[Geoff Smith]

Claire

Your original post indicated a dispute between you and one of your solicitors as to the correct styling of the account.

My replies have given a 100% guaranteed solution which, if adopted, will settle this dispute and any going forwards.

If you are happy with how you do it then stand your ground – my own experiences are that solicitors usually think they know best on everything.

[Geoff Smith]

No – because it is clearly showing the client to be the executors.

If it does not show “executors of” then that clearly, and incorrectly, makes the deceased person the client.

I added the correction as an afterthought because starting the client name with “The” may well have too much time spent searching.

I had, pre retirement, over 40 years in legal accounting and never was the styling I suggested ever questioned.

[Geoff Smith]

Just a technical correction to my post.

The preferable way to style the client would, in my opinion be –
eg
“ Smith, John (deceased) – Executors of”

as this may assist when doing a name search or locating on a client name list.

[Geoff Smith]

Phil

A deceased person cannot be a client – they have no capacity in which to be able to give instructions.

The client is – and always will be – the Executor/s in a probate matter.

I’m surprised that your auditors don’t pick you up on this.

[Geoff Smith]

Mark is (almost) spot on.

The executors are your client so the client name should be Executors of ??? (deceased) and the matter as appropriate – for example you will have one matter titled “Probate” and at least (usually) one other matter “Sale of xxx”.
All funds and transactions outside of any property sale should go into the probate matter.
Any transactions in relation to a property sale (if any) should go into the second matter and as and when completion takes place the residual proceeds can be transferred to the probate ledger.
Fund

• This reply was modified 1 week, 1 day ago by Geoff Smith.

[Geoff Smith]

I think the answer is that you should always endeavour to comply with the rules at all times.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

It is likely the case that there are other breaches within the accounts which the auditors have not picked up given that they are sampling randomly.

Take the positive from only the one being noted but tighten up on procedures to aim for a clean sheet next time round.

• This reply was modified 2 weeks, 1 day ago by Geoff Smith. Reason: Grammatical error 🙈

[Geoff Smith]

Isn’t the answer then to pay the money to the solicitors acting for your purchase and for them to hold the money on trust in their client account – there is an underlying transaction – or in a joint solicitors escrow account?

[Geoff Smith]

Your post is not clear as to the “probate issues”. Are you acting in the probate as well as the conveyancing or is the probate issue related to the purchase?

Additionally if you send the sale proceeds back then presumably the purchasers solicitor is in the same position as you and will not want to hold those funds either.

If the funds can’t be held by your firm then why can’t they be either held as probate funds, presumably in a designated deposit account, or passed to the firm dealing with the probate to be held and returned to your firm when the purchase proceeds?

[Geoff Smith]

I wonder why an individual in the firm would want to pay £79 for £79 then unless they believe there to be an added value to the collection?

My view now is that if it is cash which is still legal tender then it should be banked in the normal way.

There are places such as Vintage Cash Cow who will give a free valuation and free postage both ways.

However what has to be considered is the cost/benefit of pursuing this any further unless there is a real likelihood of an beneficial increase in value and the bank route seems the professional way forward.

[Geoff Smith]

My views –
1. Do you have anything in writing to say that the coins are only worth face value?
2. I don’t think that without a positive answer to (1) it would be ethical to allow a member of staff, especially in the accounts department, to purchase at face value.
3. Why is your firm dealing with this anyway – you refer to executors, surely that is their responsibility?

• This reply was modified 2 weeks, 5 days ago by Geoff Smith.

[Geoff Smith]

A thought- why can’t she open a bank account in the name of Mrs X as trustee for Mr X?
That way she can still receive the payment intended for Mr X into that account and then distribute or make payments as she feels appropriate and also clearly identify any payments as being distinct from any joint income.

[Author]

Posts