Me and my co-executors have observed I (PFD) Act 75 notice periods, advertised Trustee Act notices and as a final belt and braces obtained executors estate protection which basically appears to cover lots of unknown claims/issues.
We are ready to distribute and have sent the Estate Account to beneficiaries. One of the beneficiaries is a charity (they are receiving about £200k being 25% of the estate) and has stated that they do not give indemnities. The others have signed the required form.
Do you consider that there is any further risks for the executors which would definitely require the indemnity?
I readily admit to being “old school” on many things, but wonder why Evelyn thinks that the “executors … definitely require [an] indemnity” at all? Perhaps it would be easier for me to understand if Evelyn could explain why she is also insuring against [apparently] “lots of unknown claims/issues”?
Also, if the precise terms of the “Indemnity” were set out for consideration…
Otherwise I assume that the co-execs have been informed that the Trustee Act notices only protect the PRs/Trustees as such. Anyone with a valid claim can still pursue any one or more who have received benefit from the estate, to the extent of their own inheritance - leaving them to claim back any excess from the other beneficiaries…
There is only so much you can do to cover yourself against any liability you may have assumed as an executor. The charity is entitled to say “Pay us what we are owed once the administration is at an end” and not to do anything further. You aren’t entitled to an indemnity from the charity and, at some point, the charity would be entitled to sue you for what they are owed from the estate.
If there is a particular risk that you are concerned about an application to protect the executors may be made using the Civil Procedure Rules Part 8. For example, if the deceased was a Lloyd’s name the situation is governed by Practice Statement [2001] 3 All ER 765. The Chancery Guide may also assist generally if an application is considered. You may find the following interesting on this topic: K Deceased [2007] EWHC 662 (Ch) and Re Yorke [1997] 4 All ER 907; Jervis v Wolferstan (1874) L. R. 18 Eq, 18 Ch; Whittaker v Kershaw (1890) 45 Ch. D. 320; Part E of Tolley’s Administration of Estates. Hope that helps.