💰 Archers thread #121: Brookfield digs for treasure, Alice & Philip try to bury the truth. Dish the dirt here if you dig The Archers. PS Send nudes.

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Thank you, @PseudoBadger, for kicking off this long, long series of Archers threads.

All views on The Archers welcome here! New blood welcomed. We don't all agree on all points and most of us are posting tongue in cheek a lot of the time, so don't worry about revealing that you long to hear Pip again, or other unusual views.

Spoilers: not on this thread, please. We don't wait for the omnibus to discuss the weeknight episodes, but we do try our best to avoid cross-contamination from www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3853783--The-Archers-spoilers-thread-5-Cant-wait-for-7-02pm-Join-us-here, where spoilers are positively welcomed!

For newer listeners, lurkers or those who just have no idea what we're talking about, @DadDadDad has created this useful thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3557323-For-Archers-fans-a-guide-to-acronyms-on-the-long-running-discussion-threads-and-any-other-meta-thread-questions-you-may-have - BOOP point for him! (See thread for explanation.)

Thanks to @LillianGish and @PersephonePromotesEquanimity for the title suggestions.

Current events: as @Bailey0703 has astutely spotted, it's Anti-Slavery Day tomorrow - could this herald the beginning of the end of the horses storyline? I do hope so. Horrible stuff, but what a blow for Kirsty. They're laying on the dramatic irony with trowel at the moment.

What do we think will happen to Alice and Chris? I can't see this pregnancy going to term and ending well. I don't think the marriage will survive either, giving Brian a chance to revisit his classic line about having to treat this as Alice's starter marriage.

Will Elizabeth end up on a date with Vince Casey? That would put the cat among the pigeons at Lower Loxley.

Over to you ...

I suspect the inheritance trust is another almighty "void of knowledge".

Let's hope that Aisha or Anna Toboggan come to the rescue! On the plus side, it is a good thing the editor has suddenly remembered that there is a trust for Freddie (that was probably going to give him the estate at 21 or 25).

Thank you for that listening suggestion PPE

If there is a trust with a specific intent, ie to carry out the terms of Nigel's will and protect his estate until the will can be carried out, I don't think the trustees are empowered to decide to make it over to someone not named in its foundation as its beneficiary.

I suppose if Freddie were to die intestate there might be a complication, but if he's alive I think they are bound to carry out its terms.

when did he ever do anything without getting her permission?

Jan 1st 2011, unfortunately.

He thought that he was doing what she had told him to, though. She wanted the banner down Right Now. Then she countermanded her orders, but he thought he'd better do it anyway because otherwise she would complain the following day...

"Carnage is coming"?

Oh dear. I suppose I should start listening again.

If there is a trust with a specific intent, ie to carry out the terms of Nigel's will and protect his estate until the will can be carried out...

I think it depends how the settlement was worded. It is likely that Nigel gave the trustees powers not to sign the estate over to Freddie until he is 25 (for instance) or, importantly, until he is ready. In which case, rather than making it over to Lily or anyone else, they will simply maintain the status quo and continue with the board of trustees in charge. If he never becomes fit to run it then there will be a back-up clause allowing it to go elsewhere but that would need to be significantly further down the line, I think.

Do we know much about these trustees? It seems odd that the trust was set up with no family members on there given it’s a family concern but may be there was a reason got it at the time. Are they all accountants and solicitors on the board in which case running LL would be a nice little money-spinner for their firms.

Alice was v sweet talking to Susan as she demonstrated her fridge-reorganising skills though it made for slightly awkward listening after the drunken voicemail subplot. I hope Emma doesn’t wade in again with that chip on her shoulder and make things awkward for Alice with Susan. I’m hoping the conversation was just an opportunity to get Alice to hear more about living with alcoholics and understand Susan better...

Sorry- lots of ground to cover today after the boring Brookfield episode the night before..

Who guards the guardians? There must be legal requirements and things on the trustees, otherwise they could simply withhold the estate from Freddie (or any other minor heir to any estate) indefinitely for no particular reason and keep on drawing their pay.

Who guards the guardians?

Oh they will absolutely have to have proper grounds for withholding the estate from Freddie. Otherwise he’ll be able to take them to court and prove they are behaving unreasonably. I don’t think the court would be thrilled about the drug dealing and might need more evidence than a Christmas play that he has turned his life around but the judge wouldn’t want him to be stripped of his inheritance unless the case was overwhelming. Similar in some ways to the situation with the Marquess of Blandford some time ago, though obvs LL comes with no title...

I’m certainly no expert on this btw, but am doing Wills and Trusts on my law course this term - couldn’t be more timely...

I think the law is that if someone has served their sentence for a criminal offence they are then deemed no longer to be subject to further penalty for the same offence, isn't it?

Overturning his father's will in someone else's favour should certainly count as penalising him further!

(Thanks for the Blandford; I was trying to remember which of them it was and got stuck on Bath. In Blandford's case there was rather more than a single offence of dealing drugs when he was 18: in 1994 when he was 39 "The heir's progress through the last decade was marked by 12 motoring offences, two prison sentences, one attempted burglary, one assault on a police officer, mounting debts and a drug habit costing £ 500 a week." And it was his father who wanted him not to inherit the estate, rather than a group of trustees one at least of whom his father had nothing to do with appointing to his position.)

I have a hazy recollection of Lizzie talking to the trustees about the vineyard the autumn after Nigel was pushed off the roof by David?
Wasn't she worried that she didn't know enough about blending?

I don't believe that there has been any mention of them since and they would surely have intervened when Lizzie was unwell and the place had lost its licence.

Presumably Ruari is set to inherit a fair amount of money soon, too?

They have appeared since then once or twice, for instance forbidding her permission to sell some of the estate to get the cash for converting the Old Dairy into some bedrooms.

They existed, until now, to say "No" to Elizabeth about things, as far as one could tell. Now they exist to say "no" to Freddie altogether.

They were notable for their absence when they ought to have stepped in and appointed a manager to look after the estate and business while Elizabeth was clearly not competent. I don't believe that if they had been doing their job properly (or at all) at that point, they would have allowed it all to devolve onto someone of eighteen with no experience or qualifications at all, ie Lily.

And allowing the licence to continue to be withheld when the reason for its suspension no longer obtained was a truly absurd matter; almost as bad as it being suspended before any reason for that was known, a decision made between Friday night after eight and early on Monday morning when there was no proof any crime had even been committed. If alcohol licences were removed every time someone on a premises was arrested, you would never be able to buy a drink anywhere.

They can't ded Brian.

I am suspicious about morning sickness suddenly starting in the fourteenth week of a pregnancy. What else might it be?

@MikeUniformMike

They can't ded Brian.

Presumably @Madcats meant Siobhan’s estate? Not sure she would have had much money though.

I think the law is that if someone has served their sentence for a criminal offence they are then deemed no longer to be subject to further penalty for the same offence, isn't it?

Overturning his father's will in someone else's favour should certainly count as penalising him further!

It doesn't work like that. The criminal offence is over and done with once someone has fully served their sentence, meaning that they couldn't be re-sentenced for it, but that doesn't prevent any ongoing disadvantages in other respects. Look at, for instance, the fact that that offence will turn up on DBS checks and debar from various areas of employment; that you may not be able to get visas for certain countries; that if it was a driving offence your insurance costs will go up; that, if it's an offence such as child abuse or neglect, it is likely to go against you in any subsequent child care dispute; etc etc.

Talking of which, it was a bit off for Elizabeth to talk about Freddie's offence as a one-off mistake. Drug dealing is hardly a mistake, and she knows perfectly well that Freddie committed the offence several times.

Alice is clearly desperate to go on a binge. I wonder how long till she gives way to temptation.

They've got a lot of mileage out of Susan's radio show in the last few months, haven't they?

Alice is clearly desperate to go on a binge

Definitely! I thought it sounded as if she was revisiting the fast-and-bumpy-ride/miscarriage/termination idea - ‘this is something I have to do myself.’

They've got a lot of mileage out of Susan's radio show in the last few months, haven't they?

It can get a bit annoying, but it really was a bit of a stroke of genius as a cv19 emergency device.

I agree - with limited casts they need to make the most of the small number of three dimensional characters.

But apart from getting mileage out of Susan herself, it was a good device for diverse people interacting remotely other than a series of personal phone calls.

Mildly amusingly - immediately after this afternoon's repeat Emerald O’Hanrahan (Emma) will be playing a character called Kirsty in this:

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09rz655

I listened to that, I knew I recognised the voice. I think Alice should have a termination, then bloody get divorced.