Don’t leave it to the Courts to settle your affairs

Mental capacity. A farmer built a successful business running one of the UK’s largest car boot sales. He had a large family with three different partners. One son alleged his father didn’t have capacity to marry his third long-term partner, due to dementia. 

 

The marriage took place in 2016. The father made two new Wills, disinheriting his son in favour of his new wife. The son claimed he had been promised the farm many years before. He said his father lacked capacity to make the later Wills. The Court dismissed the claim because of the size of the father’s expanding family. It heard evidence that he did have capacity to make the new Wills. In addition, the Court found that the son had become personally wealthy whilst working on the farm. However, the Court also found that the son’s property tenancies were valid. 

 

In this case, changing family relationships, agreements made over many decades, and mental capacity all needed clarification. 

 

Lifetime interest. A brother and sister who lived in their family home to care for their mother went to Court after her death. Following increasing disagreements between brother and sister the brother moved out. The sister continued to look after their mother until her death in 2020. She claimed this had been to the detriment of her career. 

 

After their mother’s death, her brother wanted to sell the house. In response, she claimed their mother wanted it to be their home for the rest of their lives. Based on this understanding, she had spent money maintaining the house. In contrast, her brother claimed their mother’s Will said they should each have an equal share of the house when she died. 

 

The daughter had taken a larger share of the caring responsibilities for their mother. Their mother had also written a letter saying her daughter should remain in the house at her own expense. However, she didn’t specify how long her daughter could stay. 

 

Granting the daughter a lifetime interest in the house would have effectively prevented her brother from accessing his inheritance. The Court decided that the sale could take place in 14 years, after the daughter’s 70th birthday. It rejected her claim for a lifetime interest and for increased provision from her mother’s Will. 

 

Disinheriting family members. A mother who died in 2021 left an estate with an estimated worth of £1.1million. Since 2013 she had written a series of Wills leaving her estate equally to her three children. However, in 2015 she wrote a letter about the breakdown of family relationships. She told her younger children to improve their relationship with their older brother and show their mother ‘love and respect’. 

 

In 2018 her final Will she disinherited her younger children. It included a letter complaining that nothing had changed in the last three years. After her death, the youngest daughter claimed the brother had influenced their mother’s decision. However, the Court heard that their mother had attended the solicitor on her own to make her final Will. The solicitor noted she was clear in her intent at the time, although she received a dementia diagnosis in 2020. 

 

In this case, the mother could leave her estate to anyone she chose. Undue influence requires a lot of evidence to convince the Courts. The Court decided she deliberately made her choice when she had capacity. 

 

In each of these cases circumstances changed over time, which is why it’s important to review your Will regularly. Ideally, if you decide to make some changes, you should tell the people affected directly so there isn’t any doubt.