Shocked at ex Fil's will

[coffeerevelsrock]

I have just downloaded a copy of my ex Fil's will as my ex is currently avoiding paying CMS and I wanted to find out exactly how much he has inherited. There are a couple of things I find shocking and/or puzzling and wondered if anyone could possibly explain.

Firstly, ex was the sole inheritor. Not that shocking except he has a sister. However, she is severely disabled so maybe she had 'her share' at some earlier point. The thing that shocks me is that if ex had died before his father, the entire amount (just under £200k) would have gone to charity. I know that's now irrelevant as that didn't happen. but I am so taken aback that he would have left nothing to his two grandsons, especially as in that case they would have lost their father at a young age. It has really unsettled me for some reason. Why would someone do that? They saw him fairly regularly and one in particular had a real bond and shared a number of interests with him.

The other potentially weird thing is that on the grant of probate, it states the full amount of the estate. It is a specific sum and pretty much matches the amount ex paid for a house outright months after the death, which obviously makes sense. However, I am sure that this can't be the full amount of the estate as fil had a sold a much bigger property than the one he lived in until his death just a few years before. There must have been money left from that. He also would have had savings on top as well. He was staid and sensible, was retired from a professional career and had quite ill-health in his last few years, though it was not bad enough to need care. There's no way he blew £200k in a few years. Also, the flat he lived in until his death is not showing under sold house prices, despite having been sold shortly after his death last summer.

I know it's none of my business but I am convinced ex has more money from this somehow. He's given up work and signed on (hence no CMS), has gone on two longish holidays (albeit not lavish ones) and took the dc for a few nights in a hotel last autumn which he has NEVER done in 8 years of us splitting. I'm convinced he has somehow come into more money than he says but is there any way this could have happened, presumably before Fil's death or via his sister?

He could well have gifted monies to his children before his death and or invested in things with no IHT e.g. woodland or even gifted them. It does sound like he did some estate planning to ensure things went where he wanted and if he was sensible the previous amounts would have been invested for his sisters future as others have said

If property or money was held jointly it goes straight to the other person on the account

Regarding probate - if you go to probate evrything in the estate has to go through probate. If you have property it has to go through probate, if you only have cash and investments below the 50k ish (it varies from finacial org to financial org and its per investment rather than total) it doesn't have to go through probate.

MIL has no probate but all her onies were within the different finacial organisations small claims policy. The only one not playing ball at the moment is Equiniti for shares amounting to 2k

@ClaryFairchild

Going back a bit, law degree almost 20 years ago, but back then it was possible to do a "secret will" within a will. It's how many men could leave inheritances for secret children/mistresses etc and it not appear in the published will.

No way of tracking it as far as I know.

Yep still a thin Either half secret -I leave x to John who knows what to do with it Or fully secret -leave x to John (and John knows he needs to give to y)

But the will would still cover the value of the gift. In the op case she think money is missing.

Legally do you have the right to know if your children are beneficiaries of a trust? That's one to check.

Is the disabled adult child or grandchildren are not mentioned and no other provision made can they not challenge the will?

The disabled child (or their representatives) could challenge the will, but obviously if provision was made in a trust then they wouldn't. In theory maybe a challenge could be made on behalf of the department paying any means-tested benefits, but I suspect that's unlikely unless there was a huge amount of money at stake.

It’s ok to get a good solicitor but be aware they can potentially cost thousands. Makes me laugh when people say get a solicitor.

I don't really understand how your ex can be the only beneficiary but also act as sole trustee if there are no surviving beneficiaries. I feel like there are details missing here.

Ex is the sole executor, beneficiary and trustee, and had he been unable to do it, sil and fil's ex wife are named, but only had ex been unable.

Good Lord - aren't you glad your ex is an ex? What an utter waster he sounds. It's a real shame your FIL did not include his grandchildren in his will. Some men are just bastards huh?

Oh, I may have solved the flat business. Sil''s address was on the will so I looked that up and her flat sold in December (for roughly the same amount that ex inherited). So it seems that she has probably moved into fil's flat and sold her own. But could that happen without it being mentioned on the will? Could it have been mortgage-free (likely) and in her name since he bought it 5 years ago? That would mean she and ex had both inherited roughly the same amount.

The will defines his estate as being all his property, all his property over which he has a power of appointment (no idea what that means), and the money, investments and property from time to time representing all such property.

Can anyone put that in plain English??

If the flat was owned by SIL or jointly owned by her and the deceased as joint tenants, it would have passed to her on his death automatically and would not have formed any part of his estate. There would have been no need to mention this in the will - indeed, anything the will said about the property would have had no legal effect.

In plain English, that sentence means the estate is everything he owns. The "power of appointment" is a power given to him by someone allowing him to dispose of that person's property on prescribed terms. You sometimes see this in trusts.

The only trustee is ex. Reading it through now, I think I leapt on the reference to charity but maybe that means it all goes into SIL's trust and/or a separate one that is in place for the dc?

It means it would have been up to the executors to decide where the money went. It definitely wouldn't be going into trusts for your SIL and your children as those would not be charitable - you cannot have a charity that benefits named individuals. You can have trusts for named individuals but they are not charitable.

My dm seems to think that accounts with less then £50k in them don't have to go through probate and that as ex was the sole executor he would be able to get hold of any savings under £50k easily like that. Does anyone know if that is true?

Whether probate is needed to deal with a bank account or similar is up to the financial institution concerned. There is no limit in law. Some banks do not require probate for balances below £50k, many have a lower limit. Regardless of whether probate is required, if the money in the account forms part of the estate it must still be declared for IHT purposes and dealt with in accordance with the will.

Something that didn’t happen ‘really unsettled’ you crikey, get a grip OP.

@Tinsellittis

Something that didn’t happen ‘really unsettled’ you crikey, get a grip OP.

Well, yes, it did. A man I thought loved and cared for my dc would actually have seen them inherit nothing and his money go to strangers if their dad died at a young age. And perhaps the reason for that is that he hated me so much, or thought I would have somehow taken their money, although all I've ever done is support my kids, unlike his son. That's unsettling, yes. Not devastating, horrifying, or something to be in floods of tears over, but unsettling, yes.

Thanks prh47bridge.

Since I think it's quite unlikely that his estate would have exceeded £400k I think it's unlikely that there is a trust fund after all, though if there was, would it be mentioned at all on the will. On the final page, it does talk about trustees acting on behalf of minors etc, but since nothing a specified in terms of a trust and no minor was a beneficiary of the will, I assumed this was standard stuff that wasn't specific to his will.

I assume that the figure on the grant of probate wouldn't be able to reflect the potential of an unsold flat? So if fil's flat was included in that then it would have to have been sold at that point and it would therefore be showing up in the house price records?

Any trust that was set up prior to his death would not necessarily be mentioned in the will. The only reason to mention it would be if some of the estate was to go to the trust in addition to anything he had already given.

The figure on the grant of probate should include the value of any property that formed part of the estate. The property does not have to be sold, but a valuation is required.

The "if there are no surviving beneficiaries" bit would probably not have prevented your DC from inheriting in their father's place under section 33 of the Wills Act if he had predeceased your FIL.

This is obviously a professionally drafted will so whoever drew it up should have known that, in which case if there isn't a statement that "section 33 of the Wills Act is excluded" then he probably didn't intend to cut out your DC in those circumstances.

I know this is unlikely but how do people have such wealth that they're able to put away 200k for inheritance?! I've never known anyone to set up or receive inheritance so I'm always in disbelief when I see the amounts that are put away for people.
I wish I could do this for my kids!

@SilverRingahBells

The "if there are no surviving beneficiaries" bit would probably not have prevented your DC from inheriting in their father's place under section 33 of the Wills Act if he had predeceased your FIL.

This is obviously a professionally drafted will so whoever drew it up should have known that, in which case if there isn't a statement that "section 33 of the Wills Act is excluded" then he probably didn't intend to cut out your DC in those circumstances.

S33 states that the children of a deceased beneficiary inherit, "unless a contrary intention appears by the will". In this case, the will appears to express a contrary intention. But we would need to see the full will to be sure.

Bog standard survivorship terminology has (more often than not) not been held to express a contrary intention to override s33 strangely enough. It's a bit messy either way.

@bantuknots inheritance can provide significant sums.

I knew a couple who were the only children of only children plus a few older relatives who had never married. This meant that a lot of modest properties funnelled in their direction. Nothing originally particularly extravagant, modest houses in areas which subsequently became very desirable. A few hundred thousand inherited each time.

@bantuknots

I know this is unlikely but how do people have such wealth that they're able to put away 200k for inheritance?! I've never known anyone to set up or receive inheritance so I'm always in disbelief when I see the amounts that are put away for people. I wish I could do this for my kids!

Sorry I meant to say 'I know this isn't the point of the thread!' not unlikely ffs

[quote GnomeDePlume]@bantuknots inheritance can provide significant sums.

I knew a couple who were the only children of only children plus a few older relatives who had never married. This meant that a lot of modest properties funnelled in their direction. Nothing originally particularly extravagant, modest houses in areas which subsequently became very desirable. A few hundred thousand inherited each time.[/quote]
Wow @GnomeDePlume that's so crazy but also makes so much sense. I'm guessing a lot of inheritance starts/comes from property?
Hopefully I'll be the first in my family to own my own house and pass it onto my kids (or however it works)

I can imagine unsettling - but I have said before expect nothing from an inheritance . Some could be worth millions but their choice what they do with it , some are not and could all be taken up with care home fees etc.

I understand your point about DGCs but for your own peace of mind I would just assume either DFIL did not have as much money as you thought or he distributed as he wanted - either way I would not take this personally.

If ex is not paying what he should towards DCs - that is a different matter.

Op
It sounds to me that your ex got to you fil and convinced him that he would in turn look after his kids. You'll never know what he was feeding his father about you in private.
I know it's disappointing but sounds like there is nothing you can do . Your ex is some piece of work!!