Representative? Will, beneficiary, executor

[NCforsafety]

My DH sadly lost his mother last year (15 months ago).

Her will leaves her estate to her 4 children (obvs DH is one of them). Her executor's are one of her children and a friend. The friend executor is suffering from dementia and therefore is not doing any of the executor duties.
Which leaves Dh's sister as the only true executor.

DH and sister fell out some years ago and no longer speak or communicate at all.
DH has heard nothing regarding estate etc (presumably as he and the executor don't communicate). He has applied for and received copies of probate and the will from HMCTS.
He asked me to mail the executor and ask if she was okay dealing with me instead of him as he wants no communication to continue. She has ignored and is instead emailing him saying they (all 4 siblings) need to meet up to discuss what to do with the house etc.
DH wishes to refuse and instead appoint a representative (probably me).

Is he allowed to do this? Is the executor allowed to refuse to deal with anyone other than him?
If he can do this is there anything legal we need to do to make me his representative?
Thank you in advance.

It is the responsibility of the executor to administer the estate and distribute it. As far as I'm aware it would be unusual for the property to be transferred in to the names of the beneficiaries if one objected, but someone may come along who knows better.

If the executor with dementia has a power of attorney then their attorned becomes executor (I think).

If the executor refuses to consider his wishes unless he meets with him/her I would imagine they are not discharging their duty as executor responsibly.

Thanks @Collaborate.

But can my DH insist on using a representative in discussions with executor?
Is executor allowed legally to refuse to communicate with a representative rather than DH?

The executor can do what they want as long as it's in accordance with what's in the will. As a matter of courtesy the beneficiaries should be kept informed but the executor is not bound to do so.

Assuming the will does not provide for the property to be transferred in to the names of the beneficiaries the executor can only exercise a power of appropriation (giving a share in the asset rather than cash) with the consent of the beneficiary.

He should make it clear he has no intention of agreeing to take a share of the house (assuming this is what is being proposed). On the other hand it may simply be the executor wanting the views of the beneficiaries about selling price etc. Not being obliged to get his opinion or consent, she can proceed without his input.

Similar to what Collaborate has said, my understanding is that the executor does not have to seek opinions from the beneficiaries at all so I can't see how (unless it was an issue of capacity like the other executor) you could insist they deal with a representative.

Would a compromise be to ask one of the other beneficiaries, a sibling, to act as a go-between instead? Would that be acceptable to your DH and the executor?

It is positive the Executor wants to talk to all the siblings together, it indicates a desire to resolve the estate in an amicable way. I would be more concerned if they were not willing to discuss the estate.

A will cannot cover every eventuality and decisions need to be made. For example does one beneficiary want to buy the house. Are there personal items your DH might want from the house? I can see joint discussions with all 4 siblings may be the most expedient way to reach a decision/agree a way forward. A nominated person may not be able to contribute in the same way I.e would they be authorised to make decisions or just to act as an intermediary.

Equally discussions about inheritance can be sensitive and can lead to or exacerbate conflict, so I appreciate your DHs desire not to engage.

Would your DH and the executor consider using a mediation service www.nationalfamilymediationservice.co.uk/will-disputes/

I have experienced mediation where the two parties are in different rooms and don’t meet and the mediator goes between the two rooms. A mediator can keep discussions focused on the matters in hand.

Thank you all for your replies - much appreciated.

Basically the will says the estate is to be divided amongst the 4 children.
I child lives there now.
The other 2 siblings don't need the money and so don't care about selling the house to pay the beneficiaries.
DH lost his job due to Covid and has been unemployed for a year with no benefits etc so he desperately wants to sell the house and take his 25% so the entire financial burden of our life together does not just fall on me.

I think I have persuaded him that he will have to attend a family meeting if that is what is being suggested so thank you very much for giving me the words that have finally convinced him!

When I say child I mean child of deceased - the sibling who lives in the house is in fact about 50!

Maybe you can go with him to the meeting?

Maybe husband could stop being so petty and difficult and just co-operative to get things finalised. He never has to see her again afterwards.

He's entitled to what he's entitled to. From what you say the other siblings want his engagement to ask him to concede to forgoing part of his entitlement, at least for now. If he doesn't want to concede then he doesn't need to engage. (Although I agree it sounds a bit childish, but none of us know the background, and how to act like a grown-up is not what you're asking us about!) However, if the executor wrongly takes his acquiescence as consent to their plan, then he'll have a worse battle on hands trying to force her to act.

Incidentally, if your darling husband doesn't want to be part of the prolonged house ownership (not unreasonably), one solution is for the other siblings to get 25% mortgage on it to buy him out.