Castiel233 Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Here at home in Blighty (the land of fish and chips and Hugh Grant) a mother died and very specifically left her estranged adult daughter nothing in her will. She could not have made it clearer that her daughter was to get nothing. The pair had fallen out years and years ago, so the mother had left her entire estate (£500.000) to animal charities. The daughter has spent 8 years having the will overturned and basically won. A judge has awarded her £164.000, from the mum's estate, as the daughter was on benefits. This is a dreadful ruling , which makes a mockery of having a will in the first place. So you can make a will, a disgruntled relative can now how it overturned.... The mum might have well as not bothered, and the judge has made the law an ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Laws/Rules - are meant to be broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 I was just reading this morning about a case around 400 B.C. on the Greek island of Aegina. An aristocrat had left his estate to a childhood friend, whom he also named his adoptive son. The half-sister of the dead man then sued, claiming that natural family ties were grounds for the will to be overturned. Only the friend's lawyer's speech survives; we don't know how the suit turned out. Family members exert a lot of clout. This is probably why the dead man adopted his friend, perhaps foreseeing what the half-sister would do after his death. It's a situation that helps explain a rationale for same-sex marriage, to get the partner "anthropologically" into the family. Who is paying the court costs in the case in the OP? All they all coming out of the portion that remains to go to the animal charities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 The judge may have seen it as a way to take her off the dole courtesy of dead mom (who's really not going to care at this point). Yeah, animals lose some money but tax payer's win a bit of relief (assuming she doesn't just blow it overnight and go back on benefits). mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daffodil Posted July 28, 2015 Share Posted July 28, 2015 Good reason to give it all away well before you die. Keep just enough to live on and there will be nothing to fight over when you're gone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Here at home in Blighty (the land of fish and chips and Hugh Grant) a mother died and very specifically left her estranged adult daughter nothing in her will. She could not have made it clearer that her daughter was to get nothing. The pair had fallen out years and years ago, so the mother had left her entire estate (£500.000) to animal charities. The daughter has spent 8 years having the will overturned and basically won. A judge has awarded her £164.000, from the mum's estate, as the daughter was on benefits. This is a dreadful ruling , which makes a mockery of having a will in the first place. So you can make a will, a disgruntled relative can now how it overturned.... The mum might have well as not bothered, and the judge has made the law an ass Whether a will should be overturned depends on the facts and circumstances of each particular case. Apparently, the estranged daughter provided sufficient evidence for the court to rule as it did. Whether the mother was incompetent, improperly influenced by others or defrauded, or something else can only be determined by reviewing the public court record and reading the court's written opinion on the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daffodil Posted July 29, 2015 Share Posted July 29, 2015 Usually, in the USA, if somebody does not want an estranged child to get anything, in order to avoid such a situation, they can leave them $1.00. That is what my Father-in-law did when he died to his son. My wife and her sister got the estate 50/50. My wife's brother never tried to challenge the will. How does that prevent them from contesting the will? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Usually, in the USA, if somebody does not want an estranged child to get anything, in order to avoid such a situation, they can leave them $1.00. That is what my Father-in-law did when he died to his son. My wife and her sister got the estate 50/50. My wife's brother never tried to challenge the will. How does that prevent them from contesting the will? His wife's brother is 3 and to him a dollar is a lot of money. They paid him in pennies which made it look like he got even more. He would have cried if he had gotten nothing. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Usually, in the USA, if somebody does not want an estranged child to get anything, in order to avoid such a situation, they can leave them $1.00. That is what my Father-in-law did when he died to his son. My wife and her sister got the estate 50/50. My wife's brother never tried to challenge the will. How does that prevent them from contesting the will? It doesn't completely stop them from contesting it, but the fact you left SOMETHING, be it minuscule, they acknowledge and realize the deceased was thinking and of sound mind when the will was put together. The Legal Eagle speaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts