Executing a controversial will

[Prudie]

Would you be OK with accepting to be an executor if you knew all the estate was going to charity and some family members will see red?

[DTCwordfan]

Yes, if I hated the family members involved.

[wolf63]

All my money is going to my cats and whoever takes care of them - I will be unpopular.

[Prudie]

Similar situation wolfe, it is for animal charities.
DT I don't hate them but I'm not close either (they are all step family including the person who's asked me).

[DTCwordfan]

all mine goes to my children. My ex will get £10 as a deliberate act that I have thought of her.

[albaqwerty]

excuse my ignorance, but if one was to be an executor of a will, surely the only time you would know the contents is after they are dead, or am I missing something?

I am here to learn :)

[237SJ]

Yes. I would be completely happy in that I have been appointed to do a job and I have to do it (regardless of my personal feelings)

[dzug2]

Yes you are missing something. There is nothing to stop the executor seeing the will as soon as it is made - or even before. He doesn't have the RIGHT to do so, but there is nothing wrong in it.

I personally wouldn't accept executorship in such circumstances and would suggest making a representative of the charity executor - let him deal with the flak.

[DTCwordfan]

alba, it is usual courteous to ask the potential executor before you snuff it, as there are legal responsibilities in accepting - that allows for any verbal instruction, advice etc to be "transferred" before the will comes into effect, not the specifics re amounts, but principles, especially if there are "situations" to be considered post mortem.

[DTCwordfan]

usually

[Prudie]

I think alba that the will writer is at liberty to give copies of wills out to whom they wish (I and my brother had our mother's long before she died).
I am not a beneficiary and never expected to be. I just know her living sisters (who would inherit if no will was written) already have designs on the estate and will be very angry about not getting any of it. I'm just anticipating trouble.

[dzug2]

I would add that the charity can be as difficult as the relatives in such cases.

[ladybirder]

I wouldn't want to do it Prudie in all honesty. It's a thankless task which will be made worse if the will is challenged. Unless I was particularly fond of the person who had asked me I would refuse as I see only hassle ahead. But of course you may be able to take it all in your stride, especially if you've done it before.

[Barmaid]

You don't actually accept the office of executor until the person dies. At that point it is up to the executor whether they decide to accept the office or renounce their right. It would then be up to the residuary beneficiaries to take out the Grant of Representation.

I personally wouldn't care, but then I've acted as a professional executor for more years than I care to remember.

If it came to a fight between the family and the charity and the executor decided to carry on with his/her role in those circumstances it is best for the executor to take a neutral role and agree to accede to any order the Court makes letting the charity and the family fight it out between them.

[Barmaid]

And tbh, leaving all your estate to charity is not controversial (although the family may see it as such). English law allows a testator to be capricious and dispose of his estate as he wishes. As long as he has testamentary capacity, it complies with the formalities of the Wills Act 1837 and there is no undue influence we have the joy of testamentary freedom in this country - unlike some jurisdictions where a certain proportion MUST got to nearest relatives.