Joint assets & Inheritance Act claims

[honkytonkheroe]

Hi, I've got a probate question if anyone can help:

husband dies leaving a joint bank account (in its entirety to him 2nd wife (1st wife deceased) and the 2nd wife already owns 1/2 of marital home. He also owns another property which he leaves to his children from his first marriage. When he made his will, knowing all the wealth came from him, he thought it fair that the wife gets the bank account and his children get the 2nd house; both were equal in value. He left the marital home to his children with his wife having a life interest.

How does this sit with an inheritance act claim? In his mind, he left the wife 50% of marital home (because it was bought with his money) and the bank account. He then left his children the other half of the marital home (wife with life interest) and a second property. Thus a 50% split.

It would now appear the the marital home (owned tenants in common) automatically passes to her and does not form part of the estate. Does a joint bank account do the same?

Therefore, can the wife claim 50% of the other half of marital home and 50% of the second property saying that she hasn't been properly provided for?

Hope this makes sense! I've tried to simplify the situation I am in!

You need proper advice here. Are you the person making a claim or potentially defending one? Who is claiming makes a big difference.
Also - joint tenants means the asset automatically passes to the survivor and would usually include a joint bank account unless an alternative intention can be shown. Courts can override this.

As a rule of thumb courts would look at what a spouse would have got if they had divorced as a benchmark for an inheritance act claim.

However, I do not deal with contentious probate matters and so you need to get specific advice.

We are the children defending the claim.

Would a joint bank account not form part of the estate then. If so, it may look on paper like a wife hasn't been adequately provided for but she actually has all the bank account and half the property with a life interest in the rest. Also the content of the bank is 100s of thousands and not a small amount.

See a solicitor
This is not the place to seek legal advice when you are talking of hundreds of thousands of pounds

We do have a solicitor who is drafting something for us and is getting back to us. However, this issue of joint ownership has only just come up and I'm trying to work out how they have come up with their estate value estimate (but no breakdown). I wondered if there was a straight forward answer about how it would be looked at. I'm sure I'll be getting a clearer picture in the next few days. Thanks for any advice.

I can't say 100% but yes, I would imagine the fact she received the proceeds of the bank account would work in your favour.
Again, not legal advice - wait for your solicitor who will have the full picture.

Thank you. x

Whoever did the will for him should have advised him to sever the joint tenancy. Either he ignored that advice, didn't get the advice (in which case the disappointed beneficiaries may have a case against the advisers), or he did a home made will and this is a classic example of how doing something yourself can cock things up massively.

The joint bank account automatically passes to his wife. It does not form part of the estate.

You say the house is owned as tenants in common. If it is, 50% of that house goes into the estate. The other 50% belongs to his wife and does not form part of his estate. On the other hand, if the house was owned as joint tenants it automatically passes to his wife and does not form part of the estate.

I think, from what you say, that the house is owned as tenants in common. If so, based on the information you've posted and without seeing the will, it sounds like he essentially left her a life interest in his half of the marital home since the other things (her half of the home and the bank account) aren't part of the estate. The question is whether that is actually the effect of the will (has he, for example, unintentionally left her half of his 50% of the home) and whether it is reasonable financial provision for her.

If we assume that the will has only given her a life interest in his 50% of the house, if she makes a claim under the Inheritance Act the courts will look to put her in at least as good a position as she would have been if the marriage had ended in divorce. They look at the entire situation, not just the will in isolation. The fact she has a bank account with large sum of money and 50% of the marital home is very relevant in determining whether or not the will has made reasonable provision for her.

Having said all that, your solicitor is best placed to advise. They will know whether the house was owned as joint tenants or tenants in common and exactly what the will said.

It is definitely tenants in common and the Will is worded in such a way that his 50% goes to his children and not 50% of 50%.

Just one other question, as you clearly know about this. I know you say that she should be put in the same position as she was, and everything I have read says this. However, he was quite elderly but still earning. Something that was obvious not going to go on forever. At this point their income would have decreased anyway. Would this be taken into account? The fact that if he had lived, their income would have shortly reduced anyway?

If they had divorced the courts would have looked at his (and her) earnings potential. His was clearly going to reduce so that would have been taken into account. In the same way, that should be taken into account in an Inheritance Act claim.