.png)
4 days ago
7
My father died with a Barclays account balance of over £60,000. My sibling and I were joint executors. The money in the estate was to be divided equally between us and the rest of our siblings.
Unfortunately, the relationship between my sibling and me has broken down and they are not engaging with me, or the administration of the estate.
We had a meeting with Barclays to open an executor’s account last year but, before it started, they texted me to say they would not be attending. I therefore submitted the required forms to open the executor account on my own.
Barclays has allowed my share of the money to be paid for me, but that leaves thousands stuck in a current account which it refuses to release to me so I can administer the estate. It won’t even move the funds to a savings account where they could be earning interest.
Barclays says it needs joint instructions, and that I should start legal proceedings to have my sibling removed as an executor. This would be an expensive endeavour for what is relatively a small amount of money. This seems an arbitrary decision by Barclays.
Name withheld
I’m so sorry to hear of your grief. Barclays tells me that it has to have the signatures of both named executors on a closure form before a balance can be paid into an agreed account, and the deceased’s account closed.
Apparently, your sibling called Barclays to ask why you had already been paid your share, which suggests they could lodge a complaint if the bank paid the rest of the money without their permission.
The bank says it has written to your sibling requesting their engagement with the process, but adds that it can do no more.
Its stance is correct, according to Ian Bond of the Law Society’s wills and equity committee.
“Executors are appointed jointly and so Barclays is within its rights to request that instructions are received from the both of them,” he explains. “The bank will be concerned that, if they paid the reader the funds, then they might not pass these to the siblings, and the bank may have to pay out the funds a second time if the siblings took action against the bank.”
Your sibling could formally renounce their right to be executor by filling out a Deed of Renunciation if they have not already begun administering the estate, or fill out a different form to have their “power reserved”. This means they could apply to the Probate Registry to act as executor further down the line, if desired, freeing you up to apply for probate alone in the meantime and get the estate wound up. Neither of these options cost any more than standard probate fees, but do need interaction from your sibling, which might not be possible.
Otherwise, you could jointly appoint a solicitor (which again needs cooperation) to act on your behalf, which would involve costs.
Failing that, I’m afraid you will have to seek leave from a court to remove your sibling as executor, but this is, indeed, expensive, and a court will only comply if it is satisfied all attempts at a resolution have been exhausted.
The court could order the costs to be paid by the estate, or by either or both parties, depending on circumstances, and it’s best to get advice from a solicitor for contentious probate.
KT is also struggling to wind up an estate after a family breakdown.
“My mother did not update her 30-year-old will before she died,” she writes. “This will names me as the sole beneficiary but, as I was under 18 at the time, my mother’s sister, and her sister-in-law, were to be executors. The sister-in-law is now dead, and, after a massive falling out 12 years ago, my mother’s sister is estranged from the family.
“My mother’s life insurance company is refusing to release the £10,000 in her policy to me, despite having proof that I’m the sole beneficiary. Another insurer paid out promptly after I signed a promissory note, absolving them of all responsibility.”
KT says she consulted a solicitor, who wanted the address of the surviving executor, which she did not have. In any case, legal fees could swallow a large slice of the payout.
Often, a customer nominates the person a life insurance policy should be paid out to in the event of their death. It’s worth KT checking if her mother did this and, if so, whether she named the executors as payees, in which case the insurer is following her instructions.
According to Ian Bond, providers have their own protocols if there is no nomination, including paying out to the beneficiary of a will or next of kin.
“One provider has taken a pragmatic approach and paid out, whereas the other is not showing similar common sense in the situation,” he says.
Since KT doesn’t want to incur legal costs, he suggests she make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Email [email protected]. Include an address and phone number. Submission and publication are subject to our terms and conditions
