What happens if you don't update a will?

Thoie

Let's say you wrote a will in 2010, leaving your house at 1 Main St, Anytown to Fred.

For simplicity, Fred is your sole next of kin (and would eventually inherit everything you had even if you didn't have a will).

You sell the house in 2015, and buy another at 1 Backstreet, Othertown, where you live when you die, but you never updated your will.

As the original will listed a house you no longer own, are you considered to have died intestate? Or do "they" just assume that if you meant Fred to have the house you owned at the time, that you meant him to have the new one too?

Different question - similar scenario to above, but now there's a Mary, who has the same relationship to you as Fred. You never intended leaving anything to Mary, which is why you named Fred in the first place.

my3cents

I've just acted as executor for my fathers will and it made no mention of the specific address of the house just said "I bequeath all my estate".

coylemj

In the normal course of events, any assets not mentioned in the will fall into the residue. That means that if you left the original house to Fred, made no provision for the residue of your estate and you owned a different house when you died, that new house is unassigned and would be dealt with under the rules of intestacy. If Fred was your next of kin,he would get the new house.

In your second scenario, if there was no mention of the residue in your will, the new house would be shared equally by Fred and Mary, even if you bequeathed the original house to Fred.

hullaballoo

There's no provision to read something into a will that it doesn't say - like an assumption the deceased meant whatever house they happened to own at death.

If there is a will, it usually deals with the residue of the estate. The Backstreet, Othertown house will become a part of the residue and will be dealt with as such.

No idea what Mary has to do with it. If she's not mentioned in the will, she doesn't inherit (unless she is a child of the deceased and can argue a case under section 117.)

Claw Hammer

hullaballoo wrote: »

There's no provision to read something into a will that it doesn't say - like an assumption the deceased meant whatever house they happened to own at death.

If there is a will, it usually deals with the residue of the estate. The Backstreet, Othertown house will become a part of the residue and will be dealt with as such.

No idea what Mary has to do with it. If she's not mentioned in the will, she doesn't inherit (unless she is a child of the deceased and can argue a case under section 117.)

Mary is also next of kin so in the event that the will contains no residue clause, or the residue clause fails, Mary and Fred would take the residue equally.

ED E

Thoie wrote: »

Let's say you wrote a will in 2010, leaving your house at 1 Main St, Anytown to Fred.

For simplicity, Fred is your sole next of kin (and would eventually inherit everything you had even if you didn't have a will).

You sell the house in 2015, and buy another at 1 Backstreet, Othertown, where you live when you die, but you never updated your will.

As the original will listed a house you no longer own, are you considered to have died intestate? Or do "they" just assume that if you meant Fred to have the house you owned at the time, that you meant him to have the new one too?

Different question - similar scenario to above, but now there's a Mary, who has the same relationship to you as Fred. You never intended leaving anything to Mary, which is why you named Fred in the first place.

Anyone else read that in Tim Bracken's voice? :pac:

hullaballoo

hullaballoo wrote: »

There's no provision to read something into a will that it doesn't say - like an assumption the deceased meant whatever house they happened to own at death.

There is no legislative presumption to that effect - but isn't that what the courts try to do in practice?

I have a relative who gave the residue of his estate to a charity, but in the interval between making the will his death, he'd switched banks, and the savings named in the will now formed part of the residue. Luckily, after taking legal advice, good sense prevailed.

4ensic15

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

There is no legislative presumption to that effect - but isn't that what the courts try to do in practice?

The courts won't write somebody's will. The courts might clarify it, or all of the beneficiaries might agree between them on how to interpret it. I had relatives who left a house to their son and the residue of the estate to their daughters. The house went on fire and killed them so the question arose as to whether the house insurance money went with the house to the son or into the residue to the daughters.

4ensic15

4ensic15 wrote: »

The courts won't write somebody's will. The courts might clarify it, or all of the beneficiaries might agree between them on how to interpret it. I had relatives who left a house to their son and the residue of the estate to their daughters. The house went on fire and killed them so the question arose as to whether the house insurance money went with the house to the son or into the residue to the daughters.

Sorry to hear about your relatives, that's horrific.

But in general, don't the courts interpret wills through the mode of intention? In other words, they're not likely to turn a dispute in terms of a narrow, legal interpretation, but will favour what the deceased person probably intended, in a very common-sense way.

4ensic15

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Sorry to hear about your relatives, that's horrific.

But in general, don't the courts interpret wills through the mode of intention? In other words, they're not likely to turn a dispute in terms of a narrow, legal interpretation, but will favour what the deceased person probably intended, in a very common-sense way.

They won't say what the deceased person probably intended. They have to find what the deceased person actually intended. In one well reported case a typing error put the wrong name on a will. Joan instead of John. Quite likely because of a dictaphone being used. The court did not alter the will. The court wioll resolve an ambiguity in favour of what it believes what was intended but will not distort clear words.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/solicitor-expresses-regret-for-error-in-will-as-case-is-resolved-1.1272463

Carawaystick

I could understand a car or cash in a bank getting changed to follow the most likely intention of the deceased, but if they said they left some real estate in awill, and then got a solicitor to dispose of that real estate, then it's harder to see it as anything but disinheriting Fred

4ensic15

Carawaystick wrote: »

I could understand a car or cash in a bank getting changed to follow the most likely intention of the deceased, but if they said they left some real estate in awill, and then got a solicitor to dispose of that real estate, then it's harder to see it as anything but disinheriting Fred

It would be most unlikely a will woiuld say "my deposits in bank x". It would most likely say "X amount to" or "the balance of any cash deposits to "or "the residue to". If the car was specifically identified in the will such as "My 1991 Ford Escort to" the gift would fail if the car had been sold before death but if it said"my car to", it would likely be assumed to be the car the testator owned at death.