated to them?

So who are the trustees in this case, then?

I'd agree with prh47bridge and add that there might never have been a nomination at all. This isn't uncommon.

Remember, the OP seems to be suffering from a bad case of information vacuum and Chinese whispers based upon lies told by the girlfriend.

I agree with others - Lawyer.

The waters are muddied, you need someone who knows about these things.

Also - it needs to be someone with experience of insurance too, not just ordinary Estate Administration.

If you don't make a nomination I think it is not then held in trust and it goes into your general estate and can be subject to 40% inheritance tax if you have a lot of other assets but I might be wrong.

prh is right that this is nothing to do with wills as I said above but what his employer/the trustees does with money under work life insurance pay outs. I would have thought on any a basis a recent girl friend with her own house in her name is much less entitled than young children but as people say above this country seems to have moved to an ethos that women alone are obliged to support their children and men can disappear into the sunset with new women leaving all their obligations behind.

We had a similar situation recently with MIL and three sons. Her ex that she split up from thirty years who died and she wanted to keep all his money. Bit of a Barney but they sorted it out.

The payment was at the discretion of the pension trustees, who paid a quarter each to her and three children, but they confirmed that was ok. I get the feeling that they could have pushed as they were interested in her financial dependency.

Presumably it's a sizeable fund, I agree with Mrs M, don't be passive here, 2/3 to her is not a fair split. They have a will, potentially a nom form. OK they may take into consideration his new partner, but I would have thought the splits should be the other way around.

Pension funds generally under nomination, meaning death benefits are paid out to the trustees discretion. In my opinion giving 2/3 to her would be out of proportion,

telegraph article

This might be of use, to explain it.

If I was your friend (so sorry for your loss), then I would want you to get in touch with the trustees to ensure that they have all the information they need to make a fair decision. Depending on the size of the company, it's possible that the trustees will personally know your friend (and so also his GF) - as I know the trustees that would be responsible for making the decision on my policy. They will have a duty to be impartial, but I would make sure that you write to them formally making him aware that he has DC who are dependent on him, so that there can be no misunderstanding.

As an executor you should make clear to the trustees that if they do reach a point where they're going to make a decision as to beneficiary/ies you expect that you will then receive a written copy of their decision which fully sets out the grounds on which the decision was made.

This would be after you had them provided with documents they will have needed to have considered before reaching their decision.

The trustees are not answerable to the executors. They do not have to consider the will in making their decision. They should look at the nomination made by the deceased (if there is one) but as has been pointed out previously they are not bound by it. They are free to do whatever they feel is appropriate with the insurance payout. The terms of the insurance will almost certainly state that the distribution of funds is at the sole discretion of the trustees.

Even if they're not, there'd be no harm in making them aware that they have to make their decision carefully in this case. Large organisations, whatever regulatory framework they operate in, don't always apply the same level of care in making decisions that affect others and sometimes can be remarkably cavalier and unthinking.

Any updates op? Interested t hear how this works out! Hope you and the kids are coping OK!

Updates

Turns out that my friend had another pension that the gf was aware of but didn't mention to the ex partner/children
She mentioned it in passing, but via letter, to the solicitor which they then picked up upon
When asked to furnish the details she has now stopped all contact..and hasn't provided the details
There was also an insurance policy that she didn't mention to the ex partner or children but that she has told the solicitor about. She has informed the solicitor that she will be contesting any payment made to the children???? as it was my friend's wishes to provide for her first and for the children's mother to provide for them from what was left

Solicitor seems to have head in his hands....but has passed all these correspondences on to me, as executor
She has asked again that I renounce being an executor as it is a final blow etc etc
Hard going

She sounds like a horror, any sympathy I may have had for her has gone. Thank god you didn't step down as executor!! The kids wouldn't get a penny if it was up to her by the sounds of things.

Blimey, it sounds like a big can of worms.

What she's doing is not only immoral, but illegal. Stick to your guns, OP.

And if it went to court, the children as dependents would always come first.

Blimey. She sounds a nightmare. So glad that your friend didn't marry her as his kids would have been stuffed by her.

I guess she could claim extreme grief, ignorance of the proper procedures or some such excuse as her reasons for doing these things although it sounds like she is just greedy and self obsessed. However her actions in claiming that she was the wife, the next of kin and executor etc - sounds like she needs a reminder from the solicitor that her actions are effectively fraud (or whatever the exact legal definition of what she did wrong is) and that she could be sued/imprisoned/thrown into a pond/etc as a result of her actions - and if she messes the executors or solicitor around any more then you will be taking action to ensure that you are able to execute (?! sounds extreme!) the estate properly.

Guess it is taken as read now that the dc don't have anything that actually belonged to their dad - just wonder how much stuff of his the gf has kept and not passed on to the estate.

Just out of nosiness interest - when the dad was alive - how did his gf treat his kids? Did she think of herself as their stepmum (which if she claimed she was as good as married to him, you would have thought that would be the logical extension) or were they just an annoyance to her? She certainly sounds like a wicked stepmother now!

You're doing a grand job sorting this all out and keeping her out of things for the kids. Do you think there are any other policies or bank accounts around that she doesn't know about either? I think there are ways for solicitors to find out about everything related to a single person - might be worth them checking in cases there are others that she hasn't mentioned too.

Oh and thanks for the update!

What does the solicitor think of her actions and behaviour?

I work in insurance. It is simply not possible for her to successfully put herself as beneficiary after the fact. I find it very difficult to accept that they would have had any substantive conversation at all with her. Certainly the companies that I worked for would expect either a copy of the will or letters of administration and proper identification before any discussion at all would take place. If the policy is written in trust, this would be honoured. It seems that this has not happened(ie it has not been written in trust). Usually the benefit would be paid to the estate to be distributed as part of the estate. If it is part of a pension or work related scheme then the trustees decide_ but Imho they would give most if not all to the minor children-especially if the purchase of the policy ties in with the birth of the children and predates the subsequent relationship. I think she is making this up as it goes along.

Actually it turns out that letters have been sent to the children today via their mother stating that the policy has been split effectively 3/4 in favour of the gf and 1/4 in favour of the children
She has been classed as his dependant??

I will have to consult with the solicitor in the morning but I have little hope in changing this decision as the solicitor has made it clear that the trustees have little right to be challenged and do not have to follow my friend's will

I'm jut so surprised that they have decided so quickly and that they have made such a huge decision
Be aware