Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. It is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

Serendipidity

Bad Will scenario.

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 309 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

Share this post


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.

Share this post


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

Share this post


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.

Share this post


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.

Share this post


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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...