As of today, should you die without leaving a will, I understand that the complex scenario where half uncles got three quarters of the tax exempt portion of the first 10% that hasn't been left to a second cousin as long as you don't have a sister older than 42 has all been swep' away.
Now, if you have a spouse or "civil partner" then they get the lot, end of.
As in my case I always intended that should happen, and vice versa, and still haven't got around to making a will, the pressure is somewhat off.
I think.
|
>> Now, if you have a spouse or "civil partner" then they get the lot, end
>> of.
Not if you have children they don't.
Apart from who gets what aspect making a will make life far simpler for your surviving partner. Doesn't cost much. Just don't understand the reluctance to make a will.
|
Not intending to pop my clogs any time soon I have a very brief will.
It does contain the obligatory "night in a haunted house" clause simply because I thought it was amusing.
|
>> Not if you have children they don't.
Indeedy. In that circumstance wife takes first £250k and half of remainder. Children get other half of remainder split equally between them - held on trust until age 18 if they're minors at date of death.
More here: www.theguardian.com/money/2014/sep/20/wills-inheritance-changes-intestacy-rules
Wouldn't need much of a house to be well over £250k, at least in south of England. If husband and wife own house as joint tenants then deceased's share would pass to survivor and not (AIUI) be part of estate for intestacy purposes.
Important point to note is that so called Common Law spouses still get nothing on intestacy. If hey are to benefit either a will is needed or they can be protected by joint tenancy of house and assets/bank accounts in joint names.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 1 Oct 14 at 10:22
|
>> Wouldn't need much of a house to be well over £250k, at least in south
>> of England. If husband and wife own house as joint tenants then deceased's share would
>> pass to survivor and not (AIUI) be part of estate for intestacy purposes.
Indeed, our abode (and any mortgage) has always been in joint names so that it reverts to the surviving partner. (it also make it easier in the event of divorce!)
|
|
Ah, yes, I didn't make it clear I meant childless couples.
|
|
Maybe the change is down to Brussels. The law in France has been for a surviving spouse top inherit all unless there are children, in which case they get half between them.
|
>> Maybe the change is down to Brussels. The law in France has been for a
>> surviving spouse top inherit all unless there are children, in which case they get half
>> between them.
I think we can safely assume that if this was an EU directive the usual suspects would be hollering from the rooftops.
The changes follow a review of intestacy law by the Law Commission with its recommendations being implemented in part:
lawcommission.justice.gov.uk/areas/intestacy-and-family-provision-claims-on-death.htm
The commission went further than current govt would sanction in proposing certain rights for unmarried partners.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 1 Oct 14 at 11:48
|
I guess my reluctance is a perception that it's complex and expensive if you use a solicitor. In my case, add to that the logistical problems of physically doing it and I've not yet got over the line.
This (mis?)conception has been re-affirmed by my mother in law's recent experiences trying to make a will.
It was, you would think, as simple as could be - split the estate between two daughters, and that's your lot - but took four visits to the solicitor, a lot of worry on her part when they told her she really needed a trust and so on, with numerous what-ifs about one or both daughter pre-deceasing her and in which order, and that the bill for doing it would (literally) be in the thousands, and when that was all put to one side as she didn't want to do it, a hard sell instead to be named as executors at a percentage of the estate when the time comes, and when THAT was put to one side, numerous attempts to get basic names on the paperwork right, and a final outcome of a bill of about £500. She found it intensely stressful, and was reduced to tears a few times, which was a bit heart breaking. I'm sure she was very unlucky, and I'm sure they were just doing their job, but it was the local solicitors who dealt with the family before, not some yellow pages randomness, which is what I'd end up with.
Put me off it did.
|
If you just want to leave everything to your partner you can easily make the will yourself without involving a solicitor. Plenty of on line guides or books and you can buy will forms at WH Smith. It really isn't difficult.
www.whsmith.co.uk/dept/stationery-legal-forms-12x00007
|
We were recently involved in reviewing my Mothers estate. Trusted family solicitor and her financial adviser both involved. As above, estate split two ways after a handful of pecuniary legacies.
Trusts were discussed primarily as means of passing money to grandchildren on my/my sister's death (should we not need it) without a second cut of IHT. It might also provide an element of control from 'beyond the grave' against eventuality of money passing out of family should either my sister's spouse or mine inherit the loot on our respective death and re-marry, want to bale out their own siblings etc.
It was sensible advice and they'd be potentially negligent if it were not offered.
I'm fortunate in that, although not having a legal qualification, I spent 35 years working in a legal environment and am therefore reasonably clued up on such stuff. Without that and with a natural wariness or fear of lawyers I might have been a lot less relaxed about it all.
|
...in joint names...
Careful. That could mean joint tenants or tenants in common. JT is the neater one; TiC means the house is treated as two (or more) separate assets, which one tenant may require to be bought out or liquidated in the event of a divorce.
(Paraphrased from my memory of Mrs Beest's explanation. She used to do this stuff for a living.)
|
>> Careful. That could mean joint tenants or tenants in common. JT is the neater one;
>> TiC means the house is treated as two (or more) separate assets, which one tenant
>> may require to be bought out or liquidated in the event of a divorce.
>> (Paraphrased from my memory of Mrs Beest's explanation. She used to do this stuff for
>> a living.)
Our solicitor was very careful to ensure we understood this when buying current Bromp towers. We wanted JT so that house passed to survivor to cover fact that at time neither of us had a will.
Co-habitees might prefer TiC, particularly in a relationship in its early years and before the arrival of children etc.
He wanted to be absolutely sure we understood difference and advantages/disadvantages of each. Proessional backside covering to a degree but he was quite right to do it.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 1 Oct 14 at 12:44
|
>>
>> Our solicitor was very careful to ensure we understood this when buying current Bromp towers.
>> We wanted JT so that house passed to survivor to cover fact that at time
>> neither of us had a will.
>>
There's also the future care-costs aspect.
One typical arrangement if for each half to leave his/her share to a trust rather than to the survivor. (Trust beneficiaries can include the survivor and children)
The important qualification is to make the arrangement years before any question of care fees arises, and make the primary reason one of efficient tax planning.
|
I think most couples main concern is to protect the home against forced sale to pay care home fees.
Trouble is it's quite expensive to set up, I think.
We really, really, want our daughter to inherit the (modest) value of our little house.
|
|
Do you think the state i.e taxpayers should pay for your care costs?
|
>> Do you think the state i.e taxpayers should pay for your care costs?
>>
You raise an interesting point.
I don't believe that the state should pay for our care home costs. However, if an individual has, by legal means, placed his major financial assets beyond the reach of the authorities, what can they do?
|
>> Do you think the state i.e taxpayers should pay for your care costs?
>>
Over many years I and my wife, through our taxes, have paid for others care costs, so a bit of reciprocity is not out of order.
|
>>
>> Over many years I and my wife, through our taxes, have paid for others care
>> costs, so a bit of reciprocity is not out of order.
>>
And of course most people don't need care, so it's like insurance really - you pay the premiums (taxes) anyway.
|
>>
>> Over many years I and my wife, through our taxes, have paid for others care
>> costs, so a bit of reciprocity is not out of order.
Doesn't really work like that though does it. Those taxes you paid and more have already been spent. The question is do you feel it right that current tax payers should pay for your care when they themselves are being forced to accept worse pensions, higher rates of taxes and lowers standards of living than you perhaps enjoyed.
|
>> .*********
curious now!
|
|
I used the word B ugger. Basically it was a warning to men and women who have separated but not divorced and are in new relationships who die without a will....their estate could go to the last place theu wanted...>!
|
|
I wonder what it will do, if anything, for those with wills but are insufficient? My family had that problem, we were told it would have been better to have burned the will and said their wasn't one. There was lumps of money not mentioned in the will. It caused a real headache, not that much but still a chunk to us, think it wad about 25k.
|
>> There was lumps of money not mentioned
>> in the will.
Surely most wills conclude with something like "And the residue I bequeathe to ..." ?
They are bound to be defficient if they only mention specific sums that don't add up to the eventual total.
|
|
Unfortunatly it didn't, just a series if amounts short of the total amount. I think it took well over a year to sort out might have been longer.
|
More of a lesson to ensure that your that your will is properly drawn up and clear rather than not leaving a will and dying intestate.
Wills don't have to be complicated and it is perfectly possible to draw up a will yourself if your requirements are simple and you want to save the couple of hundr d pound that a solicitor will charge. There are plenty of templates about. The shortest will ever proved read "All to my wife" I believe.
|
Indeed, i'm sure someone in the family asked to make sure it was up to date. And the answer was yes, unfortunately that wasn't the case.
Yes we got offered one at work last time we went somewhere less than friendly. It's just a simple form with you're info and a couple of lines to write in your requests.
|
|
My wife died intestate - as it turned out - apart from one insurance policy, which I eventually sorted everything worked out....in fact it was probably quicker and cheaper than going through probate etc, mind you I wouldn't make the same mistake again.
|
Intestacy rule change - CGNorwich
