|
|
Post by thebfg on Jun 8, 2018 19:37:28 GMT
In my eyes it is quite simple. Two brothers both get equal shares, if one dies then the other gets it all - ignore their children. No one else involved. If both brothers die before me then I really can't be bothered about what happens. I thought that was simple but I'm being asked to sign a document that the only reference to what happens if one brother dies before me is a law that seems complex and very open to misinterpretation (mainly because it could be argued whether I understood it). I'm no expert but from what I gather the clause stops their children expecting their fathers share if he died. if he does the other would get both shares. |
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Jun 8, 2018 19:38:16 GMT
Two brothers both get equal shares, if one dies then the other gets it all - ignore their children. And there you have it. Because you are effectively excluding the children then Section 33 has to be excluded or the law would presume that they were to inherit. Without it the children could go to court and challenge the will, with most of your estate being salted into the pockets of solicitors to fight it! So no need to have a go at the solicitor for including the phrase, just for not explaining it! If I were writing your will I would be unhappy that you were not giving instructions for the possibility of your brothers predeceasing you which, as you are all going to be of a similar age (give or take). Even if the “backstop” is “charities”. Who have you chosen as your executors? Pleeeese dont tell me it’s the solicitors! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 19:58:04 GMT
Two brothers both get equal shares, if one dies then the other gets it all - ignore their children. And there you have it. Because you are effectively excluding the children then Section 33 has to be excluded or the law would presume that they were to inherit. Without it the children could go to court and challenge the will, with most of your estate being salted into the pockets of solicitors to fight it! So no need to have a go at the solicitor for including the phrase, just for not explaining it! If I were writing your will I would be unhappy that you were not giving instructions for the possibility of your brothers predeceasing you which, as you are all going to be of a similar age (give or take). Even if the “backstop” is “charities”. Who have you chosen as your executors? Pleeeese dont tell me it’s the solicitors! The executors are my brothers (I may be stupid but I'm not that stupid  ). My problem with the draft was that it assumed I knew what I was signing whilst making no reference to what I wanted in plain speak. Something I really abhor and would expect a reputable firm of solicitors to be able to challenge.
Basically I don't care what happens to anything that is left over after I die as long as it doesn't cause arguments. If my brothers pre decease me and the money goes to the government then I can live (or die) with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Jun 8, 2018 20:02:39 GMT
Well, in theory if both brothers die before you then as the will is silent on what your wishes are it becomes an intestacy and, guess what? Your brother’s children inherit!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jun 8, 2018 20:12:33 GMT
What’s wrong with your brothers’ children anyway? Young people these days need their parents and aunts/uncles to die, so they can afford to buy a house!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 20:16:05 GMT
Well, in theory if both brothers die before you then as the will is silent on what your wishes are it becomes an intestacy and, guess what? Your brother’s children inherit!! <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.279999999999973px; height: 2.9200000000000017px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_98347518" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.28px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1300px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_1833637" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.28px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 87px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_23382934" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.28px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1300px; top: 87px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_38171928" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> If that is what the majority thinks then I'll go along with it. It might be a weird view but somehow I think the majority view should prevail at times. Admittedly it might cause some problems over who is a step child/legitimate ect but thankfully I would not be part of that discussion! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 20:20:09 GMT
What’s wrong with your brothers’ children anyway? <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.279999999999973px; height: 2.9200000000000017px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_80714247" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.28px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1300px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_20167618" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.28px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 87px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_45411426" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 27.28px; height: 2.92px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 1300px; top: 87px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_70380494" scrolling="no" width="27.279999999999973" height="2.9200000000000017"></iframe> I don't have time to reply, Christmas is approaching! |
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Jun 8, 2018 20:52:24 GMT
If there are issues regarding the children you can specify that none outside the bloodline inherit
So only the fruit of your brother’s loins inherit!
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jun 8, 2018 20:55:07 GMT
If there are issues regarding the children you can specify that none outside the bloodline inherit So only the fruit of your brother’s loins inherit! It’s a slightly odd presumption if you don’t mind me saying so! If it were me I’d want to leave my money to those deserving and needy of it, not those that happened to share most of their DNA with me! (Not that I have any issue, so I suppose I’m not in a position to comment!) |
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Jun 8, 2018 21:06:09 GMT
If there are issues regarding the children you can specify that none outside the bloodline inherit So only the fruit of your brother’s loins inherit! It’s a slightly odd presumption if you don’t mind me saying so! If it were me I’d want to leave my money to those deserving and needy of it, not those that happened to share most of their DNA with me! (Not that I have any issue, so I suppose I’m not in a position to comment!) Trust me, I see it most days! Second wives/husbands trying to cut out their step children, brothers and sisters at each other’s throats because one has been left more than the others (let’s forget she gave up her job,home,life to look after ages parents when the others visited once a month at best brandishing a bunch of petrol station crysanths), The daughter in law waiting until the day her mother in law’s funeral to leave her husband because he’s worth more in the divorce settlement now than before mum in law snuffed it.. I could go on......... |
|
|
|
Post by Trina on Jun 8, 2018 22:44:01 GMT
We've done our wills twice.1st time was when we said we'd both been married before & wouldn't go there again.Fast forward 7 years to 1997 & we got married💗.We've changed bits n'bobs over the years but most things remain the same.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jun 8, 2018 22:55:21 GMT
We've done our wills twice.1st time was when we said we'd both been married before & wouldn't go there again.Fast forward 7 years to 1997 & we got married💗.We've changed bits n'bobs over the years but most things remain the same. I did our wills once, but he said he didn’t like it. |
|
|
|
Post by patty on Jun 9, 2018 5:41:13 GMT
PM dyer tribe she knows everything about this stuff...shes sorted me out... Thanks for the compliment! I would never have mentioned you had used us, client confidentiality and all that. I know u wouldn't say but thats why I did...I have peace of mind knowing my blood line gets mine...to some folks its important..was to me after what I have gone through. |
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Jun 9, 2018 7:29:06 GMT
We've done our wills twice.1st time was when we said we'd both been married before & wouldn't go there again.Fast forward 7 years to 1997 & we got married💗.We've changed bits n'bobs over the years but most things remain the same. Just checking, you’ve made wills since you got married again, right? |
|
|
|
Post by dyertribe on Jun 9, 2018 7:31:46 GMT
And there you have it. Because you are effectively excluding the children then Section 33 has to be excluded or the law would presume that they were to inherit. Without it the children could go to court and challenge the will, with most of your estate being salted into the pockets of solicitors to fight it! So no need to have a go at the solicitor for including the phrase, just for not explaining it! If I were writing your will I would be unhappy that you were not giving instructions for the possibility of your brothers predeceasing you which, as you are all going to be of a similar age (give or take). Even if the “backstop” is “charities”. Who have you chosen as your executors? Pleeeese dont tell me it’s the solicitors! The executors are my brothers (I may be stupid but I'm not that stupid ). My problem with the draft was that it assumed I knew what I was signing whilst making no reference to what I wanted in plain speak. Something I really abhor and would expect a reputable firm of solicitors to be able to challenge.
Basically I don't care what happens to anything that is left over after I die as long as it doesn't cause arguments. If my brothers pre decease me and the money goes to the government then I can live (or die) with that.
I would suggest, (back to your brothers being of a similar age to you) that you appoint a replacement, younger, executor as well. Didn't your solicitor mention any of these things? Also have you done Lasting Powers of Attorney? |
|
). My problem with the draft was that it assumed I knew what I was signing whilst making no reference to what I wanted in plain speak. Something I really abhor and would expect a reputable firm of solicitors to be able to challenge.
