# Estranged from both parents. Can they write you out of their wills ?



## georgesoros (6 Nov 2014)

I have basically been estranged from both parents who are divorced and have seen neither of them for many years. 

Both of them have significant assets in their own names.

Can they legally write me out of their wills ? What is the situation there ? They made verbal promises repeatedly over many years when I was talking to them to give me a fair share compared to my half siblings but I do not really have much faith that this is what will happen.


----------



## so-crates (6 Nov 2014)

If they have made no wills then you would have some default entitlement based on the relationship. However, the assets are theirs and they can dispose of them how they wish. There is no obligation to give anything to you or anyone else (except perhaps - in effect - the tax man!). Any historic verbal assurance would be trumped by any subsequent documentation stating otherwise.


----------



## noproblem (6 Nov 2014)

Your parents can do with "THEIR", money, assets, etc, as they want.  They're not obliged  to give you zilch. They can leave it to the dogs and cats rescue home, if that's what they want to do. Talk to them, call them, if they don't want to, there's not a lot you can do, but you'll have tried.


----------



## georgesoros (6 Nov 2014)

In a lot of countries you are legally obliged to leave something to your kids. Thats why I asked. My parents were married to each other and never married anyone again. They split up when I was 5 and I was bounced around moving fro relative to relative while they never took any responsibility. I wanted them to see their grandkid but they are not interested. I was good to them but I am not going to put them on a pedestal to connive my way into anything. I merely wanted to know- if assets remain behind, am I entitled to a share. It seems I am not.


----------



## Agent 47 (6 Nov 2014)

What do they really owe to you over a stranger or a neighbour who is in regular contact?

Forget about it, or make serious efforts to be part of their remaining lives or expect what may or probably will not be coming your way inheritance wise.


----------



## so-crates (6 Nov 2014)

No harm in asking the question georgesoros - it is a simple enough answer. You have no automatic entitlement to an inheritance and equally you have no obligation to discharge their debt if such a situation existed. In Ireland the estate belongs to the person who owns it, they can will it where they please. If they do not make a formal will then there are rules of inheritance that come into play but otherwise they are under no obligations other than those they have incurred (i.e. debts). 

I would agree with noproblem - despite, what seems from your post, a history marred they are your family and they are your child's family. You would always hope that their time while they are alive would be more valuable than their money when they are dead so perhaps it is worthwhile trying to engage them again. Not for any wish or hope of inheritance from them (though you can always ask or ask on behalf of your child if that is what you wish) but rather for that intangible benefit that comes from knowing your family, your connections and your history. An open door can always be walked through and maybe some day they will.

Good luck


----------



## monagt (7 Nov 2014)

> However, the assets are theirs and they can dispose of them how they wish





> Your parents can do with "THEIR", money, assets, etc, as they want. They're not obliged to give you zilch. They can leave it to the dogs and cats rescue home, if that's what they want to do. Talk to them, call them, if they don't want to, there's not a lot you can do, but you'll have tried.



No, In Ireland, you can go to court and you will get a share, talk to a Solicitor asap for professional advice as anything said here is ONLY an opinion.


----------



## Buddyboy (7 Nov 2014)

As far as I know (I am not a solicitor), there is legislation to ensure that *children *are catered for in a parents will (and the will can be contested if there is no provision for them).
However, when you attain *adulthood*, then you no longer have any right to anything from your parents estate, if they choose to not leave anything to you.

I think there is a small wrinkle, where due to mental capacity or such, that they may have to provide for dependant adults and again, the will can be contested on this basis.

I am inferring from your posts that you are an adult, (with childern of your own), and therefore not entitled to anything from your parents estate.

Edit to add:  Based on subsequent posts, it looks like the definition of child is not limited to underage children, but that you remain a "child" of the person even into adulthood.  I am therefore incorrect above.  I'm just leaving it here as it is quoted in subsequent posts.


----------



## Sarenco (7 Nov 2014)

Buddyboy said:


> As far as I know (I am not a solicitor), there is legislation to ensure that *children *are catered for in a parents will (and the will can be contested if there is no provision for them).
> However, when you attain *adulthood*, then you no longer have any right to anything from your parents estate, if they choose to not leave anything to you.
> 
> I think there is a small wrinkle, where due to mental capacity or such, that they may have to provide for dependant adults and again, the will can be contested on this basis.
> ...


 

This is incorrect.  

Section 117 of the Succession Act 1965 gives a child of *any* age who has been un- or under-provided for the option of applying to the High Court for provision out of his or her parent’s estate.  

Obviously detailed legal advice should be sought by anybody contemplating making an application to the court under this provision.


----------



## monagt (7 Nov 2014)

> However, when you attain adulthood, then you no longer have any right to anything from your parents estate, if they choose to not leave anything to you.



Not correct.


----------



## stephnyc (7 Nov 2014)

Just to change the emphasis.. 



Sarenco said:


> Section 117 of the Succession Act 1965 gives a *child* of any age who has been un- or under-provided for the option of applying to the High Court for provision out of his or her parent’s estate



A child is anyone under 18, no?

Interestingly, the revenue site states 'Son/Daughter' not 'Child' when discussing CAT Thresholds Group A, and such like, which is much less ambiguous.
http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/cat/thresholds.html

Regardless, it must be expensive to take a case like this and ultimately not worth it, unless they are vastly wealthy. OP, are we talking millions? Could you state under oath that you were not provided for as a child? If not, assume you get nothing, and anything extra is a bonus!


----------



## Sarenco (7 Nov 2014)

stephnyc said:


> Just to change the emphasis..
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No, you don't cease to be somebody's child upon reaching 18 (or any other age), although an applicant's age and circumstances are certainly relevant in judging the likelihood of success of any application under Section 117.

From the limited details provided by the OP, I think it would definitely be worth consulting with a solicitor.  There is a significant body of case law on Section 117 and a good solicitor should be able to give the OP an informed view as to whether an application under Section 117 would be worth pursuing.  Applications under Section  117 must be made within strict time limits so it would be advisable for the OP to consult with a solicitor at an early stage.

It may be worth pointing out that if either parent dies without leaving a will, any surviving children will be legally entitled to share in at least one third of that parent's estate.


----------



## georgesoros (7 Nov 2014)

Agent 47 said:


> What do they really owe to you over a stranger or a neighbour who is in regular contact?



They should have been my family. Instead they hurt me deeply, calling me family as I grew up when in front of others for show but basically treating me very badly in private and when away from the people they always tried to impress. When I had a child of my own I realised that even more.



Sarenco said:


> No, you don't cease to be somebody's child upon reaching 18 (or any other age), although an applicant's age and circumstances are certainly relevant in judging the likelihood of success of any application under Section 117.
> 
> From the limited details provided by the OP, I think it would definitely be worth consulting with a solicitor.  There is a significant body of case law on Section 117 and a good solicitor should be able to give the OP an informed view as to whether an application under Section 117 would be worth pursuing.  Applications under Section  117 must be made within strict time limits so it would be advisable for the OP to consult with a solicitor at an early stage.
> 
> It may be worth pointing out that if either parent dies without leaving a will, any surviving children will be legally entitled to share in at least one third of that parent's estate.



Thanks for this. How much would an application under section 117 cost me do you think ? Would I be able to claim court costs against the estate ? I suspect my half siblings would oppose me for money reasons. Being the eldest- I was very good to them growing up before any of us had any concept of money but they share some traits with the parents, lack of empathy for others, sociopathy, lack of interesting in visiting their niece since she was born etc.


----------



## Sarenco (8 Nov 2014)

georgesoros said:


> How much would an application under section 117 cost me do you think ? Would I be able to claim court costs against the estate ? I suspect my half siblings would oppose me for money reasons. Being the eldest- I was very good to them growing up before any of us had any concept of money but they share some traits with the parents, lack of empathy for others, sociopathy, lack of interesting in visiting their niece since she was born etc.



Section 117 is a mechanism whereby relief can be sought from the court in circumstances where a parent has failed to adequately provide for his/her child in accordance with his/her means and the applicant has a need.  

Put crudely, this is all about money.  It may sound cold but it is important to understand that no court order can change the past or repair a broken relationship.

An experienced solicitor can guide you on the viability of any possible application under Section 117 and can address your questions on the process and costs of such an application.  The Law Society can put you in touch with an appropriate solicitor in your area and most solicitors will only charge a nominal fee (if anything at all) for an initial consultation.

I would like to wish you good luck however you decide to proceed.


----------



## georgesoros (9 Nov 2014)

Sarenco said:


> Section 117 is a mechanism whereby relief can be sought from the court in circumstances where a parent has failed to adequately provide for his/her child in accordance with his/her means and the applicant has a need.
> 
> Put crudely, this is all about money.  It may sound cold but it is important to understand that no court order can change the past or repair a broken relationship.
> 
> ...



Thanks. Sure it is about money but somebody has to get the money, this Section 117 option is for when there is nothing remaining but money and I see no reason why I should not have an equal share to my siblings. In fact , I believe my siblings may have exploited the narcissism and weak character of my parents.  Long story.


----------



## monagt (9 Nov 2014)

The finds could have been dispersed before the last parent is deceased, and that is that, as they say.


----------



## Sarenco (9 Nov 2014)

georgesoros said:


> Thanks. Sure it is about money but somebody has to get the money, this Section 117 option is for when there is nothing remaining but money and I see no reason why I should not have an equal share to my siblings. In fact , I believe my siblings may have exploited the narcissism and weak character of my parents.  Long story.



No problem but the point I was trying to emphasise is that the policy underlying Section 117 is to allow for relief where the circumstances of a child are such that that child might reasonably expect support from a parent, having regard for their means.  Section 117 is not about ensuring that all children get an equal share of a parent's estate  (or any share for that matter) but rather it is intended to provide a means whereby a child may seek adequate provision from a parent's estate having regard for their needs.


----------

