Probate - DWP

The new debt becomes the liability of the executors.How they get the money back is up to them. Was the mother in receipt of any benefit other than old age pension? If she was eg DLA or carers allowance etc etc then they want to check that her assets match up to her claim. If she 'forgot' to declare investments or bank balances then they will make a substantial claim on the estate. The fact that the executor seems to want to decline answering the request would IMO make it a certainty that they would start an investigation starting with a copy of the will, which is now in the public domain, since Probate has been granted. I think it is good practise for an Executor to contact the DW&P and ask whether there is any clawback due when reporting the death. IANAL

Not a wise move at all. He is likely to be in much more trouble if he fails to cooperate. If the deceased omitted to declare assets and thus obtained benefits they were not entitled to the DWP are quite rightly entitled to recover the benefits that were fraudulently obtained by the deceased.

The executors should have placed a notice in the London Gazette and a local paper to the effect that they would distribute the estate unless claims were made by a certain date. If not the executors are usually personally liable for any claims.

Peter Crosland

Talk your friend out of it, that would be a very unwise move.

The phrase is there simply because in the past people didn't realise the DWP could ask for this information.

The interest from the DWP is mainly in relation to means-tested benefits. You'd be surprised what is uncovered after a death, in some cases bank accounts with several thousands of pounds (and I mean tens of thousands of pounds in some cases) where the deceased had been pleading poverty. It's a recovery of public funds which should never have been paid out in the first place. Its origins are somewhere back in history, probably the old poor laws.

Don't know this bit, sorry

Robbie

Why should anyone be in much *more* trouble if they fail to co-operate?

What sort of trouble would that be?

The worse case scenario is that the deceased was paid too much in benefits and this amount must come out of the estate. The maximum that the DWP can recover is the amount which was over paid (if indeed this was the case).

I suspect that it is a trawling exercise by a department that is trying to justify its own existence. It would be interesting to know how much it costs to run that department and how much they actually recover each year. They are probably recovering payments made as a result of the incompetence of the DWP rather than any fraudulent activity of the deceased.

It is up to the DWP to prove that this is the case - let them do their own work - including providing all evidence of what the deceased "claimed".

1. There are almost certainly offences and penalties for not providing that information.
2. The agency may just decide to get more bl***y minded over the matter and has the power and means to make life miserable.

This sort of approach may be OK at the Old Bailey, but has little relevance with respect to administrative law. If cooperation is not forthcoming, they can probably make a generous assessment of what is owed, and it is the person at the other end who has to show that it is wrong.

In which case you will be able to detail the offences/the penalties and in particular the law which is relevant - please do so.

When you have done that you can then please explain how the agency can make life miserable for the executor.

Of course - if your response is pure speculation or wishful thinking then just ignore the request.

Because, as you have already been told the debt will pass to the executor. They will be far less inclined to write it off if you muck them about than if you are honest and helpful

tim

Sure, but that can well amount to quite a bit, and it is the executor who will be personally liable, given that probate is over with and the estate has been distributed. The executors have no legal power to force the beneficiaries to give anything back. This would not be a problem, of course, where the executors *are* the beneficiaries.

There is insurance available for just this eventuality, to indemnify the executors against the financial consequences of having failed to establish (through no real fault of their own) to whom the deceased owed money. Too late for that now, though, in the OP's friend's case.

Robert wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

snip

I too am dealing with, what I thought was a straightforward probate, and I have received a variety of communications from this department - no doubt they do have this right to ask for information, and I guess that in the case that I am dealing with they may be entitled to some of the estate (because in dealing with the deceased's finances, we unearthed some investments that no-one seemed to be aware of) - but - they are grossly inefficient (two people in the same office send conflicting letters on the same day), and their collections office (in Corby?) are downright bl**dy rude. The initial letter I got said quite clearly that we were ill advised to distribute the estate until their claim is settled. Mind you, they don't seem to be in any hurry to let me know how much they want, or to return the documents that they asked for.... Now.... don't get me started on the various parts of the Inland Revenue....

Now just let me understand what you're saying here.

There is a possibility (NB a possibility) that the estate owes the DWP some money. If the executor refuses to provide the information because they haven't got it/can't easily get it/have no legal obligation to provide it, then the DWP can do their calculations and can inform the executor that the estate owes some money. The executor can then check if this is the case and then pay it if they agree. If, on the other hand, the executor rolls over and provides all the requested information, then the DWP will just say many thanks - just forget about it.

Do the DWP have access to the probate return? If so, they may have a pretty good idea that there was an over-payment anyway, which is why they are making enquiries.

This is how newspapers etc can tell how much a deceased person's will was worth x of pounds. The document will provide an amount of the total value of the estate.

If they did then they wouldn't need the details from the executor - they could just issue an invoice (if one was due).

So they don't

But they should.

In message , Eric Jones writes

This is quite a common scenario. On death, it sometimes turns out that the deceased had assets that the DWP was unaware of, that mean they weren't entitled to some of the benefits they had received. The letter means the executor has had personal notice of the claim, and is therefore personally liable for it. Ignoring the letter and going ahead with distribution was probably high in the top ten of the most stupid things an executor can do.

Not in this case, though, since (if I interpret the OP correctly) the letter came *after* distribution had already happened.

wrote: []

Does the valuation of the estate (or assets for means-tested benefits for that matter) include 'goods and chattels with a life of

In terms of the most stupid things one could do, how would it compare to a solicitor jumping to a conclusion on limited facts which have been presented to him?

In my case, my mother died - I was the executor - there were two beneficiaries my sister and myself. All assets were with a bank. I applied for probate and spoke to the bank in parallel. The day I received the grant of probate I took it in to the bank with the death certificate. In a matter of days I received a cheque for the full value of the assets. I split the money with my sister.

Some time later I received the trawl from the DWP.

I see no stupidity in what I did - the OP could be in a similar situation.

Another of the most stupid things an executor can do is to waste money on a solicitor when applying for probate and distributing the estate.

It would depend on the value of the whole estate. So if there was not enough cash to pay the debts then assets would have to be sold to raise the money. Then the debts have to be settled in a strict order of precedence.

The answer is not to cheat the DWP by making false claims.

Peter Crosland

The law provides that creditors have six months to bring claims. Therefore if the distribution has happened within the six months without the executor checking with the DWP if they have a claim, he is still liable.

This is why a solicitor-executor will always write to the DWP and get clearance from them before distributing the estate.

If the letter from the DWP has come after the end of six months from the grant of probate, then the position would be different.

I believe that the executor would be entitled to seek money back from the residuary beneficiaries to meet any liability, but the executor remains primarily liable, and will have to pay any money due even if he cannot get the money back from the beneficiaries.