Unhappy families – challenging inheritance issues
The outcome of a recent High Court case is a warning for anyone challenging a will.
As inheritances become more valuable, the number of disputes about wills have increased. Court cases rose by almost 50% to 188 in 2019 compared to the previous year according to the latest Ministry of Justice figures. Many more are settled or abandoned along the way. The cases which do reach the High Court tend to be those involving the ‘right’ mix of large sums and elevated emotions. An example that appeared in April 2021 is Miles v Shearer.
Tony Shearer died in October 2017, leaving nearly all of an estate worth about £2.2m to his second wife, Pamela. His two daughters, Juliet and Lauretta, born in the early 1980s to his first wife, received nothing. This prompted them to make a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.
Lauretta wanted a payment from her father’s estate to cover:
· The cost of a home, so that she could move out of her mother’s property;
· Fees for training as a dog behaviourist, to enable her to support herself; and
· The expenses of caring for her autistic daughter.
Juliet sought funds to:
· Reduce her mortgage by about £245,000, so that it would become affordable for her on a repayment basis: and
· Buy out her ex-husband’s share of a flat in which she was living – about another £100,000.
In 2008, shortly after his divorce, Tony gave £177,000 to Juliet and £185,000 to Lauretta. At the time he made clear there would be no further financial support to his daughters. This was an important factor in the case as it reinforced the decisions Tony made in the creation of his will.
The judge rejected the claims of both daughters, stating that neither had established a need for maintenance to be funded from their father’s estate.
Two lessons can be drawn from the case:
· Make your intentions clear in advance to try to reduce potential disappointment and the likelihood of legal action when a will is finally read.
· Tony’s will achieved what he wanted to happen. Had he left matters to English intestacy laws, Pamela would have received only £125,000 and personal chattels outright, with Juliet and Lauretta immediately jointly receiving half the residue (less about £285,000 of inheritance tax).
The Financial Conduct Authority does not regulate estate planning and Will advice.
Articles on this website are offered only for general informational and educational purposes. They are not offered as and do not constitute financial advice. You should not act or rely on any information contained in this website without first seeking advice from a professional. Past performance is not a guide to future performance and may not be repeated. Capital is at risk; investments and the income from them can fall as well as rise.