Crosswords0 min ago
law
I described Jan 2010 20 relatives hoping to share £400.000 of Uncles will.A godson no relation challenged will saying godfather (no relation) said all should go to him.For 4 years the solicitorskept us in the dark. Most of you replieds and agreed wirth me they should pull fingers out and sort things We assumed the godson entitled to nothing.THis August sorted . Barristers appointed agreed to settle out of court-result 20 received £8000each godson £72000 rest fees and government.We are still in shock-how on earth did he get anything -the barristers seemed to agree he was entitled and the decision was binding.I still wonder why bother with will when someone not even a relation or mentioned in will can win
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by thos. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Bleak House (Dickens) is constantly quoted in my case of a contested Will. 3y later & solicitor has kept finances gained from Estate as his 'Success Fee' !
You're right, Wills have no value if contested. Losing contestors plead 'poverty' and pay percentage of winners legal costs...........it's all poppycock !
You're right, Wills have no value if contested. Losing contestors plead 'poverty' and pay percentage of winners legal costs...........it's all poppycock !
Goodness, tamborine, I never knew solicitors could have a 'success fee' on contested will cases. If they do, that's bad news for the estate. 'Success fees', claimed by solicitors who work on a 'no win , no fee' basis, have an enormous uplift over conventional fees. The defendant ends up paying them.
It's a scandalous system, but it's a 'good little earner' for all those case farmers who advertise on TV.You know the kind of thing: 'Are you a complete idiot who never looks where you're going or are you a man who can't be trusted with a ladder? Then ring this number and we'll scare the insurers into offering something because they know what ridiculous costs we'll get off them!'
It's a scandalous system, but it's a 'good little earner' for all those case farmers who advertise on TV.You know the kind of thing: 'Are you a complete idiot who never looks where you're going or are you a man who can't be trusted with a ladder? Then ring this number and we'll scare the insurers into offering something because they know what ridiculous costs we'll get off them!'
I can't add to what others have said about the right to challenge a will, dependency and the way 'out of court' settlements work.
But if it's any consolation, I suppose even if the godson had only received the same as each of the 20, the overall amount each person would have got is the total of £232000 divided by 21= just over £11000 each. So each person would only have got another £3000.
And if the case had continued no doubt the legal fees would have been higher and you might have ended up with less.
But if it's any consolation, I suppose even if the godson had only received the same as each of the 20, the overall amount each person would have got is the total of £232000 divided by 21= just over £11000 each. So each person would only have got another £3000.
And if the case had continued no doubt the legal fees would have been higher and you might have ended up with less.
I don't know the facts of the case, but you have been given some very good pointers above. Godson could have claimed under Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 on the basis he was receiving some form of maintenance from the deceased or under proprietary estoppel which Fredpuli described. Fact is, you should have been consulted as beneficiaries before any settlement was reached. There shoudl not be an out of court settlement in this sort of case on which the beneficiaries have not been consulted.
This sort of thing happens all the time - mainly because people do not keep their wills up to date or have them properly drafted. No barrister would have recommended a settlement unless there was a good reason - commercial, evidential, legal or otherwise.
This sort of thing happens all the time - mainly because people do not keep their wills up to date or have them properly drafted. No barrister would have recommended a settlement unless there was a good reason - commercial, evidential, legal or otherwise.
