# communicating with beneficiaries of a will



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

Looking for everyone's thoughts on this. If you decide to give part of your will to a beneficiary who falls under the category of "long lost" relative etc that you don't communicate much with, should you communicate with them at the time you decide to write them in your will? Or should you just let it be a surprise when you pass on? This situation came up in our family (not for me personally) and my gut reaction was that the long-lost beneficiary should be notified at this time. Was I right or wrong in my initial reaction?


----------



## caricole (Mar 12, 2012)

*



Was I right or wrong in my initial reaction?

Click to expand...

*You are wrong

Anybody writing a will, does not have to notify any benificiary

If you name an executor, it is wise to ask him if he willl do it, wihout mentioning what and who is in the wiil

A will can be written and re-written at any time, normaly only the notary knows what and who is in the will

For my part, a will stays secret up and till the day of dead, then it is read in front of everybody present after the funeral

After the reading, the beneficiaries are taken appart and informed of the outlines af the patrimoine and the expected sequence of the following parts and values, these regard only the beneficiaries

This applies to 95% of the succession for the ordinary people

Of coarse, the professionals, Notaries laywers accountants etc. will all disagree, because they all try to lay their hands as executor or administrator of a will...and *their bills are astronomical and indecent
*
If you can do your own taxreturs, you can easy be an executor of a will, their is nothing complicated about it, *it only TAKES TIME*...very often, the time is decided by the date of the reception of THE LAS INCOMTAX ASSESMENT that says O BALANCE OWNIG...*easely 9 to 12 months* after the date of dead:encouragement:


----------



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

Wow interesting response caricole. I stand corrected - thank you!


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The executor is required by law to notify each beneficiary and send them a notarized copy of the will.

Informing them beforehand has some drawbacks, such as if the will is changed and they are no longer included in it. The beneficiary may decide to legally challenge the will with regards to when the changes to disinherit them were made. (example.......the challenge could be the deceased was pressured into changing the will or was incompetent at the time they changed the will).

Even people not named in the will............who believe they "should" be beneficiaries also may have a claim through the courts.(example.........one sibling is disinherited by parents for an unjustifiable reason)

Many estates, and all estates that hold real estate property, must go through the probate process.

Unless the estate is very small, consisting of a few thousand dollars beyond the immediate funeral costs, banks and financial institutions will not release money from the deceased bank accounts without a certificate of probate that verifies the executor has court approval to make the decisions.

I would not serve as an executor to an estate of any consequence without the assistance of an estate lawyer and accountant.

The estate pays the legal and accounting costs for the executor, so to ask an executor to perform the duties and assume the legal liability so the estate can save money.......would be too much for me to consider.

The legal liability as an executor is just too high.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> The executor is required by law to notify each beneficiary and send them a notarized copy of the will.
> 
> Informing them beforehand, though, has some drawbacks, such if the will is changed, and they are no longer included in it. The beneficiary may decide to legally challenge the will with regards to when the changes to disinherit them were made. (example.......the challenge could be the deceased was pressured into changing the will or was incompetent at the time they changed the will).


Yes. The potential beneficiaries should never be given a copy of the will, or notified until after the funeral. A lot can happen to possessions, to funds and family heirlooms, between the time the will was first written up ....and the actual disposition of the will at time of death.



> The legal liability as an executor is just too high.


It all depends on how the will is written and who ends up contesting it. The executor, through no fault of their own could get caught up in the middle, if it's more than just a simple dispensation of the will.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

One thing to beware about is the naming of people in the will. MIL decided to specifically exclude an estranged son by name. There had been no contact in over 15 years. The lawyer hired a skip tracer who eventually tracked him down. Then a copy of the will was sent to him. The probate judge approved the will as is. He did have the power (in BC) to override the terms and include the son.


----------



## caricole (Mar 12, 2012)

*



I would not serve as an executor to an estate of any consequence without the assistance of an estate lawyer and accountant

Click to expand...

*What a joke...probably from a "PROFESSIONAL"

Before the law was changesd, I was named and acted as an "EXECUTOR", after the law was changed I was named and acted in 3 differend cases as "LIQUIDATOR" and ASSISTED as a friend a couple oh cases where friends where cut up in this situatrion, justl like helping a friend with his incometaxes or his car troubles

All in Quebec of coarse

If you start it right...no problem...it is a matter of time and patience

In all cases, THERE WAS A notarised will...THAT MAKES IT EASY

If you can complete your incometax filing, you can easyly complete the job of liquidator

Only the professionels do the scaremongering that you can not dot, that you are at risk, that ONLY THEY con do it

Exept, if you ask HOW MUCH IT WIL COST, you never get a clear answer from these professional croocks :encouragement:


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

caricole said:


> Only the professionals do the scaremongering...


Some do for sure!

I knew someone who handled a tiny estate of $70K, and hired an accountant/lawyer; the latter charged $450/hr.


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

On the other hand, the professional is (professionally) liable; the non-professional is not. High fees are sometimes, perhaps often, used to dissuade people from purchasing services for "small" accounts. 

FWIW there are no "beneficiaries" until there is an estate. You can communicate someone's intentions as expressed in a will, but you can't tell them they will be a beneficiary unless you can predict the future. 

Also, only in BC have estranged relatives been relatively (ha) successful in challenging their exclusion. I am involved in a will in Ontario in which the deceased excluded two of three children and left the bulk of the (significant) estate to the ex-spouse of one of the children.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Ex-clusion clauses can be built into wills. I gots one. The other other interested parti in yer ***-ets is the gummint. You can't exclude them on any tax payable,
but at least they can't follow you into the grave, if you still owe them. What p*sses me off, is the HST on funeral services. If I could, I would raise a stink after
my death by refusing to pay any more taxes.:biggrin:


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Toronto.gal said:


> Some do for sure!
> 
> I knew someone who handled a tiny estate of $70K, and hired an accountant/lawyer; the latter charged $450/hr.


He was an accountant and a lawyer? Well that explains it. $100/hr for accountant services and $350/hr for legal services, undertaker charges $500 to take you under in style.
Minister gets $500 for his services. Pope gets $500 for his retirement pension...have I forgotten anyone..oh yes...
Gummint gets 13% on everyone involved,and everyone is happy..well I guess that would also include the diseased..er..deceased who is also responsible for filing their tax return.


----------



## the-royal-mail (Dec 11, 2009)

Just wanted to thank everyone for your input on this topic. I appreciated all comments.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

carverman said:


> He was an accountant and a lawyer?


She was the executor, and a dishonest one as well. :rolleyes2:


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The beneficiaries often need their own lawyer as well.

The estate lawyer represents only the executor.........not the benficiaries.

The beneficiaries may need a lawyer to ensure the executor is performing their duties honestly and correctly.

I believe it is also a legal requirement that a minor named in a will has a representive to look after their interests.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> The beneficiaries often need their own lawyer as well.
> 
> The estate lawyer represents only the executor.........not the benficiaries.
> 
> ...


Ok..dad dies with just a small estate..about $100K lets say.
Dad has six children who don't think they are getting equal share in his estate, so they each hire lawyers at $350 an hour + Hst= ($400/hour)

6 lawyers write letters to each other and the lawyer for the executor arguing that they should get equal share
It takes about 30 hours of legal effort for each lawyer to arrive a mutual satisfied decision, probably by taking the case to court.
$400 an hour x 7 lawyers x 30 hours of legal work presenting their cases in court for the judge to decide.
Thats $84,000 to settle the deceased dads estate....
lawyers..they follow you right into the grave!

Did you hear the joke about a wealthy man dieing and a doctor, priest and lawyer attending his funeral? 

An old man was on his death bed. He wanted badly to take all his money with him. He called his priest, his doctor and his lawyer to his bedside. 

"Here's $30,000 cash to be held by each of you. *I trust you to put this in my coffin when I die so I can take all my money with me."* 

At the funeral, each man put an envelope in the coffin. 
Riding away in a limousine, the priest suddenly broke into tears and confessed that he had only put $20,000 into the envelope because he needed $10,000 for a new baptistery. 

"Well, since we're confiding in each other," said the doctor, "I only put $10,000 in the envelope because we needed a new machine at the hospital which cost $20,000." 

The lawyer was aghast. "I'm ashamed of both of you," he exclaimed. "I want it known that when I put my envelope in that coffin, it held my personal check for the full $30,000."


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

carverman said:


> $400 an hour x 7 lawyers x 30 hours of legal work presenting their cases in court for the judge to decide.
> Thats $84,000 to settle the deceased dads estate....


A contested case with 7 lawyers and only 30 hours of work involved?! :rolleyes2: :biggrin:

I wonder what % of such cases resolves such disputes in the Mandatory Mediation Program.


----------



## caricole (Mar 12, 2012)

sags said:


> The beneficiaries often need their own lawyer as well.
> 
> The estate lawyer represents only the executor.........not the benficiaries.
> 
> ...




Who are tfe jokers in this thread who only speak about lawyers ????

First case, left everything to 16 differend peaple, in differend portions , as executor...no problem, everyone signed they were satisfied at the end

Second...left everthing to the surviving spouse....no problem

3 TH Widow dies with a proper will, leafs everything in 7 equal parts to her 7 shildren. as executor..no problem

4TH old maid, hated MEN..left everything in 4 equal parts to her 4 nieces and left the nephews out...a notarized will, i was executor...no problem

A few more where I helped out, FREE SERVICE to friends, specialy 2 BIG ONES

No problem

Never had to deal with laywers or contestants in any succession, only THE PROFESSIONALS claim you can not do it....That proofs they are incompetend (the banned term) because anybody can do it

Of coarse, if there is a house or real estate involved, you probably go thru a real estate agent and the papers will be signed in front of a notady with the usualy cost involved, just as if you buy or sell your own house

And please, dont let the banks with their financial adviser and planner come close to a succession estate...they are the worst and knowthe least about successions

Unles your name is Bronfmant and the canadian governement let you export a few billions without any tAX LIabilities :upset::hopelessness:


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The lawyer for the beneficiaries would only cost if they had to represent their clients against actions by the executor.

If the cost meant preserving an inheritance, it may be well worth it.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

caricole i am not writing to question your competence in any way & indeed i believe your family members & friends have been exceptionally fortunate to have had you functioning as the executor of several wills.

however, this is an area that can sometimes blow up with personal feelings, jealousies, rivalries or even clan feuds. In addition, wills themselves can sometimes be badly drawn in that a complicated inheritance including, for example, a farm or a business may have been poorly planned in the first place.

this is why sags' cautions are so well-placed, i believe. Yes, a simple estate can be wound up through patient paralegal & clerical work, i do believe.

but the minute there is a hint of contested bequests or a testamentary trust, i also believe it is time for the professionals. At the very least, they carry malpractice insurance, while we ordinary folks perhaps acting as executors for our parents & relatives do not.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

sags said:


> The lawyer for the beneficiaries would only cost if they had to represent their clients against actions by the executor.
> 
> If the cost meant preserving an inheritance, it may be well worth it.


There is a minimal charge if a lawyer is involved, as long as it's not a contested will..then costs could rise.
I was joking with my hypothetical case above.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

carverman said:


> I was joking with my hypothetical case above.


I know carverman, but you made a valid point just the same! Even with just 2 lawyers involved, they could easily walk away with 1/2 that amount, as such a case would take more than the week you mentioned [30 hours]. 

Professionals are of course needed in many cases, that goes without saying, but what some beneficiaries don't realize, is that contested wills leaves a lot less for them, so depending on the size of the estate, contesting it only benefits the lawyers. I wonder if there are legal rules around contesting small estates. Wouldn't lawyers/judges draw the line depending on the amount involved? 

What I think is very important, is to have professionals wills.


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

The same issues arise in divorces. People are often not rational about these matters: what's important is not that the person contesting the will/disputing the net property statement in court gets more of the assets, _but that the other person gets less_. I remember, many years ago, a photo in the Globe and Mail of a divorce court in which a judge was presiding over the splitting up of the couple's prized Beanie Baby collection.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Toronto.gal said:


> I wonder if there are legal rules around contesting small estates. Wouldn't lawyers/judges draw the line depending on the amount involved?
> 
> What I think is very important, is to have professionals wills.


It all depends on how much there is to execute the will and distribute the assets.
In executing a will, all legal rules and filings have to be followed, even if it's a small estate under 100K. Not sure what happens if the person dies without any assets,
probably there is government assistance to at least tidy up his earthly remains. 

However, if it is sizeable there are all sorts of charges that a lawyer can charge:
http://www.thepascoedifference.com/fees-administration.html


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

A simple will with very small assets, can be administered by a layman.........no doubt.

But, my dad's estate involved a total of 25,000 and the CIBC legal department took 2 weeks to decide if they would require the will to apply to probate. Their concern is protecting themselves against future claims that they dispensed the bank accounts to someone without the authority to access them.

They eventually decided not to require it............but any higher amount and they would have demanded probate.

Probate not only determines if the will is valid, but also provides the executor with the authority to act on behalf of the estate. It also means a full accounting of all assets at market value with the application for probate..........and a full accounting of the assets at the end of probate. The CRA reviews the probate inventory before issuing a final death certificate to calculate taxes owing on assets, since they are deemed as disposed at the time of the owners death. The inventory also determines the probate fees levied and the amount that lawyers and the executors can charge for their services.

The probate process is complicated................and at that point I would think a lawyer and accountant would be wise.

If a lawyer needs to be called in after mistakes are made in the administration of the estate, it can be a lot more costly than it would have been to ensure the estate process ran smoothly from the start.


----------



## caricole (Mar 12, 2012)

*



ensure the estate process ran smoothly from the start.

Click to expand...

*Here is how to start, in Québec with a notarized will

1) You are the liquidator and you have a notarized copy of the will in your possession

2) You request a official deadcertificate from the governement...2 weeks and 25$ ???

3) With this offical dead certificate, you request a "CERTIFICATE OF LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT" from the chamber of notaries and the bar association...up to 4 weeks delay and 45$

4) With these 4 official documents, you can now open a "SUCCESSION ACCOUNT" in a financial institution where the liquidator is the OLY PERSON ACT TO AND to write cheques...no power of atorny allowed and no bankcards allowed in a succession account

5) All amounts received are déposited in the succession ACCOUNT AND ALL PAYMENTS ARE ONLY MADE BY CHEQUE

6) I always told the beneficiaries "THEY COULD CHECK THE BOOKS AT ANY TIME.." never a problem

7) Collecting bank accounts, RRSP, RIF oustandin pension cheques etc....no problem and paying the outstanding bills

8) The biggest job is : FILING INCOME TAXES and the delays involved. The governement goes automaticly 3 years back for a deceased person, this means 3 to 6 months before you have the assesments if there are no problems in the previous years

9) As long as the liquidator realize the money in the estate account is not his money, and if he decides to make a PARTIAL DISTRIBUTION, he wil make it EQUAL to every beneficiary according to the will, no favours to anybody

10) Anybody showing up with a lawyer, I WILL BE LAUGHING IN HIS FACE and he will pay the laywer out of his own pocket

PS: I noticed some using the term of "EXCLUDED FROM A WILL" 

Who invented this non-existing situation

Peaple are " INCLUDED" in a will, and everybody else is automaticly "EXCLUDED" including you and me LOLOLOLOL :upset::love-struck:


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

According to common-law statutes in every province except Quebec, surviving spouses and direct descendants ("issue") of a deceased person are assumed to share in an inheritance, according to provisions set out in statute for how estates are divided if someone dies inestate (with no will). Thus there is a strong assumption that if your spouse or parent dies, you will share in any inheritance. People who fall in those categories but who do not inherit according to the provisions of a will are commonly referred to as "excluded" in the sense that they would ordinarily, by common law, be included.


----------



## caricole (Mar 12, 2012)

*



According to common-law statutes in every province except Quebec, surviving spouses and direct descendants ("issue") of a deceased person are assumed to share in an inheritance, according to provisions set out in statute for how estates are divided if someone dies inestate (with no will).

Click to expand...

*Same in Quebec, this is why it is so important to make a will

Handwritten, cost nothing but will create more problems and delays when you die

A Notarized will...and it becomes easy....even if you pay 500$ now, it takes time and 1.000$ if there is only a handwritte will at time of dead :hopelessness:


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Caricole..........it sounds like you are the ideal executor to administer an estate.

Unfortunately, that is not always the case.

Here are some things we encountered with an executor..............

Selling land from the estate from himself (executor) to himself (buyer) and then selling the land shortly after to a third party for a profit.

Failure to provide proper accounting of the estate accounts.

Distributing assets to 2 of 5 beneficiaries and refusing to distribute to the others without an executor release signed stating they are in full knowledge of all accounting and agree with the administration of the estate (which of course, they don't have any knowledge of the estate accounting)

Renting out estate land, without the permission of the beneficiaries, to their friends at less than fair market value.

Borrowing against the estate land and placing liens on some of the beneficiaries land.

Having the financial institutions with the liens on the property demanding full payment of the debt or they will seize the land.

Payment of executor fees before the distribution of the estate.

As you can see..........this is not a simple estate that was properly administered............hence the retention of a lawyer for the beneficiaries.

Without the lawyer, the beneficiaries would have knowledge of nothing that had transpired. He informed them of the activities.

The unfortunate reality is that by not having a lawyer to represent them at the initiation of the administration of the estate, the options for the beneficiaries are now limited to a possible expensive and lengthy lawsuit.

Caveat emptor...........when assigning an executor.

If they all where as honest and diligent as Caricole..........there wouldn't be issues...........but unfortunately all executors do not perform equally.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

My brother is also involved in an estate battle, where his wife and her brother were joint executors.

There was an inheritance of 2 properties.

One went to the sister and one to the brother........fair enough.

But, the property to the brother had a lien on it for the payment of a new roof (15,000) and the other had a lien on it for some work (10,000)

After funeral expenses, there was not enough money to pay the debts, so the sister paid the 10,000 debt on the home she inherited.

The brother refuses to pay the debt on the property he inherited. He is in bankruptcy and cannot borrow money to pay the debt. He cannot borrow against the home because it still belongs to the estate.

So, the will has not been closed and they are at a stalement with each of them not having ownership of the homes they live in.

Although most families deal with estates in a cooperative fashion with each other...........it isn't always the case.

Money.............can create all kinds of problems.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Having been through some problems with estates............there is one thing I do know people should do.

Ensure there is a pile of cash available.........to pay any and all outstanding debts for the estate.

Otherwise.........somebody has to borrow money (not always possible) or sell assets (not always desirable) to pay the debts.

Cash dedicated to pay debts, including income tax debt, is an ideal solution to a lot of potential problems.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

*To return to OP's original question:*

No, I wouldn't notify such a beneficiary ahead of time, for reasons that others have stated. However, the reference to "long-lost relative, with little communication" poses problems for an executor. How the heck is the executor supposed to track down this person, and how long will estate settlement be delayed while he tries, if no one has an address for him/her? If the testator cannot leave sufficient information in his estate papers to find this person, then I don't think they should be mentioned in the will.


----------

