We have a client now deceased who has a Will (not drafted by us) which states ‘my property at xxxxx and it’s contents therein for my partner xxxxxx’
There was a car owned by the deceased, kept on the driveway at that property. The beneficiary of the house and contents believes the car should be included in her legacy, whilst the residuary beneficiaries believe the car does not count as household contents therein. Unfortunately there is no Will file to consult to determine intent, nor does the Will drafter remember the intent. The vehicle is worth £15k so a considerable amount. In the absence of a standard ‘chattels’ precedent used in the Will, I wondered what others interpretation would be or whether we need to seek further professional opinion as to which gift the vehicle falls into?
Many thanks
For clarification, is there evidence (or admission) that the car was owned solely by the deceased? It is not possible to have joint registered keepers for “family” vehicles so if the vehicle was funded from a joint account or the partner made contribution to the purchase from own funds then it would be jointly owned and pass by survivorship - thus avoiding the problem of interpretation of the will.
I believe the car falls into residue. Had the clause in question said house and personal chattels, then the car would not form part of the residuary estate. “Contents” seems clear to me.
The vehicle was owned solely by the deceased. The position now is that the partner has also now died, so its a question of whether the vehicle belongs to her estate, or to the residuary beneficiaries of the first deceased.
I note the gift is of “my property at xxxxx and its contents therein”, rather than a gift of “household contents”.
Whilst the gift in the will is wider than one merely of “household contents”, the question surely is whether the car is a “content” of the house.
Many years ago, I had a similar issue and counsel advised that if the car was normally garaged on site it could be a “content” of the property, but felt that would be stretching the definition and/or intention of the testator. As, in that case also, the car was normally parked on the drive counsel opined that it was not within the gift of “contents”. I don’t recall the word “therein” being included in that instance and, perhaps, I the present instance that word is the defining point – the car is not normally parked “in “ the property, but outside of it – so is not a “content”.
Paul Saunders FCIB TEP
Independent Trust Consultant
Providing support and advice to fellow professionals
Thanks Paul - it is interesting you have had a similar issue!
In Scotland “contents” would definitely not include the car. I am inclined to agree with Karl that the wording is clear