The deceased died in 2013, leaving behind three children: David (the claimant), Susan and Ruth, who are all now in their seventies. In her will, the deceased left the residuary estate (consisting mainly of her property) to her two daughters, excluding David.
Originally, she and her husband made mirror wills in 2002, which provided for the surviving spouse or, if predeceased, their three children equally. However, both parents amended their wills in 2006 to exclude David.
David moved into the property in 2011 after his divorce and the death of his father. He lived there rent-free with Ruth and the deceased, caring for his mother until her death. David continued living there with Ruth, covering household expenses. During this time, Susan received no benefit from the estate.
Legal proceedings
In 2020, Susan issued legal proceedings and a Personal Representative was appointed in 2021. In 2022, the Personal Representative issued proceedings to obtain possession of the property on behalf of the estate. David then made a claim, ultimately asking for one third of the estate. Only Susan opposed the claim.
Court decision
The court found that the will failed to make reasonable financial provision for David due to his lack of personal finances, accommodation and health issues preventing him from gaining employment.
David was awarded a 25% share in the residuary estate (approximately £150,000) and the sisters were awarded 37.5% each. David and Ruth were given six months to either purchase the property or find alternative accommodation, after which a possession order could be obtained and enforced against them. They were ordered to each pay Susan £1,125 for their occupation during this period.
Court’s reasoning
The court held that it was likely that the deceased excluded David from her will due to her concerns surrounding his marital status, either due to her dislike of his marriage or to prevent his wife from making a claim to her inheritance, rather than estrangement. After David moved back in with the deceased, their relationship improved. At this stage, the deceased lacked capacity, which was cited as a potential reason for not having amended the will to include David again.
Financial positions of the parties
- David had minimal savings and minor income from his state pension and pension credit, resulting in an annual deficit. He had been dependent upon the deceased since 2011. Apart from a coin collecting hobby, he lived a frugal life with Ruth and didn’t spend money on anything other than bills. He was not in a financial position to pay for accommodation and had no capability of earning a living due to illness.
- Ruth was paying for a larger share of the bills and had more assets than David, but would also have been made homeless following a possession order and would have needed to use her inheritance to purchase alternative accommodation.
- Susan had numerous health issues, and as such lived in a residential care facility. This was funded by Medicare, as would any alternative facility. All additional expenses were covered by her income. She didn’t like the facility and would have preferred private care, but due to the size of the estate, she could only pay for 10 months, and the court was not satisfied that the care would be substantially different to warrant the need for this money from the estate.
As such, it was held that there was a need for a provision to safeguard David’s entitlement to future accommodation. If David and Ruth continued living together, the value of their joint assets would be enhanced, and the amount was deemed sufficient to afford a suitable property.
A life interest was not deemed to be appropriate because, due to the size of the estate, it would have to extend over a significant part of the estate. This could result in the sisters being shut out of the capital for the rest of their lives. Due to the family relationships, a professional trustee would be required which would have been an unaffordable burden to the estate.
If you would like to discuss making or defending a claim against an estate, please do not hesitate to contact one of our Contentious Wills, Trusts & Probate specialists 0800 2800 421.
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer
This information is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We recommend seeking professional advice before taking any action on the information provided. If you would like to discuss your specific circumstances, please feel free to contact us on 0800 2800 421.
