Family law [intestacy-1]

etefia · 11-04-2006, 22:19

Fred, aged 30 and Madge, aged 27, have been together for 2 years. Fred has always worked and they live in a house bought by Fred b4 the couple met. The house is worth £110,000. There is no outstanding mortgage on the house. Madge is a shop assistant on a low wage. Fred suddenly died. He has died intestate i.e he did not leave a will. Fred's parents and his sister,aged 22 are all still alive. Consider this:
(a) Fred & Madge were married for two years. Under the law relating to intestacy Madge will automatically inherit the house and all Fred's belongings entirely
Do you think Madge should inherit everything?if yes give reasons,if no give reasons.

In addition to this,do you think that cohabiting couples should be treated the same way as married couples in cases of intestacy [please indicate whether you are single,cohabiting,married]

owlface · 11-04-2006, 22:34

This isn't quite right as the following quote from English Intestacy law states:

Where there is a surviving spouse he or she takes everything unless the Intestate left certain relatives.

(a) If the Intestate also left issue (that is children, grandchildren and remoter lineal decedents) the spouse and issue share the estate provided the issue satisfy the requirements of the statutory trusts.

(b) If the Intestate left no surviving issue, but left a surviving parent or parents, the parent(s) and the spouse share the estate. The parent(s) take(s) the property absolutely or in equal shares. If no parent survives but the Intestate left a living brother or sister of the whole blood (or other issue) they share the assets with the spouse, provided that they satisfy the requirements of the statutory trusts.

So, Freds wife doesn't get the house at all, his parents do.

etefia · 12-04-2006, 08:40

What if they where not legally married base on their personal opinion but have been living together for two years but unluckily for Madge her lover (Fred) died. Would you leave Madge with nothing out of Freds wealth? because the law says so.

Twiglet · 12-04-2006, 08:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by etefia

What if they where not legally married base on their personal opinion but have been living together for two years but unluckily for Madge her lover (Fred) died. Would you leave Madge with nothing out of Freds wealth? because the law says so.

Yes, because there are no children involved. I have several pairs of friends who have been living together for over two years and have no intention of marrying, and their relationships are not akin to those of a married couple. I think they would want their estate to go to their parents and not their live in partner. If Madge part owned the house and had been contributing to the mortgage, she would be entitled to some money from it's sale.

Two years is not a long time. If, however, they had been living together for say 10-15 years, it would be a different matter.

willman · 12-04-2006, 14:53

should have made a will. i have little sympathy i'm afraid.

etefia · 12-04-2006, 16:55

Twiglet, You seemed to place emphasis on HAVING CHILDREN and the NUMBER OF YEARS THEY HAVE LIVED TOGETHER.

Base on your opinion if you are in the position of make the law, How would you allocate what percentage she inherits within the range of 25%, 50%,75%,100% to the number of years they have lived together and the age of their children. should anything goes to the children, at what percentage?

etefia · 12-04-2006, 17:02

Willman lets be human, what if they have children and madge did not take any paid employment because she and her lover agreed she should stay at home and look after the children. Do you still stand on giving her nothing?

hmr44 · 12-04-2006, 18:30

Why do you need to know this? Are you planning on killing your husband

fierysatsuma · 12-04-2006, 19:09

Sounds like an study exam/mock or assignment to me...

But, no, if not married why should Madge get anything - she has no entitlement, by law. If Fred had wanted her to benefit from his estate, he would have made a Will.

Nowadays, most of us are aware of basic intestacy rules and we also regularly think "what would happen if I were to die".

Just as Willman has said and I have to say time and time again to people "should've had a Will"

Fred didn't make a Will, therefore he was happy that Madge would not benefit from his estate.

Twiglet · 12-04-2006, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by etefia

Twiglet, You seemed to place emphasis on HAVING CHILDREN and the NUMBER OF YEARS THEY HAVE LIVED TOGETHER.

Base on your opinion if you are in the position of make the law, How would you allocate what percentage she inherits within the range of 25%, 50%,75%,100% to the number of years they have lived together and the age of their children. should anything goes to the children, at what percentage?

I'm not in a position of making the law and I don't know that it would be fair to allocate percentages according to years together. Children would automatically get money, as owlface stated, because the deceased has left issue. All I'm stating is that 2 years of living together in no way equates to the same amount of commitment as a marriage, because I know people who are in that situation. If I reached a stage of commitment with someone at which I wanted them to have money on my death then I would change my will (not that I have one as I don't have any assets). They are still fairly young and the surviving partner is likely to move on and form a new relationship.

Cyclone · 12-04-2006, 20:20

I'm actually in a similar situation with my SO. We aren't married, we live together. So I have her specified as the person to receive my death in employment (or whatever it's called) payout, basically life assurance done through work. And she has me specified in her will to recieve the house.

How does it work though for joint assets if no will is made, ie what does intestacy(sp) say happens to the joint assets. Would a house need to be sold in order to give half to children/parents of the deceased?

willman · 13-04-2006, 06:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by etefia

Willman lets be human, what if they have children and madge did not take any paid employment because she and her lover agreed she should stay at home and look after the children. Do you still stand on giving her nothing?

as the law stands then yes - make a will why is it so hard to understand.
i've legally had to bequeath my pension rights to a dependent upon my death what is so difterent to making a will. if you care about someone YOU should protect them not the state.

willman · 13-04-2006, 07:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclone

I'm actually in a similar situation with my SO. We aren't married, we live together. So I have her specified as the person to receive my death in employment (or whatever it's called) payout, basically life assurance done through work. And she has me specified in her will to recieve the house.

How does it work though for joint assets if no will is made, ie what does intestacy(sp) say happens to the joint assets. Would a house need to be sold in order to give half to children/parents of the deceased?

your half goes to mummy & daddy.

WTAW · 13-04-2006, 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by willman

your half goes to mummy & daddy.

Sorry Willman you are wrong, jointly held assets, whether it is a house or money in a bank account, automatically pass to the person who jointly owns that asset. The assets could still be counted for IHT purposes, so if an estate was over the NRB and the person jointly owning the assets was not a spouse they would have to pay the IHT.
Because a jointly held asset by law passes to the survivor, if you wish to pass your share of an asset to another person you need to sever the ownership. For a property that would mean a severance of joint tenancy.
Going back to the original post: No I don't think unmarried coupes should be treated in the same way a married couples. If you don't wish to get married then make sure you have a Will reflecting your wishes for your estate, even if you are married everyone should still have a Will as there are too many issues to be dealt with by 'guess work'.

willman · 13-04-2006, 16:47

sorry misunderstood the post.didnt read the bit about joint assets correctly..
many thanks for correction.