Challenge to a will

[ElizabethS]

A relative died leaving his house to one person, and everything else (money and land), equally divided, between a group of beneficaries. One of the beneficiaries claims that the land element was promised to him, and he wants agreement from all the other beneficaries to cede that land to him. At this stage I do not know if he is offering to give up his claim to the other assets.

My first question: can the first person take possession of the house whilst the rest of the will is unresolved?

Second: if a beneficary dies whilst things remain unresolved, does their share go back into the pot?

Third: is the unhappy person's request usual and is there a standard process for changing the division of assets?

Fourth: what is the role of the administrator in all of this, can he speak for the unhappy party?

Many thanks

 

[dazza21ie]

Q1 - Legally it is for him to prove that the house should be his. In practice if he moves into to the house does anybody want to go and remove him?
Q2 - No. That beneficaries share will pass under his/her estate.
Q3 - It happens quite a bit. A Deed of Family Settlement could be done to re-divide the assets. Legal and tax advice should be sought about this.
Q4 - The administrator/excutor's role is to administer the estate by the terms of the will. Any unhappy party should go and get independent legal advice. If legal proceedings are taken against the estate it is the administrator/excutor who must defend/settle them. This could delay the estate.

 

[csirl]

One of the beneficiaries claims that the land element was promised to him, and he wants agreement from all the other beneficaries to cede that land to him.

Obviously he is mistaken if the Will quite clearly states otherwise. The Will is all that matters in this case.

My advice would be to allow the executor to distribute the assets strictly laid down in the Will. Once this happens, and if this person is still interested in the land, then there is nothing to stop him puchasing it from the other beneficaries if they are willing to sell to him.

I would be very relunctant to mix what are, in legal terms, different transactions i.e. distribution of assets in accordance with Will & an individual wanting to acquire some land from others. Too much risk of the whole thing ending up in a mess. Let the executor do his/her job.

 

[Vanilla]

Obviously he is mistaken if the Will quite clearly states otherwise. The Will is all that matters in this case.

Not true. People can acquire rights in all sorts of other ways. The solicitor for the executor should advise.

 

[ClubMan]

Obviously he is mistaken if the Will quite clearly states otherwise. The Will is all that matters in this case.

Not true. People can acquire rights in all sorts of other ways. The solicitor for the executor should advise.

Surely csirl is correct here? S/he is dealing with the matter of somebody claiming that something was promised to them when the will contradicts this - and not dealing with the issue of other rights/entitlements?

 

[Vanilla]

We don't know enough about the circumstances but it is possible that a person can challenge a will under the doctrine of proprietary estoppel or legitimate expectation. Of course there are other ways of challenging wills too but these seem potentially relevant just from the OP's post. Again as I said the solicitor for the executor should advise the executor based on the circumstances presented.

 

[csirl]

And if someone did have a legitimate entitlement thru some other means, this would all come out in the wash when the Will goes thru probate. So better to let it run its course rather than trash out messy deals.

One of the beneficiaries claims that the land element was promised to him,

What is the basis of his claim e.g. does he have documentary evidence of a contract or other agreement between him and the deceased or any other evidence that he has an interest in the land?

Wills can often turn up surprises with people not getting what they though they would get. Except for certain close relatives in certain circumstances, nobody has a "right" to get anything from someone's estate just because they think they deserve it.

 

[ElizabethS]

The unhappy party does not have any concrete evidence, I think he just always thought he was getting it. He does not have any closer family ties to the deceased than anyone else, he has worked on the land in the past, but now has his own business and the land is currently let. My main concern is that the elderly couple getting the house, in which they already live, are worried that their situation is in the balance (telling them not to worry doesn't have much effect). The actual beneficiary is worried that his wife may lose out if he were to die while things drag out. If his inheritance of the house can be sorted separately where do I need to start, with the administrator, solicitor?

 

[csirl]

I think he just always thought he was getting it.

This has no basis in law and he will not get it based on this alone.

If I were you, I'd stay out of any messy deals and let the Executor get the Will thru probate unhindered.

Apart from him having no entitlement to the land, you and you fellow beneficiaries have no legal right to do deals that are contrary to the wishes of the deceased. The Executor is legally obliged to distribute the estate as per the Will. Currently this land belongs to the estate until such time as it goes thru probate.

If individual members of your family want to sell or give away the land they inherit to him afterwards, then thats their choice, but its not part of the probate process and shouldnt be done before probate is granted.

Second: if a beneficary dies whilst things remain unresolved, does their share go back into the pot?

No, it goes to the beneficiaries heirs.

 

[sam h]

you and you fellow beneficiaries have no legal right to do deals that are contrary to the wishes of the deceased.

I understood there was a way around this - assuming the person is not looking for the land over and above his share of the balance of the estate.

(this is by no means a legal example, but it was the wa it was described to me when I was doing an estate for a deceased member of the family)

Say there are 3 beneficiaries & the balance of the estate (less the house) of land woth €50k and other assets worth €100k. Instead of selling the land and dividing up the proceeds, the person (or persons) could opt to take the asset/land in it's entirety and the remaining people split the money...€50k each. Again....assuming he isn't expecting the get the land + € 33.3k

 

[ElizabethS]

Many thanks to the people who replied. The field seems to be on the backburner at the moment and we have moved in another direction as detailed under Mortgages - How easy is it to create a lease?...