Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • why is this in the overseas forum? as you or steadypay not in the UK?   dx  
    • I recently applied for a Sure Start Maternnity Grant and received a decision from the DWP today, declining my eligibility; under the basis that there is another child (under 16) in my family/ household. My situation is this,  I am co-habitating with my partner/ father of my new/ first baby.  Within the last 10 months, my partner's daughter from previous relationship (age 13) had to be removed from her mothers care, owing to domestic violence issues.  The family Courts are still dealing with the situation as her mother is contesting her daughter residing with us, as she wants her to return to her home/ care - so obviously there is Social Sevices involved etc. Anyway, prior to this situation arising, my partners daughter, had always resided with her mother and my partner, had regular acess etc. I have cited the Sure Start Maternity Grant Act/ Policy and the more recently published 'Restricting payment of the SSMG to first child only' -  I have to say, both have left me further confused as if you read the 'restricting payment policy/ in one paragraph, it states that in a situation where a woman has her first child and another child under 16, residing in same household/ family and is from the partners 'previous relationship' this would be considered a 'first child' and will be eligible for payment of grant. If however, the reverse applies (ie: it is the 'father/ partner' first child, then payment would not be made.   This seems pretty straightforward, but then the policy starts to contradict itself and goes on to define, the only exception for payment to more than one child, is in the case of the child living in same household, is not from partner.  Or if you are adopting a child under 1 year old/ special guardianship etc, then you are eligible. It does not offer the scenario of any childd in household under 16, from partner previous relationship being acceptable?   Can anybody please clarify this point please???  I want to challenge the decision/ request a Mandatory Reconsideration - but wanted to include my reasoning/ the point of law they have not applied correctly?   Any help advice / greatly appreciated.   thank you 
    • you don't respond LInk DCA ...the biggest fleecers there ever were know full well that: Barclaycard rarely even have enforceable CCa's for even debts from the last 10yrs, let alone one from the 1990's.!! not a chance!!   ignore until/unless you ever get a letter of claim. and read my red bits below if you aren't on a tablet or mobile.   dx
    • Looks like the 2014 TCE was ignored, or disregarded then as unless the scenario hinted at by UB is followed as in point the camera at the TV now show the serial number on the back and it is listed, there is no way that CGA could be compliant.  Don't think it could be in reality unless EA sees the goods in situ and lists them correctly. Might be big stink if there was a forced entry removal after a Virtual CGA.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 826 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi folks,

It would be valuable if any of you guys may offer an insight on my and my siblings current situation after the passing of our father a few years

 

My Dad, a successful businessman, divorced my mum years ago when I was in my early 20s.

Their marriage had been pretty dysfunctional for a long time so it wasn't surprising.

 

My Dad remarried a few years later to a subordinate from the establishment he worked for, also a divorcee.

 

After originally having some animosity towards her for the divorce, perhaps misplaced, over the ensuing years we got to know her personality.

 

To say she is materialistic, shallow, and a goldigger is an understatement.

My Dad was the exact opposite.

He was intellectual and thick skinned

she a bit of a dullard and seemed to only be interested in appearances and acquisition of new items.

 

My Dad was coerced by her to acquiesce to this over the years, antithetical to his upbringing.

We could see the change in him and there was tension but mostly civility between us and her for him.

She seemed controlling with him.

Him having to be home at certain times etc.

All of us children concurred on her personality.

He brought the majority of wealth to the relationship.

 

My Dad tragically died a few years ago in bad circumstances.

He was unconscious for a while and passed away some days later.

She was not at the hospital at the time.

 

My Dad left a TIC Will on the house leaving her a life interest and £multiple k in money, half his large pension.

The Will was generic and not personalised at all.

The beneficiaries were her kids and us equally on the house.

 

We believe it’s possible she coerced him into a will that didn't immediately allow any estate to the beneficiaries if he passed first.

She didn't offer a penny of his capital even as a token gesture.

She lives in a nice house in with no money worries.

She also refused an executor access to the will file for unknown perhaps insidious reasons.

 

One of my siblings does not need any advance on the inheritance.

I'm currently disabled living on ESA and on my uppers and my other sibling wants to move out of his flat.

We cannot do anything currently.

I may pre decease her as I have health issues.

I know it was my Dad's Will but do you think she should at least talk to us about the situation?

Maybe he was coerced.

 

We have thought of an equity release scheme but knowing her personality with money she may be obdurate and make things worse by changing her will.

Her daughters seem to be in her mold.

We all got on really closely with my dad and were devastated at his early passing.

I had a deep depression.

I am really struggling financially and this constant worrying about money and her is affecting my MH badly.

 

Is there a loan one can take out against being a beneficiary in will?

 

What can we do?

 

Thank you kindly in advance.

Edited by dx100uk
grammer spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear about your troubles.

 

One possibility is that you mention "We believe it’s possible she coerced him into a will". Undue influence is one of the legal grounds for challenging the validity of a Will. More info here.

 

https://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/knowledge/legal-articles/2013/05/24/disputing-will-undue-influence/

 

Another possibility is that you have a claim for "reasonable financial provision" under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. More info here

 

https://www.lawdonut.co.uk/personal/claiming-an-inheritance/dependants-claims-against-an-estate

 

Note that a claim for Undue Influence challenges the validity of the Will itself, and if the claim were successful the Will would be void and your father's Estate would then be dealt with under Intestacy law. But a claim under the 1975 Act accepts the validity of the Will but seeks a variation of it so family or dependants can, in some circumstances, receive funds from the Estate which were not left to them in the Will.

 

Whether you could use either of these approaches I can't say. It's a complex area of law and needs legal advice from a solicitor specialising in this. From what you've said it seems unlikely you have sufficient evidence to meet the high standard of proof needed to establish 'undue influence'. I fear that, in any event, you may have left it far too late to pursue either of these routes. Generally action needs to be taken within 6 months of Probate being granted.

 

I doubt it's possible to get loan secured on the house until the property actually passes to you. You don't have a legal interest that would allow a lender to use the house as security, your interest is only 'contingent'. That would be my first thought but it's not something I know much about.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ethel for your thoughtful insightful reply.

 

Avarice is one of the human traits I hold in least regard.

People really can be 'blinded' by love.

We only suspect he may have been coercred through nagging due to her personality, but cannot prove it and I thought there was a statutory time limit on making a claim against the legality of a Will, that will now have expired.

 

My brother as an executor and co-trustee requested that a small change of a clause be included due to very ambiguous language. She refused.

 

I will certainly investigate the two options you outlined.

Thanks awfully for the links.

 

As you mentioned though the time limit will have probably expired as he passed a few years ago.

Having no insight to her subsequent behaviour and suffering the depressive episode at the time I certainly did not have the wearwithal to investigate these routes.

 

Thanks again for the input

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites
We only suspect he may have been coercred through nagging due to her personality, but cannot prove it and I thought there was a statutory time limit on making a claim against the legality of a Will, that will now have expired.

 

The validity of a will can only be challenged before probate is granted. To delay probate, a caveat is normally entered to allow sufficient time for investigations to be completed. A suspicion is not sufficient grounds, and you would be hard pushed to find a solicitor who would take on such a case.

 

An Inheritance Act claim needs to be made within six months of probate being granted. Once again, you need good grounds for making a claim without relying on the Illot-v-Mitson case. You will also need substantial funding to pursue a case through the high court. Something in the order of £40,000 for the preliminaries and may be as much as £100,000 or more to go to trial.

 

In both contesting a will and an inheritance act claim, once outside the time limits, you can seek permission from a judge to file a claim. But you would need pretty good reason for being out of time, a strong chance of success, and a very deep pocket.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

Quote
No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.
Link to post
Share on other sites

To add to the above post: The rules in Scotland governing inheritance are different to that of England & Wales. If the deceased resided in Scotland, then it is certainly worth paying a visit to a solicitor and getting some qualified advice.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

Quote
No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Mr P for the great input.

 

I think the legal route seems to be a non starter for the expense and timing constraints.

 

It seems that we should keep her onside, hope she doesn't change her Will to only her daughters and son and just be patient.

 

Some people really are solipsistic sometimes. My executor brother should've seen the Will before my Dad's passing really.

 

Thank you again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...