Executor deliberately slowing down process because they want changes to will

quad_red

Hi folks,

My parents are experiencing problems with my grandmothers will.

The will itself was drafted in the mid seventies and the solicitor who drafted the will is still alive and handling the estate. He insists that it is rock solid and legally watertight.

Two siblings (not mine) were made executors back in the seventies. Since then one has become estranged and he is now a hostile party and refusing to undertake his duties as executor.

He has since written a letter to other beneficiaries 'suggesting' that they redo the will to significantly increase his inheritance at their expense with the implicit threat that he will not sign off until they agree to hand assets over to him.

So he is doing everything right up to legally challenging the will. But he is clearly playing a long game here - he is never going to sign off on the will in it's current form unless all his siblings make major concessions to him.

Is there anything that can be done? I have done some reading online and there are a number of instances of executors being slow. But where an executor is clearly unhappy with the terms of the will (rather than the legal coherence of the will) and abusing their position as executor in an attempt to undermine the will and enrich themselves - can they be removed?

Cheers,
Quad

Ken.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/death/the_deceaseds_estate/dealing_with_the_deceaseds_estate.html

If the will is cast iron bulletproof then I'd imagine this part would apply to your uncle.

Duties of Executor/Administrators
Generally, you are obliged to distribute the assets as soon as possible after the death (within a year if possible - you may be sued by the beneficiaries if you do not distribute the estate within a year). This may not be possible if there are legal issues to be decided).

quad_red

ken wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/death/the_deceaseds_estate/dealing_with_the_deceaseds_estate.html

If the will is cast iron bulletproof then I'd imagine this part would apply to your uncle.

Duties of Executor/Administrators
Generally, you are obliged to distribute the assets as soon as possible after the death (within a year if possible - you may be sued by the beneficiaries if you do not distribute the estate within a year). This may not be possible if there are legal issues to be decided).

Legal opinion thus far has been he doesn't have a leg to stand on if he challenges the will. But he seems to be making strong indications that he will not sign off on the will as it stands unless he receives a significant increase in his portion of the estate (equal to others).

He is going to continue abusing his power of executor with the aim of forcing people into handing over assets to him.

He has written a letter 'suggesting' they hand assets over which I think has to be written evidence that he has a serious conflict of interest. But what can they do with it?

Labarbapostiza

To ask a question in relation to this.

How can an estranged sibling cause as much problems as possible for their estranged family in an instance like this?

I'm sure the op's family are lovely people, but there are families who are very grubby and nasty, who'll do their best to cut another family member out, just so they can get their hands on more stuff.

quad_red

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

To ask a question in relation to this.

How can an estranged sibling cause as much problems as possible for their estranged family in an instance like this?

I'm sure the op's family are lovely people, but there are families who are very grubby and nasty, who'll do their best to cut another family member out, just so they can get their hands on more stuff.

Outside of issues of who theoretically deserves what, I just want opinions on what might the legal options be.

He is manipulating his position as executor to try and undermine the written, witnessed intent of the deceased in order to enrich himself.

coylemj

The only solution to your problem is going to a legal one as it sounds like you are way beyond any form of mediation. You said that there is a solicitor acting for the estate and two other solicitors acting for two of the siblings - if you have three solicitors on your side, what are you expecting from people on this forum?

My tuppence worth would be that it's time for the other beneficiaries to start sending him legal letters saying that he needs to start accepting his responsibilities as executor or they will take steps to have him removed.

quad_red

coylemj wrote: »

The only solution to your problem is going to a legal one as it sounds like you are way beyond any form of mediation. You said that there is a solicitor acting for the estate and two other solicitors acting for two of the siblings - if you have three solicitors on your side, what are you expecting from people on this forum?

I'm not driving this - I would just like to be in a position to offer support and suggestions.

And the advice has been thus far just wait and allow him to make whatever moves he wants.

coylemj wrote: »

My tuppence worth would be that it's time for the other beneficiaries to start sending him legal letters saying that he needs to start accepting his responsibilities as executor or they will take steps to have him removed.

Thanks. That's a good suggestion.

Labarbapostiza

quad_red wrote: »

A sibling with a massive chip on their shoulder, an unerring sense of self entitlement and a ruthless streak.

Well, people with massive chips on their shoulder tend not to see the chip due to their overblown sense of entitlement, this also leads them to be ruthless in pursuit of righting a perceived injustice. Bad people nearly unerringly have a self delusion that they are good. They project their badness onto others. And whole families can do this through scapegoating one individual.

I have seen this happen in several families.

Your point doesn't apply here. The estranged uncle was getting the same as
everyone else in the will. He hasn't been cut out or robbed - he just isn't
getting more than everyone else.

We're talking in the abstract here. But skulldugery does go on; bank accounts are looted, assets are hidden or stolen by family members; with the family members claiming after the fact they were gifts, not stolen. An equal share can be whittled down to the quick, quite efficiently by people who have more access due to proximity.

In my opinion he doesn't deserve a bean but no one is arguing that.

But either way, the will is the will of the deceased. He is manipulating his position as executor to try and undermine the written, witnessed intent of the deceased in order to enrich himself.

Everything here is meant to be discussed in the abstract.

There can be genuine grievances. I knew someone whose mother was incapacitated (not of sound mind and body), and his family pressurised him into giving up his job to care for her; she lived for a significant number of years. He was promised the house verbally by the rest of his family. But when his mother died he end up being booted out on his arse, and not only that, his mother's bank accounts had been looted. He performed the role of being the free carer; which would have depleted her funds otherwise. Since he was the family scapegoat, the rest of his family felt perfectly comfortable in ganging up and stealing from him (Oh they all had better "characters" and were more deserving).

Scapegoating usually begins in early childhood. It is a form of child abuse. Child abuse is not a petty grievance.

coylemj

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Everything here is meant to be discussed in the abstract.

And then you proceed to quote an actual case

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Scapegoating usually begins in early childhood. It is a form of child abuse. Child abuse is not a petty grievance.

This is a legal, not a Child Psychology forum.

quad_red

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

Well, people with massive chips on their shoulder tend not to see the chip due to their overblown sense of entitlement, this also leads them to be ruthless in pursuit of righting a perceived injustice. Bad people nearly unerringly have a self delusion that they are good. They project their badness onto others. And whole families can do this through scapegoating one individual.

I have seen this happen in several families.

We're talking in the abstract here. But skulldugery does go on; bank accounts are looted, assets are hidden or stolen by family members; with the family members claiming after the fact they were gifts, not stolen. An equal share can be whittled down to the quick, quite efficiently by people who have more access due to proximity.

Everything here is meant to be discussed in the abstract.

There can be genuine grievances. I knew someone whose mother was incapacitated (not of sound mind and body), and his family pressurised him into giving up his job to care for her; she lived for a significant number of years. He was promised the house verbally by the rest of his family. But when his mother died he end up being booted out on his arse, and not only that, his mother's bank accounts had been looted. He performed the role of being the free carer; which would have depleted her funds otherwise. Since he was the family scapegoat, the rest of his family felt perfectly comfortable in ganging up and stealing from him (Oh they all had better "characters" and were more deserving).

Scapegoating usually begins in early childhood. It is a form of child abuse. Child abuse is not a petty grievance.

That is not the case here. But I take your point and will amend the post to remove irrelevant details.

I put too much detail in trying to flesh out the case when the legal question was options to force an executor to stop deliberately stalling.

Santa Cruz

There is plenty precedent in law for dealing with executors who will not do their duties. The only problem is that it involves legal action and the solicitors will get their fees paid from the estate before anyone else. Barristers advice and assistance will be sought and overall it will prove costly. However a strongly worded letter should be sent to this gent outlining what will be done and the cost of same.
If the will is legally sound it has to be executed as is. This is not to stop a medicated payment being made to the objector by other beneficiaries just the get his agreement without resorting to the courts

Labarbapostiza

quad_red wrote: »

I put too much detail in trying to flesh out the case when the legal question was options to force an executor to stop deliberately stalling.

These family things can be incredibly sticky. I do know of a situation where the executor deliberately stalled. My father was an executor on my grandfathers will. He told me he was deliberately stalling it (he didn't tell me how). It was dragged out for years, I'm uncertain of the final resolution. The reason he was stalling was to try to cut my uncle's widow out. His plan, he told me, was she would get nothing - but he didn't tell me how he would go about this. At the time I took my families side, but with distance I realise how shameful and disgusting my father's actions were. And I'm disgusted at myself. I believe it was a case of pure spitefulness, and not so much greed. Some people have nothing better to do with their lives.

Santa Cruz

Labarbapostiza wrote: »

These family things can be incredibly sticky. I do know of a situation where the executor deliberately stalled. My father was an executor on my grandfathers will. He told me he was deliberately stalling it (he didn't tell me how). It was dragged out for years, I'm uncertain of the final resolution. The reason he was stalling was to try to cut my uncle's widow out. His plan, he told me, was she would get nothing - but he didn't tell me how he would go about this. At the time I took my families side, but with distance I realise how shameful and disgusting my father's actions were. And I'm disgusted at myself. I believe it was a case of pure spitefulness, and not so much greed. Some people have nothing better to do with their lives.

I'm not sure how that would work out because even if she died she would have been able to will her delayed bequest to someone else. You are right in saying that it was a shameful disgusting act.