RIGHTS OF BENEFICIARIES Beneficiaries in an estate have certain rights. Do these rights include the following: The right to be notified when the estate trustee (executor) applies to court for a Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee (probate). A beneficiary may make representations to the court whether or not the beneficiary has any objection to the proposed executor being appointed Regards XXXXX XXXXXXXX@XXXXXX.XXX
The executor applied for probate at probate court at holbain london without telling 6 of the beneficiaries
he was the executor.Regards shirley
The executors are not underany absolute duty to advise beneficiaries when they are making an applicationfor probate, although they are under a duty to act in the best interest of thebeneficiaries, and whatever that entails.
Is this the executor who wasappointed in the will, who has been appointed?
Can we have the backgrounddetails please?
Please confirm you are in theUK
Hi yes we are in the UK in essex
He should be agreeable toanswer all the questions put forward by the beneficiaries because he will becharging over £200 per hour for doing it. Legally, he does not have to answerany but he would probably struggle to argue that that was not in the bestinterest of the beneficiaries to answer any questions at all.
There is no final chance toask questions and no requirement that they all go through one beneficiary.Please see the previous paragraph. I would probably tell him that if he refusesto answer questions. You will refer the matter to the firm's Complaints Partnerand the Legal Complaint service at the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Bear inmind that every telephone call and every letter would probably cost £15. He canargue that it is actually in the beneficiaries best interest not answer endlessquestions from numerous beneficiaries. It all the beneficiaries all rang withthe same query, they will get the same answer, but the estate will be chargedsix times. It can reach the point where the guy cannot get anything donebecause the beneficiaries are on the phone or emailing all the time. That ismost certainly not in the beneficiary's best interest.
The same applies to the over30s trust. It's difficult to be certain without seeing the will. But if theunder 30s trust has exhausted all the money and there is then nothing left forthe over 30s, that is the way it is if that is what the will, says.
Whoever wrote the will hasleft the beneficiaries open for large executor costs over the next 20 years ifthe solicitors are administering the fund. There is nothing that can be doneabout that. In the beneficiary, for example, wants 50 quid out of the fund. Thesolicitor will probably charge £200 for administering it. Once again, there isnothing that can be done about that provided the solicitor is only chargingtime
It's not of any particularbeneficiaries business what other beneficiaries get out of the trust. He iscorrect. Beneficiaries actually have no absolute right to even see the will,although it becomes a public document once admitted to probate and can beobtained from the probate registry for just 5 pounds.
Hi Thanks for your answer but the executor is my sisters husband and he is the only executor and he is not a solictor how would the questions apply now. as there are 7 beneneficiaries myself Shirley (next of kin) my 3 children Natalie aged 33 Nikki 32 Warren 28 plus my sister ( married to the executor) Jeanette and her 2 children Gemma aged 28 harrison 25 .Regards Shirley
In which case, he cannotcharge, but is only under a duty to act in the best interest of thebeneficiaries.
What he is saying actuallymakes good practical sense, although he cannot enforce it and beneficiariescertainly cannot, unless there is an allegation that he is breaching his dutyas an executor and trustee in which case, he can be removed.
If it is simply acase of him not wanting to deal with an endless stream of trivial questionswhat he has actually said makes sense, although not legally enforceable
Just to go back to Q2 below - can the executor say that its none of the beneficiaries named on the will's business who takes money from the trust, even though the executor is supposed to be looking after the best interests of all beneficiaries, and if the money isn't all spent by the one beneficiary who has the potential to spend this fund (his son, still studying) then it comes to the other beneficiaries.
The executor has already said the only possiblity of the grandchildren trust being spent is indirectly (as his son is being paid to study in Australia) on flights backwards & forwards to the UK. Surely this is not 'aiding his education', but his airmiles. All other beneficiaries of this trust are then suffering because his son chose to study in Australia & not the UK.
Can the executor only give beneficiaries of the trust money from the trust if he deems them to 'need' it. He can't possibly know what anyone's 'need' is without seeing their bank account. But he has said it is only for those that can't afford to pay for the education 'directly or indirectly'. His son will obviously 'need' the fund in the executors eyes, because he has never had a job to earn enough to pay for it.
Also normal practice says there should be two beneficiaries - why is there only one who has all the power to interpret the will as he sees, benefitting only his family?
I think you need to blame whoever drafting the will andwhoever made these bizarre requirements or the difficulty and the uncertaintyadministering this.
The legal interpretation is that the money must be usedfor "education, maintenance and benefit" unless the will says otherwise.
There is no requirement to have two executors, it is justgood practice.
I think it unlikely that flights back into to Australiawould come into the above category, but that would be for a court to decide ifit got that far. Clearly, the executor is acting in the interest of his son, tothe detriment of residuary (over 30) beneficiaries.
It depends on the wording of the trust, but if theexecutor has the discretion, yes, he has the discretion. In which case, thebeneficiaries have to put a case forward to have money from the trust and givethe executor unreasonably refuses, then the beneficiaries faced with a courtapplication.
It is also nothing to do with any other beneficiary. Whata particular beneficiary has had or has not had out of the trust. The executoris correct in that respect.
I think however there is a conflict of interest betweenthe executor's interest in his son and the other beneficiaries interest.Whether that is enough to have the executor removed and replaced would be for acourt to decide. It might be worthwhile running this past Chancery Counsel foran advice. Expect to pay about £800 plus VAT