Illegitimate adult child claim on inheritance

[RelativePitch]

My dad had an affair in his first marriage about 60 years ago. A child was born and the mother was paid off by my grandfather (around £250k in today's money). My father had nothing to do with this child and never met him.
My father died last year with a will whereby everything goes to my mother, but his properties go into trust for his 5 children.
My mother's solicitor rang to say that an anonymous woman rang up to say that she was going to make a claim on the estate on behalf of her son. No detail other than that. The Solicitor wouldn't commit to how worried we should be.
I understand that minors should be able to claim against an estate, but a 60 year old man?
Of course it could be another child we don't know about, but as my dad had a vasectomy in 1984, the youngest a child could be is 40.
My dad makes Boris Johnson look like the paragon of virtue!
How worried should we be?

'Young'?? He's at least 40!
And you don't even know if it's really him. Could be some chancer... and this is Legal Matters, not AIBU. OP isn't asking whether she should give him anything.

OP ignore all these 'nicey nice' replies and just go with the ones that have actual legal basis.

As far as morality goes, is it not moral that your father has the right to leave the wealth he spent his life accumulating to the people he chose? This is the basis on which a wife or child can inherit nothing. As your father had nothing to do with this progeny I do not see why the child has any claim on the estate. For all we know he may have been raised by another man and inherited handsomely from him. Morally, should this child potentially inherit twice?
Feeling very like Mrs Dashwood now.
In fact, all of this speculation over wills is taking to a bygone era. VERY grateful I did not live then, when my future would have depended upon the whims of a male and other relatives rather than my own hard graft

I don’t think OP has any responsibility towards this potential half brother - or any other unknown siblings!

My father more or less disowned me and went on to have two more children. I expect they will inherit everything, he’s not rich but pretty well off. It had never occurred to me to contest his will, why on earth would I feel a right to his money and a right to put my half siblings through that stress?

I'm also wondering what 'claim' someone would have on the estate, that isn't explicitly stated in the will.
As a PP said in England there's nothing to stop a parent from leaving child A 1 million, and child B 50p.
How on Earth would anybody determine the amount due to a party not named in the Will?
Also, given that the properties are in trust. IANAL but I strongly suspect that any money is going to come out of OP's mums' inheritance. What amount should she give away? A grand? 100K?

The mind boggles.

@TimesChangeAgain - I think this is the most moral post I have read on this thread, and also the one with the most common sense, thank you. And well done for not letting your outlook be tied up with bitterness or some misplaced sense of revenge/. Justice

The main thing re wills is to get proper advice. That advice will usually tell you that surviving spouse - where there are no previous marriages - get everything and then everything left after the surviving parent dies goes to children equally. Messing about with property in trust and different bequests is never worth the bother.

So much moral outrage on this thread. Yawn

What a load of assumptions! How rich is the OP? How much spare cash has she got lying around? Maybe she should just give her inheritance away because you’ve decided she doesn’t need it!

’ This young man’. What the 60 year old?

In her defence, she was 16 obviously confronting a powerful family (that money would have been much more value then). She worked for them. But part of me also wonders if it was granddad's hence the pay off. But none of this answers op.

@RelativePitch As others have said; don't worry now. Wait for if/when the claim is made and proceed from there

Am I the only person who wonders if the lady who has made contact on behalf of her son - could be the half-brothers wife - putting a claim in for their child.

Could the half-brother already have passed away.
My guess is the Father will be named on the birth certificate especially as a bundle of cash was handed over for the child

@Needanewname42 My guess is the Father will be named on the birth certificate especially as a bundle of cash was handed over for the child

eh, no! You only pay somebody off to avoid responsibility & negative association by having your name on the birth certificate....

But you might very well be right about a Wife (possibly even daughter) of the illegitimate son fueling a claim as theyd be less likely to have profited from any of the original pay off & may just be assessing their/his options & wether their was a will (which they could claim potential plans to dispute it to get a copy if it hasn't yet been filed)

I agree this sounds like a Barbara Taylor Bradford novel.
Fickle son of a wealthy family flirts with the young servant girl. He woos her and courts her then gets her pregnant. He goes to his wealthy father who is outraged and angry at his feckless son.
Her parents are devastated and seek help from the family.
The ‘grandfather’ not wanting to bring shame upon the family and feeling sorry for the poor girl, pays her off.
The servant girl leaves and goes elsewhere to have her baby.
Meanwhile she meets a kind man who takes her on……..
The feckless gadabout carrys on flirting with all the women. His father engineers a meet with the daughter of another wealthy family……..

40 years later and the legitimate youngest daughter of the feckless man receives a letter from a solicitor……

Hmmmm I think this would make a cracking novel.

Everything left to your mother is irrelevant to the conversation as it is not his money. It's hers. She can leave it to whomever she wants

The trust that was left to named beneficiaries so the chances of anyone else claiming are close to nil as a parent has no obligation in England and wales to include all their dc.

There is a small proviso if a disinherited dc is in financial need but even then it is extremely unlikely as this 'child' is not a dependent but a 60 something year old man. And it is extremely difficult to overturn a will in any case.

@Jk8 Remember the shame on the young girl.
I know an elderly man, born to a young single mum, the birth cert didn't have the father's name, but their is a court amendment with the father's name on it dated 2 or 3 months after the birth. The father had nothing to do with the man ever.
That's under Scots law but I can only imagine it was to reduce the shame. A named father is marginally less shameful than an unknown father.

Or he could have been in contact with his father without the rest of the family knowing or he could have got in contact and the father said he didn't want contact. He might have thought he would cause trouble by contacting his half siblings. So many different possibilities and without knowing it is hard to judge.

Maybe I'm 90 😁

No, I was half asleep. Not young of course. Yes there are lots of assumptions. But if the dad left multiple properties and mum has everything for now anyway, sounds as if she should be okay unless this leads to too much drama, whether or not this man has any claim. That's all I meant and I accept that I'm only working on scraps of knowledge.

@Whycantiwinmillionsandsquillions oh it gets better. My Mediterranean mother was the last aupair his first family had. There had been a string of them, probably all shagged by my dad. In fairness to my mum, my dad's first divorce was underway when she arrived in their household, but yes my dad ran off with my mum and married her. Her deeply Catholic parents were less than impressed.
It does sound like a novel!

They might contest the will claiming leaving out the other child was an oversight, it would have been better if he had said he didn't want the other child to be a beneficiary. If the child was adopted later he won't have a claim, do you know if the mother married? You could check the child's birth certificate to see if there is an adoption added to it.
.

This is incorrect. Trusts are a protection to ensure your intended beneficiary receives their inheritance and solicitors ARE likely to reccomend them. For example Husband and wife 2 kids. H dies, w remarries doesn’t make new will. W then dies All goes to H2, who leave to own kids. Original kids totally disinherited somewhat unintentionally. They can’t bring a claim against H2. If H had left his share in trust to W for life then the kids they would have received his share. Or you have a child who if an age is not specified would inherit at age 18. What will the child be like at 18? Turns out they are into gambling and all the inheritance is lost. With a trust the funds are released to the child at the discretion of the trustees and the inheritance isn’t lost. There are many more examples of how they could be useful but to say they are ‘never worth the bother’ is completely untrue. They are commonly used and effective at ring fencing and protecting inheritance.

@Bumblebeeinatree according to my dad's cousin, she heard that that the girl got married when her son was about three or four years old, but who knows? She would have been finding out information from her mum, who was my grandma's sister. Maybe my grandfather kept tabs on the situation from afar.

There is some misinformation on this thread. There is no automatic right for a child to inherit under English law. In certain circumstances, under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1979, a child (or other dependant) may successfully claim on the deceased's estate. The relevant circumstance in this instance would be that the adult child could show that the deceased was providing financially for him in his lifetime (so he had a reasonable expectation that that provision would continue). Since it would be quite unusual for a parent to still be providing financially for a 60 year old child, it seems unlikely that such a claim would succeed in this instance.

Also, the mother of the adult child would not be able to bring this claim on his behalf, unless the child himself lacks mental capacity. The mother would have no legal standing to bring the claim otherwise.

I'd wait to see what claim (if any) actually emerges, and then take advice from a solicitor specialising in contentious probate.

All we can do is wait and see. This lady and her son obviously haven't seen a copy of the will and won't until probate is granted which is probably another year away. She can then apply for a copy of the will and go to a solicitor who will advise her then. She then has 6 months after grant of probate to act. There is part of me that is worried that she'll be put off pursuing it and then we will never know who it was and I'd really like to know! Obviously if it's the 60 year old child we now know exists then I could probably find him if my half brother coughs up the information, but if it's someone else, then we will always be in the dark.

That's what happens if there is no will. If there is a will the person can leave whatever they want to whoever they want, it usually will be the wife and children, but often something to other relatives or favourite charities. Or in this case leave things in trust for the next generation, I think this can also reduce IHT substantially.

Was just coming on to post same @Bumblebeeinatree . There are some quite misinformed people on here!

Always get proper legal advice!

So having a Will is what happens if there is no will - duh, that is in no way what I’m saying. I actually come from a family of lawyers.

Please get your facts straight on inheritance tax by the way. Are you all from families where your parents are multimillionaires who expect to pass away before they need funds for care or just living in retirement?