cost of making a will

thebourke

what is the rough cost of making a will?

Water John

With a Solr, think it was billed at about €400.

spurious

Mine cost 180 a couple of years ago, with a solicitor. It wasn't terribly complicated. I would imagine the more complex, the more work, the higher cost.

arubamuuu

When I worked in general practice, we charged anywhere from €150 to €500 + VAT depending on the complexity of the will

JCJCJC

It depends how much tax planning is involved. For a large estate, where children inherit more than about 300k, tax planning is vital. Farms and businesses are tricky too. If the estate is modest, say house, car, few quid in the credit union - 150 is plenty.

mrcheez

curious, if one doesn't have a will, do all assets go to next of kin automatically on death?

Interrobang

Our local Credit Union offers a free will making service through a designated solicitor. Might be worth checking out whether your local CU offers the same, if you have an account with them.

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

curious, if one doesn't have a will, do all assets go to next of kin automatically on death?

They go according to what’s called the rules on intestacy. It will depend on whether the deceased is survived by spouse, children etc. If no spouse or children, then it goes to siblings and children of predeceased siblings.

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

They go according to what’s called the rules on intestacy. It will depend on whether the deceased is survived by spouse, children etc. If no spouse or children, then it goes to siblings and children of predeceased siblings.

which is pretty much what I would put in my own will, that it allgoes to family and they can split it up themselves so not sure of benefit of will to me personally unless I wanted to be specific about who gets what.

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

which is pretty much what I would put in my own will, that it allgoes to family and they can split it up themselves so not sure of benefit of will to me personally unless I wanted to be specific about who gets what.

You need to plan for a lot of possibilities. Nasty things happen even to nice people. Supposing you had a son or daughter married to someone you didn’t like, and you son or daughter dies before you do. Do you want their share of your estate to go to the spouse, or their kids, or to your other children? Suppose you have a son or daughter in a longterm happy relationship to someone you like but not legally married, if they predecease you do you want their partner to inherit something? Leaving it to intestacy is risky.

kate07

Paid €75 euro last year with a solicitor.

JCJCJC

kate07 wrote: »

Paid €75 euro last year with a solicitor.

Some solicitors charge very little, on the basis that if they are instructed in the administration of the estate they will get a decent fee. Some don’t charge at all, on the principle of pro bono, simply a strong principled belief that society is better served if people make wills, and that is true. Generally legal services cost more inside the M50, the overheads of running a practise are so savage that they can’t afford to work for nothing. There are no fixed scales of fees.

PhilOssophy

mrcheez wrote: »

which is pretty much what I would put in my own will, that it allgoes to family and they can split it up themselves so not sure of benefit of will to me personally unless I wanted to be specific about who gets what.

"They can split it up themselves" = recipe for an argument! . Reasonable people can become very unreasonable when there is money involved.

A solicitor will make sure you have thought of every eventuality. It is the best 500 quid you'll spend - and makes sure you don't leave a mess behind you. There are too many examples of families who have fallen out over a few quid, and the biggest winners are the legal industry.

JCJCJC

PhilOssophy wrote: »

"They can split it up themselves" = recipe for an argument! . Reasonable people can become very unreasonable when there is money involved.

The crazy thing is that children can challenge a will, but not an intestacy. Intestacy results in even shares, so it’s not a matter of splitting it up themselves. Intestacy also treats predeceased children as if they were still alive.

PhilOssophy

JCJCJC wrote: »

The crazy thing is that children can challenge a will, but not an intestacy. Intestacy results in even shares, so it’s not a matter of splitting it up themselves. Intestacy also treats predeceased children as if they were still alive.

Actually yeah I worded my response badly, good thing I'm not a solicitor! I don't want to drag the thread off topic by going into an off-topic discussion!

JCJCJC

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Actually yeah I worded my response badly, good thing I'm not a solicitor!
Its still quite difficult for a child to successfully challenge a will unless they have very valid grounds as to why they are left out in favour of others though I think?

The challenge is called a Section 117 Action. It must be based on a failure of moral duty. It works two ways - a child with special needs, or a child with special talents can challenge for a greater share. So, if the child is showing potential to become a world-class opera singer, that child could challenge for a greater share than an even split in order to further their musical training. A child with a poor income and no assets could challenge if all the others are very well off. Conduct during the deceased’s lifetime is taken into account, so if a parent sent the child to college, bought them a car and a flat etc and they blew it all on Latvian hookers and brown mescaline, the court will probably say that the parent’s moral duty has been adequately discharged during their lifetime.

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

You need to plan for a lot of possibilities. Nasty things happen even to nice people. Supposing you had a son or daughter married to someone you didn’t like, and you son or daughter dies before you do. Do you want their share of your estate to go to the spouse, or their kids, or to your other children? Suppose you have a son or daughter in a longterm happy relationship to someone you like but not legally married, if they predecease you do you want their partner to inherit something? Leaving it to intestacy is risky.

no wife or kids.... obviously if I do later, then a will might be handy but for my present situation it's not required

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

no wife or kids.... obviously if I do later, then a will might be handy but for my present situation it's not required

Brothers, sisters, living or deceased? Deceased leaving children? Any wishes for burial, cremation etc? Any thoughts on who you want to take temporary control of your assets? Any friends you want to leave any particular items to? Any church or charity you want to help? All those things and more come into play.

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

Brothers, sisters, living or deceased? Deceased leaving children? Any wishes for burial, cremation etc? Any thoughts on who you want to take temporary control of your assets? Any friends you want to leave any particular items to? Any church or charity you want to help? All those things and more come into play.

Nope, I just want the equal shares split which is the default you mentioned ?

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

Nope, I just want the equal shares split which is the default you mentioned ?

It's your own business, but you might want to be aware of the CAT thresholds...

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

It's your own business, but you might want to be aware of the CAT thresholds...

Is that different if I make a will saying I want to split the assets between next of kin identically to follow rules on intestacy?

I'm not seeing the benefit of going the will route over the default rules of intestacy route given that (in my case):

- There are no deceased children or any other other issues that you mentioned to complicate the split

- I will split the assets identically to how they would be under rules on intestacy

- You mentioned a will can be challenged, but not intestacy which "results in even shares"


I'm not ruling out the will idea, I just can't see why I would need it when the default split is exactly what I would enter in the will.

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

Is that different if I make a will saying I want to split the assets between next of kin identically to follow rules on intestacy?

I'm not seeing the benefit of going the will route over the default rules of intestacy route given that (in my case):

- There are no deceased children or any other other issues that you mentioned to complicate the split

- I will split the assets identically to how they would be under rules on intestacy

- You mentioned a will can be challenged, but not intestacy which "results in even shares"


I'm not ruling out the will idea, I just can't see why I would need it when the default split is exactly what I would enter in the will.

It's entirely up to yourself... just alerting you to what can arise. It might be no harm to tell your next of kin that you don't intend making a will, and your solicitor if you have one, otherwise searches will have to be made in an attempt to trace a will which takes time and costs money, which will come out of your estate unnecessarily.

PhilOssophy

What if you and several other family members who would have benefitted from your death die at once? Do you want the money to go according to a will they may have made?
To me, it is a few hundred euro that I can't see why anybody would try to save on!

mrcheez

PhilOssophy wrote: »

What if you and several other family members who would have benefitted from your death die at once? Do you want the money to go according to a will they may have made?
To me, it is a few hundred euro that I can't see why anybody would try to save on!

In that case how is it any different if I write the rules into a will, vs going via intestacy, given that the wording of the will would be identical to the rules of intestacy?

It's not the money that's the issue, it just seems unnecessary given that the wording of my will would match the default rules.

AndrewJRenko

mrcheez wrote: »

Nope, I just want the equal shares split which is the default you mentioned ?

It will make the administration of your estate a lot easier for those left behind if you put a will in place, and tell someone about where it is.

mrcheez

Here's what my will would be:

My estate is to be divided up between...

Parents, but no spouse, civil partner or children: your estate is divided equally between your parents or given entirely to one parent if only one is living.

Brothers and sisters only: your estate is shared equally among them, with the children of a deceased brother or sister taking his/her share.

Nieces and nephews only: your estate is divided equally among those surviving.




Seems to match the wording here: https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/death/the_deceaseds_estate/what_happens_the_deceaseds_estate.html#lc8139

Claw Hammer

mrcheez wrote: »

Is that different if I make a will saying I want to split the assets between next of kin identically to follow rules on intestacy?

I'm not seeing the benefit of going the will route over the default rules of intestacy route given that (in my case):

- There are no deceased children or any other other issues that you mentioned to complicate the split

- I will split the assets identically to how they would be under rules on intestacy

- You mentioned a will can be challenged, but not intestacy which "results in even shares"


I'm not ruling out the will idea, I just can't see why I would need it when the default split is exactly what I would enter in the will.

On intestacy a grant of administration must be applied for through the courts. This costs money which will be taken out of the estate, and if lawyers get involved, their fees will be coming out also. Your assets might change before you die for example if you won the lottery or obtained an inheritance, in which case you might want to have made different provisions than which apply on intestacy. You may also want to make provisions which are tax efficient.

If you don't mind causing trouble and expense for your relations, making money for lawyers and paying money over to the tax man which need not have been paid over, then sure, intestacy is the way to go

mrcheez

Claw Hammer wrote: »

On intestacy a grant of administration must be applied for through the courts. This costs money which will be taken out of the estate, and if lawyers get involved, their fees will be coming out also.

Grand, that's the info I was looking for.

So if I have a will there's no lawyer fees then, or is that not also taken out of the estate?

Kewreeuss

There are ALWAYS fees, just the probability of less if you have a will.

AndrewJRenko

Kewreeuss wrote: »

There are ALWAYS fees, just the probability of less if you have a will.

You're generally right, but there are some people who have successfully taken estates through probate without involving lawyers. The probability of some fees or higher fees are indeed much higher with no will.

PhilOssophy

mrcheez wrote: »

Grand, that's the info I was looking for.

So if I have a will there's no lawyer fees then, or is that not also taken out of the estate?

Solicitors fees will be taken from your estate and there is no way around this, but your administrators are free to choose any solicitor from the cheapest to the most expensive in the country. They don't necessarily have to go with whoever you made your will with.

JCJCJC

Claw Hammer wrote: »

On intestacy a grant of administration must be applied for through the courts ....go

No, that’s not correct. The vast majority of grants, testate or intestate, are issued administratively through the Probate office in Dublin or District Probate Registries in some counties. The Revenue side of it has gone online since last September. Probate fees are still payable to the Probate office even if you go the diy route. All the information is on courts.ie

JCJCJC

PhilOssophy wrote: »

Solicitors fees will be taken from your estate and there is no way around this, but your administrators are free to choose any solicitor from the cheapest to the most expensive in the country. They don't necessarily have to go with whoever you made your will with.

The general starting point is a percentage of the gross estate plus VAT and outlays. 4% would be top dollar. The bigger the estate, the more of a reduction should be negotiable, because above a certain point, it’s the same amount of work.
Before you pee on lawyers, take account of the other issues that arise - does the deceased have good marketable registered title to their real estate, are the addresses of all beneficiaries available, do they all have Irish PPS numbers, is the lawyer doing the CAT returns or is there an accountant needed, etc. If the lawyer has to sort out all that stuff, they have to be paid for the time it takes.

mrcheez

would be interested to know roughly what cost differences are between will vs no will, assuming the wording of the will is line for line what is in rules on intestacy.

We talking a couple of hundred, or would it be thousands in the difference?

Say the estate is 1 million - I don't have an estate worth 1 million .. this is just for arguments sake

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

would be interested to know roughly what cost differences are between will vs no will, assuming the wording of the will is line for line what is in rules on intestacy.

We talking a couple of hundred, or would it be thousands in the difference?

Say the estate is 1 million - I don't have an estate worth 1 million .. this is just for arguments sake

To many variables to answer that. If you have €1m and only one brother to leave it to, there is only one tax return to be made - quick and easy. If you have sixteen brothers spread over the five continents, there is obviously a lot more work involved and there may be no tax payable but that must be fully checked out.

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

To many variables to answer that. If you have €1m and only one brother to leave it to, there is only one tax return to be made - quick and easy. If you have sixteen brothers spread over the five continents, there is obviously a lot more work involved and there may be no tax payable but that must be fully checked out.

Say it goes to the parents, and they split it as they need.

That's how the intestacy rules go afaik?

Say I got knocked off my bike tomorrow. Parents still alive.

PhilOssophy

JCJCJC wrote: »

The general starting point is a percentage of the gross estate plus VAT and outlays. 4% would be top dollar. The bigger the estate, the more of a reduction should be negotiable, because above a certain point, it’s the same amount of work.
Before you pee on lawyers, take account of the other issues that arise - does the deceased have good marketable registered title to their real estate, are the addresses of all beneficiaries available, do they all have Irish PPS numbers, is the lawyer doing the CAT returns or is there an accountant needed, etc. If the lawyer has to sort out all that stuff, they have to be paid for the time it takes.

I was 100% not peeing on lawyers, they like every other professional service are fully entitled to charge for their time and I have absolutely no problem with that. I know full well that there is a lot of time and effort goes into the administration of estates.

I was actually making the opposite point to how you construed it! My point to the OP was that his administrators aren't obliged to stay with the solicitor who wrote the will if they think it is too expensive. That was all.

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

Say it goes to the parents, and they split it as they need.

That's how the intestacy rules go afaik?

Say I got knocked off my bike tomorrow. Parents still alive.

'as they need' is too loose. Under intestacy they get 50:50. If you get knocked off your bike tomorrow or even today or next week and go into a coma for the next twenty years with a half-inch pipe stuck up your willy with a jubilee clip to hold it there you'll be sorry you didn't make a will...

JCJCJC

PhilOssophy wrote: »

I was 100% not peeing on lawyers, they like every other professional service are fully entitled to charge for their time and I have absolutely no problem with that. I know full well that there is a lot of time and effort goes into the administration of estates.

I was actually making the opposite point to how you construed it! My point to the OP was that his administrators aren't obliged to stay with the solicitor who wrote the will if they think it is too expensive. That was all.

Construed - a nice lawyerly word.Your point is absolutely correct, but often the solicitor making the will is appointed as either the sole or one of the executors, and also some solicitors who don't charge for making a will do so on the basis that they will be instructed in the administration of the estate.

Claw Hammer

mrcheez wrote: »

Say it goes to the parents, and they split it as they need.

That's how the intestacy rules go afaik?

Say I got knocked off my bike tomorrow. Parents still alive.

The parents could be taxed on it and it could be taxed again if they make gifts with it. A lot would depend on the cumulative value of inheritances received by your parents.
Equally, your parents might not give anything at all to your siblings or their children. They could leave it to the parish priest to say masses for the repose of their souls.

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

'as they need' is too loose. Under intestacy they get 50:50. If you get knocked off your bike tomorrow or even today or next week and go into a coma for the next twenty years with a half-inch pipe stuck up your willy with a jubilee clip to hold it there you'll be sorry you didn't make a will...

Claw Hammer wrote: »

The parents could be taxed on it and it could be taxed again if they make gifts with it. A lot would depend on the cumulative value of inheritances received by your parents.
Equally, your parents might not give anything at all to your siblings or their children. They could leave it to the parish priest to say masses for the repose of their souls.

ok but these answers don't address how it would be different if there was a will with the intestacy rules in it, rather than the default intestacy setup.

Legal fees with will = taken out of estate
Legal fees without will = taken out of estate

The way the estate would be split up or taxed appears to be identical, and fees appears to be similar?

Claw Hammer

mrcheez wrote: »

ok but these answers don't address how it would be different if there was a will with the intestacy rules in it, rather than the default intestacy setup.

Legal fees with will = taken out of estate
Legal fees without will = taken out of estate

The way the estate would be split up or taxed appears to be identical, and fees appears to be similar?

A grant of administration has to be applied for by the next of kin, who may be reluctant. Much easier to have a willing executor, or two. If you make a will, you can structure things in a tax efficient way.

PhilOssophy

JCJCJC wrote: »

Construed - a nice lawyerly word.Your point is absolutely correct, but often the solicitor making the will is appointed as either the sole or one of the executors, and also some solicitors who don't charge for making a will do so on the basis that they will be instructed in the administration of the estate.

I happen to have a family member who is one so I hear it quite a bit!

Anyway, I have added all I want to the discussion OP, good luck with whatever you do!

JCJCJC

mrcheez wrote: »

ok but these answers don't address how it would be different if there was a will with the intestacy rules in it, rather than the default intestacy setup.

Legal fees with will = taken out of estate
Legal fees without will = taken out of estate

The way the estate would be split up or taxed appears to be identical, and fees appears to be similar?

You're missing the point. first you said the estate would be split according to need, I told you that won't happen, it's 50:50. Taxation depends on CAT thresholds and I've given you the link. If the bus doesn't kill you fully dead, your parents could pre-decease you and you would be past the point of changing your mind. If another sibling did the same thing as you're doing, your parents could exceed their thresholds and all your money would go to the Revenue, well, 33% of it. Now will you ffs go and see your own solicitor and break his/her heart.

mrcheez

JCJCJC wrote: »

You're missing the point. first you said the estate would be split according to need, I told you that won't happen, it's 50:50. Taxation depends on CAT thresholds and I've given you the link. If the bus doesn't kill you fully dead, your parents could pre-decease you and you would be past the point of changing your mind. If another sibling did the same thing as you're doing, your parents could exceed their thresholds and all your money would go to the Revenue, well, 33% of it. Now will you ffs go and see your own solicitor and break his/her heart.

lol

I think you're missing the point of my question but I'm enjoying how stressed you appear to be getting over it...the other poster appeared to understand my query.

The earlier info was handy though

.

mrcheez

Claw Hammer wrote: »

A grant of administration has to be applied for by the next of kin, who may be reluctant. Much easier to have a willing executor, or two. If you make a will, you can structure things in a tax efficient way.

grand

rogber

Costs have gone up in this field too