When is a deceased's "will" not a true Will?

AlorStar

When is a deceased’s “will” not a true Will?

A controversy arises concerns two equal property Administrated share out of a total of three equal property shares where one shareholder the Administrator dies and in the deceased’s will disposed of the two non-administrator party’s shares together with their own one-third equal share making the will seem as if the Administrator was the total shareholder of the three shares whereas in distribution the deceased was only equal to one shareholder.

In the will all share are disposed to one non-administrative shareholder leaving a one-time non-administrative shareholder without legal share. On querying the will with the solicitor who also helped drew up the will he replies; I will not enter into discussions with you, but only with or through your solicitor.

The advice from the “will’s” solicitor is only his opinion to what his preference is on how he would prefer to deal with the matter. Is that statement a correct assumption or is there a ruling that a person in this instance cannot represent themselves?

Legally can administrated property be disposed by Administrator through their own account? And can solicitor rebuff a challenge to withhold evidence if any giving the “Administrators” authority to dispose of shares in the way described?

Thank you for your interest.

eagle_&_bear

aaah you got to love undergraduate academic assignments

Goesague

AlorStar wrote: »

When is a deceased’s “will” not a true Will?

When it's a lie!
Why not use a reasonable size font, and language that makes some sense?

nuac

Could you set out your problem in simpler language?

Is this within our jurisdiction ( ROI )? Some of the terms used not usually used here. Note you are in the UK. We went our separate ways in 1922.

_JOE_

nuac wrote: »

Could you set out your problem in simpler language?

Is this within our jurisdiction ( ROI )? Some of the terms used not usually used here. Note you are in the UK. We went our separate ways in 1922.

AlorStar

eagle_&_bear wrote: »

aaah you got to love undergraduate academic assignments

If I was modern undergraduate academic, do you seriously think I would be posting here? Maybe, but then why isn’t the forum up to taking apart flaws in a genuine articles assignment?

AlorStar

Goesague wrote: »

When it's a lie!
Why not use a reasonable size font, and language that makes some sense?

The outcome is a lie, that’s for sure.
The font has being changed, thanks for that.
The language, I cannot change to suit every whim. Necessarily at one time I speak a kind of ‘jallapala’ (mixture of Swahili, Bemba, Shona and Afrikaans English) and later took a GCE course in English to reintegrate, so if I sound different to “Jackeens or Culchies” please forgive me my shortcomings of not thinking straight out of the Irish/English box.

Does that places us on neutral ground?

The topic condensed is this:

Three persons, equal shares in property, One shareholder is Administrator. The Administrator makes a historic lie, and over time bundles all the shares together and says to one of the two shareholders. It’s all yours. The other one is counted out.

By introduce more substance into the equation it might appear I seeking direct advice; hence it is within the Moderators formula.

However if you would like to improve my post, please feel free to do so, If you want more info, when you request that, it can be arranged.

AlorStar

nuac wrote: »

Could you set out your problem in simpler language?

Is this within our jurisdiction ( ROI )? Some of the terms used not usually used here. Note you are in the UK. We went our separate ways in 1922.

I have experienced the separation. When emigrants were leaving Ireland in the 40/50 and 60’s there was little in the way of discouragement. In fact it was necessity, and back home there was a greater necessity for the monies returned. The recipients were not asking the colour of the returns, nor how it was earned. And now instead of being moderate with EU monies have become one of the greedy P.I.G.S.

My posting is to gain insight into recover my inheritances by reclaiming back into my ownership a part of that greed. I would welcome a solicitor, but your returns to me is typical of the prejudices that a solicitor might return and if he is a hungry pig will want his snout , head, feet and backside in the through.

How do I know his reputation? His prejudices maybe the same as yours and he would have no qualms about overwhelming or doing a local deal to satisfy his devouring and wasteful appetite at my expense. I could name one, but he is protected by the law of slander. How many do you know?

AlorStar

_JOE_ wrote: »

I have experienced the separation. When emigrants were leaving Ireland in the 40/50 and 60’s there was little in the way of discouragement. In fact it was necessity, and back home there was a greater necessity for the monies returned. The recipients were not asking the colour of the returns, nor how it was earned. And now instead of being moderate with EU monies have become one of the greedy P.I.G.S.

My posting is to gain insight into recover my inheritances by reclaiming back into my ownership a part of that greed. I would welcome a solicitor, but your returns to me is typical of the prejudices that a solicitor might return and if he is a hungry pig will want his snout , head, feet and backside in the through.

How do I know his reputation? His prejudices maybe the same as yours and he would have no qualms about overwhelming or doing a local deal to satisfy his devouring and wasteful appetite at my expense. I could name one, but he is protected by the law of slander. How many do you know?

_JOE_

AlorStar wrote: »

I have experienced the separation. When emigrants were leaving Ireland in the 40/50 and 60’s there was little in the way of discouragement. In fact it was necessity, and back home there was a greater necessity for the monies returned. The recipients were not asking the colour of the returns, nor how it was earned. And now instead of being moderate with EU monies have become one of the greedy P.I.G.S.

My posting is to gain insight into recover my inheritances by reclaiming back into my ownership a part of that greed. I would welcome a solicitor, but your returns to me is typical of the prejudices that a solicitor might return and if he is a hungry pig will want his snout , head, feet and backside in the through.

How do I know his reputation? His prejudices maybe the same as yours and he would have no qualms about overwhelming or doing a local deal to satisfy his devouring and wasteful appetite at my expense. I could name one, but he is protected by the law of slander. How many do you know?

Firstly, i apologise if i caused offence, i merely thought this was a last ditch effort "copy and paste assignment question" which was phrased very badly!

Secondly, your reply is wholly unnecessary considering your initial unclear post to start with.

Thirdly, you failed to answer nuac's valid questions; "Could you set out your problem in simpler language? Is this within our jurisdiction ( ROI )? Some of the terms used not usually used here"

Finally, if you are seeking legal advice, i would suggest you contact a solicitor.

AlorStar

_JOE_ wrote: »

Hi Joe.

Rather than quote all of your post #10 The following was first said in your post#5.

Originally Posted by nuac
Could you set out your problem in simpler language?

Is this within our jurisdiction ( ROI )? Some of the terms used not usually used here. Note you are in the UK. We went our separate ways in 1922.

A couple of weeks ago I made a detailed post that the Moderator wasn’t happy with. He referred to it as “coded” and suggested I rewrite it, which I did. He was nice enough about his conclusion and deleted both.

Shortly after I made another post and someone went bellowing what’s going on, this is the 3rd same post in different words. So as to keep the peace I pulled back and noticed the user who complained wasn’t active, so I had another go by condensed the topic that has passed the Moderator and the objector. So not knowing exactly the defined boundaries, straight speaking, my post is from “No Man’s Land.”

At first reading it wasn’t clear what you meant “within our Jurisdiction (ROI) me thinking you were thinking I’m from the UK giving you a wind up. In my details I could have said I was from Dublin, which in fact I am and have a “false” Birth Certificate to prove it. And I am not the instigator of the certificate. However if I was questioned about Dublin, I would be at a loss for local info. So it’s best foot forward that carries my approach. And when you referred to “separate ways in 1922,” his was short-sighted political on your part. And accompanied that all the prejudices came rolling out like apples from a tipped up barrow on Moor Street. So we have all learnt something.

The original that Moderator cut is probably on my HDD, It is in story form and may bond for you with that which is posted to-night. I f you would like to receive it, you are welcome to ask.

Thanks for you interaction.

PS. A message has appeared that wants to run add-on 'ietag.dll from Microsoft. Do you know if that is OK to run?