Deceased survived by long term partner who gave up her job to look after him. Has an estranged son and a daughter.
Total estate around £300k. Will left £20k to partner. They lived in her property. He had his own property which was let. Residue to son and daughter equally. executors are two partners in the firm (who are conveyancers).
Partner placed a caveat on the file and intimated a 1975 Act claim. Solicitors set out details of claim - she would accept another £40k plus the original £20k.
When the caveat was received a litigation partner was instructed to deal. When the offer was received (ie the £40k) he then started to advise the executors about the merits of the claim and said he would negotiate. He then wrote to the beneficiaries in those terms.
The figures have been agreed. I would be interested to know what members think of the situation and on particular the question of who our client is/are. Forgive me if this question is too basic - but I have always taken the view that where there is a caveat and a claim is intimated, if we are advising the executors then we step back and let the beneficiaries sort it out between themselves if it is a 1975 Act claim. The executors only step back into the ring if there are any adverse IHT implications or when it comes to deciding which assets will be appropriated in settlement of the claim.
Are members happy to act for beneficiaries and executors in cases such as this? When it comes to preparation of a settlement agreement would members instruct the son and daughter to seek independent advice? Claimant has sacked her solicitor. In this case the settlement seems to be a pragmatic one, I am just a bit uneasy about the professional boundaries.
Michael McCabe