Is there something similar going on with Wills and our collective attitude towards them? Having a Will that you feel good about, that makes sense to you, and that will not likely lead to the implosion or explosion of your family, is really quite important. And yet in spite of this, Wills are often treated as an afterthought; a box that has to be ticked. Some lawyers routinely use Wills as a loss-leader, and some clients view them as irritation – something barely worth paying for. Quite predictably, the net result can be clients getting exactly what they’ve asked and paid for: a ‘simple Will’. What even is that? Presumably, a ‘simple Will’ is a Will that says you leave everything first to your sweetheart of many years, and then to your children equally – those children, of course, being exclusively the product of your union with the aforesaid sweetheart. And if your life has played out in exactly this fashion, then a ‘simple Will’ may just get you over the line. But if you have: remarried and you have children from your previous relationship; or remarried and your new partner has children from their previous relationship; or engaged in extra-nuptial relations outside of your union with your sweetheart of many years, and those extra-nuptial relations have produced children… In order for a ‘simple Will’ to work, you need to have led a simple life. If your life has been a little more ‘nuanced’, then you are going to need a Will that has been designed to accommodate your personal situation.

Sam* and Liz* came to us following the death of their mother, Helen*.  Their father (and Helen’s husband) had died some years earlier. A few weeks after Helen’s funeral, the lawyers for Helen’s estate advised Sam and Liz that a gentleman, Henry*, had come forward claiming that at the time of Helen’s death, he was Helen’s de facto partner. Not only was Henry asking for half of the value of Helen’s estate, he also seemed to be claiming that most of Helen’s personal chattels in fact belonged to him. Sam and Liz had been aware that Helen had a friend called Henry. Moreover, they had been aware that Helen and Henry regularly had meals together, and that Helen often paid Henry to assist her with various household tasks. However, they could not understand (much less accept) Henry’s claim that he and Helen were in a qualifying de facto relationship – that is, a relationship that had legal recognition under the Property (Relationships) Act 1976, and which therefore granted property rights to Henry. Helen and Henry had never: Lived together; Owned assets together; Managed their finances together; Announced or otherwise presented themselves publicly as a couple; or Otherwise gone about their lives together in a manner that suggested they envisaged their future as a shared one. It didn’t make sense to Sam and Liz. Nor did it seem right or fair, and so consequently, Henry’s claims were extremely upsetting for them. Their unhappiness with the situation only increased when they learned that Henry’s lawyers had formally filed an application in the Family Court. Our role here at Lucas and Lucas was to guide Sam and Liz through the process of opposing Henry’s application. This involved generating the Court documents and correspondence, but more importantly and more fundamentally, it involved making sure that Sam and Liz didn’t feel baffled or intimidated by the legal process. We helped them to understand the comparative strengths and weaknesses of their case and Henry’s, and we helped them to prepare for a settlement conference – a settlement conference which ultimately produced a positive result for Sam and Liz. If you have any questions regarding claims against an estate please get in touch. * All names have been changed.

As you are probably well aware, there are commercial entities that offer services regarding the administration of trusts and deceased estates. These entities will often prepare a free Will for you (or virtually no charge). In exchange for preparing your free Will, these entities appoint themselves as the executor of your estate.  So when you die, the entity will administer your estate. This kind of approach to Will-making and estate planning is problematic for a number of reasons. First of all, the Will and the Will-maker are not the primary focus.  Rather, the primary focus is the entities’ business model – i.e. cultivating and maintaining a steady stream of estates-in-waiting. The greater the number of free Wills that the entities hand out, the greater the number of future revenue streams that are locked in for the benefit of those entities. Now of course, when a lawyer prepares a Will for a client, the lawyer (not unreasonably) anticipates/hopes that they (or at least the law firm that employs them) may be engaged to assist with the administration of the Will-maker’s estate. Nonetheless, the Will-maker is completely free to change lawyers, and the executors of the Will-maker’s estate are (usually) equally free to engage a different lawyer and none of this requires any change to the Will itself. But if the Will has been drafted by one of these commercial entities, the only way to end the entities’ involvement – realistically – is for the Will-maker to prepare a new Will. Secondly, the economics of these transactions are more than just a little opaque. While it’s true that the Will itself comes free (or virtually free) of any immediate charge, the commercial entities in question will more than make up for this loss-leading when they begin invoicing the Will-maker’s estate. So while a Will-maker might save themselves anywhere between $200-$1500 (depending on the complexity of their affairs) by getting a ‘free Will’……their estate will incur legal costs that have the potential to be many times greater than whatever savings the Will-maker made by not going to a lawyer who specialises in estate planning and the drafting of Wills.

Many of us own an automobile.  However, most of us do not engage in DIY engine repairs. Why? Because most of us don’t really know anything about the nuances of the combustion engine, nor of automobile repair in general. Likewise, most of us do not engage in DIY plumbing, electrical repair, or the manufacturing of pharmaceuticals or explosives.  We leave this to the experts. The same wisdom needs to be applied to the drafting of our Wills. At its best, the drafting of a Will that accommodates the circumstances and serve the needs of a given individual, combines technical expertise with creative writing. Online, do-it-yourself Will kits, are the preschool paint-by-numbers equivalent. If you have lived your life in a paint-by-numbers, fill-in-the-blanks, no-special advice-ever-needed kind of way, then you might just get away with a fill-in-the-blanks kind of Will. But most people won’t, because most people are living lives that involve varying degrees of nuance, complexity and uncertainty. Most of us are living lives that are far from simple......and we need Wills that have been written to suit. At Lucas & Lucas, we take the preparation of Wills seriously; not only because we want you to be happy with your Will but because we want those you leave behind to happy as well.

There is a very old and hackneyed saying that litigation is for '...the mad, the bad, and the sad...' This reflects the fact that many people get into disputes because of base reasons like anger, irrationality, and desperation. Fundamentally positive reasons for taking action will normally be more about you, not about your opponent. And a good reason for taking action will not only resonate with you; it will also leave you integrity intact. I am taking this action: "...because I want to put to a roof over my family's head, and to give them some security" "...because I need a solution that does justice to the relationship I had with my late partner for nearly thirty years" "...because I want my children to have the opportunity to farm" "...because this is what my dad would have wanted" "...because it's only fair that my work over a lifetime should be recognised" Whatever your reason for acting is, it should inform not only your strategy but also the way you go about finding a solution. Most people know on some level that it doesn't make sense for them to waste money, time, and life on a dispute for no good reason. What is much less obvious is what we consider the main benefit of defining in positive terms you are trying to achieve. Time and again we have found that people who know why they are acting are so much more resilient in the face of difficulties. When we remind our clients of their 'why', they relax; they can think; and then the next step, whatever it might be, becomes clear.