B
A small correction to the previous post. Where there is a will the next of kin has no automatic entitlement to a share in the estate - that only applies in intestacy. (there are some provisons whereby a child could make a claim where there is a will but the provisions are complex and not relevant here).
If an executor has not distributed after a year (that is assuming there are assets over and above those you have a remainder interest in) you can threaten to charge interest. If there are legitimate reasons for delay you won't succeed but since the executor would be personally liable for the interest it'll certainly help you get a response.
I want to be very careful here not to give a bum steer. In anything other than a very simple case, one year and even 18 months, is reasonable in terms of finalising an administration. Where there are complications regarding intestacy, social welfare or tax liabilities, missing beneficiaries, arguing beneficiares, difficulty identifying assets etc etc even those timescales are likely to be exceeded for good reason.
There is a school of thought that in a case where an executor is seriously out of line then interest can be charged after one year. I have not seen this done in practice (because there is usually good reason for delay) but a threat can produce results. You'd need to get your own solicitor to pusue this.
Surely the OP's mother is next of kin, regardless of being separated. My mother and father were separated but he died intestate and she gets 2/3 and me and my brother get 1/6 eachAs your father was separated, then you and your siblings (if any) are legally speaking his next of kin.
My solicitor told me "you can disinherit your kids (but it may be challenged as you have to reasonably provide for them) but you cannot disinherit your wife in your will".Where there is a will the next of kin has no automatic entitlement to a share in the estate - that only applies in intestacy
Have I got my wires crossed-is the spouse not considered "next of kin" at all?
Where there is a will the next of kin has no automatic entitlement to a share in the estate - that only applies in intestacy.
All these posts are very interesting and helpful. However, there are a number of past occurences which leave the OP in a very difficult and vunerable position. E.g. The business which he was due to inherit after the Partner died has been sold and moreover he is out of work. This looks as if there is a mini-war going on between the son and the partner. Therefore, I would suggest the OP finds a solicitor specialising in Will matters to offer him guidance ASAP.As for costs, as the estate has been wrongfully handled, the proceeds of the sale of the assets should be used for the payment of the legal expenses. However the op would want to act quickly if an injunction is required to freeze the assets until all matters are dealt with correctly.
All these posts are very interesting and helpful. However, there are a number of past occurences which leave the OP in a very difficult and vunerable position. E.g. The business which he was due to inherit after the Partner died has been sold and moreover he is out of work. This looks as if there is a mini-war going on between the son and the partner. Therefore, I would suggest the OP finds a solicitor specialising in Will matters to offer him guidance ASAP.As for costs, as the estate has been wrongfully handled, the proceeds of the sale of the assets should be used for the payment of the legal expenses. However the op would want to act quickly if an injunction is required to freeze the assets until all matters are dealt with correctly.
Also, when you think about it, the guideline for what would morally be the correct amount to leave to children is the legislation itself - as this is, legally, what the Irish people (as our representatives put this legislation in place) think is the correct way to distribute an estate. That moral guideline is that children should get an amount equal to half the spouses Right Share. Would be difficult to argue that any less is ok. Remember that the word "moral duty" is in the legislation in this regard and "prudence" is in the Constitution, so a conservative "prudent" outlook favouring family members over outsiders would have to be taken in Court. Also, it is in accordance with the deceased persons means NOT the childs means i.e rich father must leave something.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?