And they also do it in case one of them has an undeclared child and may wish to make provision for that child etc ! Great pressure can be brought to bear on people to make wills.
Last edited:
And they also do it in case one of them has an undeclared child and may wish to make provision for that child etc ! Great pressure can be brought to bear on people to make wills.A solicitor who I contacted about such matters recently told me that they even have a policy of speaking to each spouse individually as there is often a conflict of views on what's best or what the aim/goal is in relation to a will between the married couple themselves!
A will costs relatively little, and you can make it include children yet to be born, I've done so.
And they also do it in case one of them has an undeclared child and may wish to make provision for that child etc ! .
I just dont see the point in having a Will if you want your estate to be passed as per the standard inheritance rules. Whats the point? Why over complicate things? A Will is a much weaker document than standard inheritance rules, so why do one? Are you familiar with the phrase "If it ain't broken dont fix it". You've nothing to gain and everything to lose as there is always the risk that there will be a mistake, challenge or legal complication with the Will.
Isn't there some assumption in Irish law that the children of a marriage are de facto fathered by the husband even if this is not actually the case?What if one of the children was not fathered by the husband but has been passed off as his? Does this child have the same inheritance rights as the other 3?
When my father died intestate our solicitor told us my mother had a legal right to reside in the family home until the end of her days if she wished, despite 'only' owning 2/3 of it and my brother and myself owing the remaining 1/3-we could not force the sale of it. Hypothetically we could force the sale of the non-family home parts of the estate. This may be wrong, but it's what our solicitor told us.Be careful. Intestacy rules may not achieve the desired result.
If assets are e.g. in the sole name of one of the parents and that parent is the one to die first then under intestacy the estate is shared among surviving spouse and children. This can cause major problems when the surviving spouse and the children disagree as to the next steps. It can result e.g. in a situation where an elderly widow's children can force her to sell, what she most likely thought of as, family assets so they can take their share immediately.
When my father died intestate our solicitor told us my mother had a legal right to reside in the family home until the end of her days if she wished, despite 'only' owning 2/3 of it and my brother and myself owing the remaining 1/3-we could not force the sale of it. Hypothetically we could force the sale of the non-family home parts of the estate. This may be wrong, but it's what our solicitor told us.
Hi
How about your parents make a will that the house goes to you and then on your death it goes to the other siblings? Thats what my grandparents did.
They had 4 daughters (including my mum). They had a farm and my aunt who never married and had no kids was living with them looking after them. The other 3 children lived in various parts of Ireland. The farm and house were in my gran's name - she was an only child who had inherited it from her parents and she made a will that when she and my granddad died my aunt got the place for her life and on my aunt's death it went to the other 3 daughters. It meant when my grandparents did die my aunt stayed in the house and it couldn't be sold from under her. My aunt died and my mum and her other 2 sisters got the place equally between them and then its up to them what to do with their shares.
The potential problems there are first that a life estate such as that is virtually worthless for raising a mortgage which might be essential for maintaining the property, and second the potential CAT implications for the other siblings - CAT may be payable on the gift, so they may have to pay tax, and get no tangible benefit for several years. Its something worth considering, but its not necessarily the best option.
I stand corrected Bronte, thank you.
Another issue that merits investigation is whether or not the family home (and any other properties held) are in joint names, or one name.
If their is a will, and the property/s are in joint names, the property is automatically excluded from calculation of the deceased persons estate, as it reverts to the remaining joint name. This can save thousands in solicitors probate fees.
Food for thought!
If the properties are in the name of one parent, and that parent subsequently demises, the properties
No, Dazza21ie, unfortunately I am unaware of that law (not a solicitor!), and yes, sometimes the money spent on solicitors fees is indeed money well spent.
My points are simple.
1. 'No will' means default solicitor involvement in taking out probate, equals unnecessary expense. Some people may elect to employ a solicitor anyway.
2. Where a will exists, a named executor may take out probate on the deceased persons estate. It requires some work (and exercise) on the part of the executor, but it is very achievable, and possible to complete in many instances sooner than a solicitor (obviously depending on the solicitor!)
Having done it myself, I found it to be painless, and in my particular case I saved approximately €16,000 for my mother. I would rather that money remain in her pocket than in someone elses.
I found www.citizensadvice.ie to be an excellent service in this regard. Believe me, I have nothing against solicitors, but this particular exercise does not require one in the majority of everyday cases where a will exists.
VBR, W&P.