Contesting A Will

[Rod Serling]

MY WIFE'S UNCLE HAS JUST DIED. WE BELIEVE A LOCAL SOLICITOR, WHO WAS TENOUSLY KNOWN TO THE DECEASED, HAS GOT HIM TO WRITE A NEW WILL (ABOUT A YEAR AGO) IN HIS (THE SOLICTOR'S) FAVOUR, ALTHOUGH WE DONT KNOW THIS UNTIL THE WILL IS READ. MY WIFE (WHO IS ONE OF FOUR NEPHEWS & NIECES) ARE THE ONLY REMAINING BLOOD RELATIVES. THEY AE NOT, HOWEVER DEPENDANTS AS SUCH, BUT THEY ARE MORE FLESH & BLOOD THAN THE SOLICITOR, WHO WAS JUST A 'FRIEND' TO THE DECEASED, AND HAD NOT FEATUIRED IN THE PREVIOUS WILL, NOR WAS HE A FRIEND AT THE TIME THE DECEASED LOST HIS WIFE SOME 18 MONTHS AGO - ALL A BIT STRANGE! YES, IT DOES SOUND LIKE SOUR GRAPES ON MY WIFE'S FAMILY'S PART NOW. I GUESS, AS A SOLICITOR, HE HAS TO BE WHITER THAT WHITE WHEN AR AS THE LAW IS CONCERNED, OR HE WILL BE HAULED OVER THE COALS BY THE LAW SOCIETY. HE WOULD BE AWARE OF THE LAW A LOT MORE THAN US MERE MORTALS, THOUGH! THE DECEASED DID HAVE HIS MARBLES AT THE TIME OF DEATH, SO IT WILL BE VERY HARD TO CONTEST, AND WE'RE NOT DEPENDANT...

[woofgang]

where is the will, who is the executor? I am not a legal eagle but if your wife's uncle was of sound mind and he had no dependants you may be on a very sticky wicket indeed.

[bednobs]

here is no obligation on anyone (in engish law) to leave estate to their flesh and blood. I'm not sure what advice you want but as you don't even know what is in the will, i don't really see what your problem is.. there is no such thing as "reading" a will (a la agatha christie!)

[tamborine]

Issue a caveat to the Probate Office of the deceased. Its a warning to NOT probate the Will. 1.Best do it asap before probate. You get 3mts to give reasons, with evidence. A Will in favour of extended family is good enough reason.

http://www.probate.uk.com/how_long_contest_will.html

2. Mediation between contestors & benificiary is called.

3. Unresolved mediation leads to Court case, (loser pays costs).

[woofgang]

Tambo a previous will in favour of someone else, even family, is NOT a good enough reason alone. Your link is to a commercial firm who deal in contesting wills therefore not precisely disinterested.

[tamborine]

A previous Will is good reason in these circumstances.

Warn (caveat) Probate office.

[tamborine]

See here

https://www.gov.uk/wills-probate-inheritance/stopping-a-grant-of-representation

[New Judge]

I’m not so sure that you have a good enough reason. This is not my area of expertise (hopefully Barmaid will pick this up) but I do know that the grounds to contest a will are very limited. From memory:

- The will must be properly written and witnessed

- The deceased must know of and approve its terms and have the mental capacity to decide how to dispose of his assets.

- The will must not have been forged or made and signed under coercion

- There are provisions in the 1975 Inheritance Act to override the contents of a will if dependant family members (who must have been dependents before the deceased’s death) have not been provided for.

But largely that’s about it. From what you say none of the above applies. Simply disliking or disapproving of its contents is not a good enough reason to contest the will.

[woofgang]

Tambo your link is to stopping the issuance of a grant of representation, which is what is issued when there is no will, on the grounds that a will does exist, which is a different situation from the OP's

The OP is not disputing that a will exists, what they are saying is that it may not be the same as the previous will.

[tamborine]

Woof, original op q says a new Will is written. From that I presume there is an old Will.

[New Judge]

If the will is written properly in its preamble it will renounce any and all previous wills. Because a later will differs fro an earlier one, even substantially, that is not a valid reason to challenge it.

[woofgang]

ineed Tambo, I presumed that there was an old will as well which makes your link irrelevant as its about the situation where someone has applied for letters of administration on the basis that there is no will and someone else wishes to contest on the grounds that there is a will.

[Buenchico]

As has been said above, nobody is ever obliged to leave a single penny to any member of their family. Indeed, the very purpose of writing a will can often be to ensure that the intestacy rules, which would otherwise see the estate going to family members, are NOT applied. (My own will makes it extremely clear that no member of my family will inherit upon my own death).

If you're considering challenging a will you need to decide what grounds you intend to challenge it upon. You can either contest the will as a whole or seek a court order to have its provisions varied.

To contest the will as a whole you'll need to be able to show that one of the reasons listed here applies:
http://www.hughjames.com/service/contested-wills-trusts-and-estates/contesting-a-will/grounds-for-contesting-a-will/
(Although that's a commercial website it still provides an excellent summary of the relevant grounds that may be used to contest a will).
However nothing in what you've written suggest to me that you've got any valid grounds to contest the will as a whole.

To seek a court order varying the provisions of the will (on the grounds that they had failed to make 'reasonable provision' for you) you must be a spouse of the deceased (or a person who was regarded as such by the deceased), a former spouse who has not remarried, a child of the deceased (or a person treated as such by the deceased) or a person who was either wholly or partially maintained by the deceased. Since none of those would appear to apply in your case, I can see valid reason which would enable you to obtain an order varying the provisions of the will.

In short, I think that you'll simply be wasting your time.

[Buenchico]

^^^Typo!

" . . . I can see no valid reason which would enable you to obtain an order varying the provisions of the will"

[atalanta]

If you think you can prove some sort of fraud, dishonesty or coercion on the part of the person who inherits, you had better be very sure of yourself. If the person who inherits is proved in court to have meddled with the will or coerced the uncle, the will may be declared null and void. Which is not to say that any former will would be reinstated.

[Jackdaw33]

Although I agree with all the advice given, it is somewhat academic until you know the contents of the will. A will is a public document, copies of which can be obtained from the probate office.

[Buenchico]

>>>Although I agree with all the advice given, it is somewhat academic until you know the contents of the will

Enter a 'standing search' with the probate registry:
https://www.gov.uk/wills-probate-inheritance/searching-for-probate-records

[Barmaid]

Seek legal advice on this, because this is a complicated area and you will need a specialist to deal with it.

There is a principle whereby if someone drafts a Will whereby they take a significant benefit, that should be sufficient to "excite the suspicion of the court" - see for example Wintle v Nye which sounds similar to your case. The Law Society also has some relatively strict rules on this area.

I really would urge you to seek legal advice before you do anything. Probably best from a member of ACTAPS (either solicitor or counsel). But go to a specialist.

[Buenchico]

If you want to read the dry legal facts of the case referred to by Barmaid, see here:
http://swarb.co.uk/wintle-v-nye-hl-1959/

If you'd prefer a more entertaining account, see here!
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/test-of-will-goes-to-court/67103.fullarticle

[woofgang]

Brilliant Chris!!