RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: LordOfKent on Wednesday 16 March 11 22:26 GMT (UK)
-
Hi thought I would start the ball rolling again.
In I think it was yesterdays program, the one featuring the German POW, I found that particularly interesting as my former father in law was in this category. And like the featured person he didn't want to talk about it really. He stayed in England and married an English woman and settle down and had a family.
He died a few years ago and we were wondering about tracing his record while he was a prisoner, we have very little info about that time of his life, so any pointers as to where to look, or who to contact please?
John
-
There is a National Archives Research Guide Second World War 1939-1945: prisoners in British hands at http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guides/pow-displaced-persons.htm#16253
Stan
-
been catching up with some of last weeks episodes
did anyone notice the product placement ? Sarsons vinegar on Tony's desk, fish and chips lunches ?
a HH question - what did Lord Teviot mean when he said he picked up a case 12 years old - he said it was coming up to the time when there was no interest. Did he mean no interest from other HH's or no more interest on the money ? Is interest paid on any money in bank accounts ?
-
been catching up with some of last weeks episodes
did anyone notice the product placement ? Sarsons vinegar on Tony's desk, fish and chips lunches ?
a HH question - what did Lord Teviot mean when he said he picked up a case 12 years old - he said it was coming up to the time when there was no interest. Did he mean no interest from other HH's or no more interest on the money ? Is interest paid on any money in bank accounts ?
I took it to mean no more interest from other HH companies (ie they would have given up by then) and therefore he could pursue it at a more leisurely pace with less risk of the dreaded "competition"
-
There is a National Archives Research Guide Second World War 1939-1945: prisoners in British hands at http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/research-guides/pow-displaced-persons.htm#16253
Stan
Thanks for that Stan I've bookmarked that for further research.
John
-
I have taken to recording each day and watching at leisure at weekends. There was a recent episode that confused me. I was always under the impression that heirs had to be bloodlines.
The case in question was the school that closed down and the land (or money from the sale of the land) had to go back to the original family's descendants. This being the usual proviso during the Victorian Era when a rich person donated land for benefit of the poor, it prevented anyone selling up and pocketing the proceeds..
If I am not mistake one of the people who benefitted was the godson of one line. I think he had been found via the will of the Lady who had named him as a main beneficianary on her death, which is how F&F found him.
Jean
-
I'm no expert but I believe that the bloodline rules only kick in when the deceased does not leave a will
I think the logic in the case you mentioned is
go back to the people who donated the land
trace who they left their estates to (may not be blood relatives)
keep following down the lines in this way until you find people who are still alive
Linda
-
Thanks Linda,
hadn't thought of it like that.
Jean
-
Today's programme - the F & F case - did I miss something? (If you've still to watch sorry to spoil it, so I'll leave a gap)
The brother seemed to have been eliminated as untraceable rather than what had happened to him being established - bit surprised that would satisfy the Treasury Solicitor or have I missed something? (I'd assume insurance would be essential for this one, anyway). It seemed sad that the stepfamily knew there'd been a will, but somehow it had disappeared when the solicitor had gone under - I thought the Law Society were supposed to ensure that client records were passed on to another firm?
-
glad you mentioned that......I couldnt understand why they didnt have to prove that the brother was dead with no issue.......they said they knew he had gone to Canada.....so why couldnt he be traced?
Its a bit worrying to think a will could just disappear if a solicitor goes to the wall.
-
Glad there's a new post. Like Jean, I record the programmes but usually try to watch them the same evening. My OH has given up watching them as he says they're all the same ??? I can see what he means which is why I quite like the history of occupations etc. we are being given in this series.
-
Can anybody help?..
I've noticed that on Heir Hunters on BBC1 the death certificates they use often have the place of birth and the date of birth of the person they are trying to trace. Whenever I've sent for a death certificate there is no mention of either date or place of birth. Why is that?
Regards
Tony
-
Hi
Those are modern certificates that show the info you mention. Without looking at my records, I can't remember when they started using the new layout. I know it was at least 1990, but could have been much earlier.
Lizzie
-
They are probably death certs for a later period than you have. Certs from the 1970/80's have more info
-
Thanks LIzzie,
I thought it was because the researchers on the show actually went to the registry office in person and were given a more detailed copy of the death certificate than the one we would get if we applied by post.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Tony
-
And thanks Carole.
Tony
-
Post 1984, BMD certificates were recorded and stored digitally - maybe something to do with that ?
-
Entries on death certificates after 1st April 1969 also show the place and date of birth of the deceased.
Stan
-
I think what is a problem in this case is it was not made clear whether the Soliciktors voluntarily closed or whether there was an intervention. If there was an intervention there are clear rules what the firm taking over the solicitors should do with the paperwork. However looking on the web one firm that does do interventions just said specifically about wills that they just file them ie they don't read them and write to people to tell them where the will is now held - not bvery helpful !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Like others I agree that I would have thought there would be rules - from the Law Society or the like, as to what happened to papers if a Solicitor voluntarily closed but I could not find out anything about this. It would have been useful if this was covered in the programme but I suspect it wasn't as its not straightforward
-
1969 Birth and Death certificates printed in portrait instead of landscape, however date and place of birth would be on the certificate only if the person registering the death knew it.
-
So refreshing to find that someone else in the family had a letter regarding a adoption pre 1926 conducted by a solictor.. Mine was my grandmothers i am lucky i got both passed on to me the agreement and solictors letter that went with it so todays episode was well worth watching !!
-
Adoption and inheriting surprised me when I read up on it. When you're legally adopted you're entitled to inherit from your adopted family but not from your blood relatives.
(*)
My dad was recently contacted by an heir hunting firm after his brother died. My Dad thought he'd died 40 years ago so it came as a bit of a shock!
(*) Moderator Comment: advertising removed.
-
referring back to the will and Solicitors going out of buisness.......noticed on todays programme that there was a copy with a solicitor but it was said that the original was needed to get estate released........fortunately eventually they apparently did go with the copy.....................so even if the will lodged with solicitor had been found if it wasnt the original it still might not have been accepted
-
I was a bit confused with today's search for heirs of the lady whose husband had died in a factory accident. The heir hunter said his firm couldn't find her death certificate, presumably because she had a fairly common name and they didn't know when or where she'd died. Then he said he decided to look at what bit of information he already had and, bingo, there was her death certificate, from which although the informant had since died, he spoke to the informant's daughter.
Whether this was a continuity problem, or what I don't know. I re-ran that part of the programme a couple or so times to make sure it was as I thought.
Lizzie
ps. heirhound - Once someone is legally adopted they no longer "belong" to the birth family, but to their adoptive family.
-
I was a bit confused with today's search for heirs of the lady whose husband had died in a factory accident. The heir hunter said his firm couldn't find her death certificate, presumably because she had a fairly common name and they didn't know when or where she'd died. Then he said he decided to look at what bit of information he already had and, bingo, there was her death certificate, from which although the informant had since died, he spoke to the informant's daughter.
Whether this was a continuity problem, or what I don't know. I re-ran that part of the programme a couple or so times to make sure it was as I thought.
Lizzie
Lizzie - we spotted that when we came to watch the recording last night. Hoopers man said something like they looked at what little paperwork had been passed on & that her sister-in-law was the informant and that speaking to informant's daughter enabled them to identify the correct death - meanwhile on screen was the death certificate with the focus on the informant's name! I think sometimes "they" don't check that pictures & words tally! As someone familiar with the area once they mentioned the industry I wondered if the firm was Richard Johnson & Nephew - again pausing when they showed the newspaper clipping & getting nearer the screen (small screen here) confirmed it was.
On the same case they said that as two of her brothers had died before her they were ruled out - in a current intestacy case that wouldn't be so if they'd left family - are the rules different for this sort of case or was this a case of details being omitted? I'd rather have proper information that chats to a former employee who wasn't there at the time of the accident.
I did find it dreadful that Norah had never had the benefit of the money that arose from her husband's death and then died within a few years, because of an outdated attitude that a widow couldn't handle money :( Why on earth had the relevant court waited over 50 years to search, I hope this isn't the norm!
-
Jean, bloodlines only apply if there is no will. When property was given to provide a school it fell under the ambit of the School Sites Act, so if such property ceased to be used as such, there was a right of reverter to the original descendants of the donor. If one of these people left a will leaving their estate to a non relative then the bloodline is irrelevant. Only if there is no will would a blood relative need to be found-
-
On the same case they said that as two of her brothers had died before her they were ruled out - in a current intestacy case that wouldn't be so if they'd left family - are the rules different for this sort of case or was this a case of details being omitted? I'd rather have proper information that chats to a former employee who wasn't there at the time of the accident.
I did wonder if these 2 brothers hadn't had children, so if the money had been available when the lady died, it would have gone to the surviving brother. Then when he died he left his estate to his widow. She made a will leaving everything to her nephew. So in a roundabout way the nephew on her family line got everything.
I know it's good to have background info but sometimes it seems to be to the detriment of giving full facts.
-
...The case in question was the school that closed down and the land (or money from the sale of the land) had to go back to the original family's descendants. This being the usual proviso during the Victorian Era when a rich person donated land for benefit of the poor, it prevented anyone selling up and pocketing the proceeds..
Thinking about the same case, but contrasting with what happens on many programs, a cousin of a deceased is traced but they are found to be dead themselves, so their children are then automatically heirs. Is any consideration given to the will of said cousin - e.g. they may have wanted all their money to go to the cats home (which is where mine is going!) rather than their children?
-
Wharfrat,
If the cousin of a deceased is traced and they are themselves dead then what happens to that dead cousins share depends on their will. Their children would only automatically be heirs if there is no will and no wife of the deceased cousin. Of course, if the children are named in the will as the heirs then they may benefit. If there is a wife, the children may not benefit where there is no will depending on the size of the estate i.e. the wife gets everything within certain monetary limits.
:)
-
Thanx Riojatinto
I kind of thought that was the case, it just never seems to get mentioned in the programs...!
-
Thanx Riojatinto
I kind of thought that was the case, it just never seems to get mentioned in the programs...!
That's what I meant about the social history now being inserted into Heir Hunters sometimes getting in the way of information we might need. Even non Rootschatters would like to know that type of info.
-
Wharfrat,
If the cousin of a deceased is traced and they are themselves dead then what happens to that dead cousins share depends on their will. Their children would only automatically be heirs if there is no will and no wife of the deceased cousin. Of course, if the children are named in the will as the heirs then they may benefit. If there is a wife, the children may not benefit where there is no will depending on the size of the estate i.e. the wife gets everything within certain monetary limits.
:)
I think there's a confusion here. Most of the Heir Hunters programmes are cases where there is intestacy in England & Wales. In those cases the estate passes according to those rules alone. Wills of potential beneficiaries only become relevant if they have died after the intestate case, so that their share then passes according to their will. If they have died before the intestate case then the rules of intestacy are followed ie blood lines only (modified - including their legally adopted equivalents).
There have been a few cases (like the school land proceeds one), which are not intestacy are and don't follow those rules.
-
mshrmh beat me to it there have been several real surprises recently
I was amazed that they glossed over the brother in Canada - more explanation would have been nice - ie insurance,
even more so about the solicitor going into liquidation and - hard luck - no will. You'd have thought there was some kind of provision for something like that from the Law Society or something.
then to cap it all (I record them too and watch in no particular orde)because the original will was lost, the Treasury rejected the copy held by the solicitor because the testator might have changed their mind and declared it to be intestate! they later relented, but phew.
I wonder if the central will registry has originals or copies?
-
then to cap it all (I record them too and watch in no particular order)because the original will was lost, the Treasury rejected the copy held by the solicitor because the testator might have changed their mind
My OH and I have what I assume are the originals of our wills (I might look at them later) and our solicitor has copies, but some people just leave their wills with the solicitor for safe keeping, so how can the Treasury reject a copy held by a solicitor in case the testator might have changed their mind. If you change your mind you have to alter your will, (in which case surely the solicitor would have had either an up to date will, or an addendum to the original will) or the original one stands.
To save us the bother of having to keep altering our wills they are made out that after one of us dies, everything goes to the survivor and after both my OH and I are deceased everything is shared between the children (named) and if any of our children pre-decease us then to their children (not named). The solicitor suggested we didn't name the grandchildren or each time a new one was born we would have to go back and alter the will.
Lizzie
-
I think there may be a little confusion over what is called a 'copy' of a will, because a will is only valid if it contains the names and signatures of the person making the will and the witnesses, and if the will post-dates others that exist. So, a copy of a will is only valid if it is a duplicate of the will, and signed and dated as per the original. As far as I'm aware, photocopies and copied made in other hands would not be valid.
-
That's what I meant about the social history now being inserted into Heir Hunters sometimes getting in the way of information we might need. Even non Rootschatters would like to know that type of info.
On the other hand, it's better than being told, in every single programme, that family trees are constructed from BMD certs and censuses!
I also get a bit fed up with
1) the Heir Hunters getting frustrated because they can't contact someone by phone - it's not life and death, just their commission at stake
2) the Heir Hunters telling us how clever they've been tracking someone down, when they've only applied the sort of logic we do all the time
I think the programme has reached a difficult stage, where it can't decide whether it's for beginners or people who know the basics
Personally
I like the social history bits
I would like less basic information
I'd like to see more loose ends tied up
Basically what everyone else has already said really :) :)
Linda
PS It still has some really good bits every now and again!
-
I love the programme and hope that we get many more episodes in the future... so much better than the load of old rubbish that is currently on.
-
The only thing that I don't like about the programme is that they usually do two cases simultaneously on the programme, and my feeble male brain often gets confused between the two cases (often aided by a glass or two of red wine, when I'm watching the programme in the evening !) :)
-
Have you noticed that so many programmes now do this, it drives me mad as well.
-
Well they do keep recapping everything that's gone before!!
-
A copy of a will is just that a copy. It is not valid as an original will and usually no official body (i.e. courts for probate/letters of administration) would accept a copy as being valid. Most people keep the original will in a strong box at the bank or leave it with their solicitor who will have a document room which is usually fire proof. They only have a copy themselves usually so they can remember what they put in the will and so that the family actually know that a will exists when they are searching through the deceased´s papers etc. Having an original will at home is dangerous in that it could be destroyed, thrown out accidentally or worse (as has happened in some cases) when someone who does not inherit as they thought they should destroys the will (since they may be better off under the intestacy rules).
A copy of a will would probably only be accepted by the courts etc if there was a genuine cast iron reason why the original could not be produced i.e. solicitors office destroyed in bomb blast etc...then they might accept a copy.
-
It is possible to have two originals of a will ie the will is produced twice and each is signed and witnessed by the same people at the same time.
This is what people should do if they want their will at home and with the Solicitor - they should not make copies eg by photocopying.
In this case they are not copies - both are originals, and legal.
-
still on wills......todays programme had another case of a will not being accepted because "it wasnt correctly made" but they didnt explain what was incorrect........wish they would finish telling you all facts............I love the programme but do find it a bit frustrating sometimes
-
Well they do keep recapping everything that's gone before!!
Probably for when it is shown on other channels with adverts the program is then stretched out to 60 minutes long and to keep the Nick29's (sorry couldn't help myself!) in the loop with what the story is especially as each episode contains two.
I do wonder if they have had much luck with the request for help segments in each episode.
-
A will could be invalid for several reasons but basicially it has to be signed and dated by the testator in front of TWO witnesses who must also sign the will as evidence that they have seen the testator execute the will. Legally, the witnesses do not have to know the contents of the will. All they are witnessing is the signature of the Testator to the document.
-
I reckon it's worth the £15.00 to lodge your will with the probate registry for safe keeping - best chance of finding it again ;D
-
even more so about the solicitor going into liquidation and - hard luck - no will. You'd have thought there was some kind of provision for something like that from the Law Society or something
The impression that I got was that the will had not been drawn up with a solicitor but with an accountant that said he knew 'how to do wills' - and it was the accountancy firm that went bust
-
still on wills......todays programme had another case of a will not being accepted because "it wasnt correctly made" but they didnt explain what was incorrect........wish they would finish telling you all facts............I love the programme but do find it a bit frustrating sometimes
A will can be invalid for a variety of reasons - the main ones being that a will has not been properly witnessed or dated. Another problem is that the person who drew up the will has been ambiguous in the wording, and it has not been made clear exactly what their wishes were. Another pitfall is that sometimes 50 years can elapse between a will being made and executed, and those that have been left money could have died themselves, often intestate. That's why it's worth the money to have the will drawn up by a professional, who will ensure that the will is worded and witnessed correctly, and will advise of any possible pitfalls in the future. But whoever draws up the will, it remains the property of the person who wrote it, and it's up to them to ensure that it outlives them.
My father had a problem with an invalid will - his son (my half-brother) had been left some money and property by his maternal aunt, but when this aunt saw his propensity for gambling, she changed her will and left the money to my father. Unfortunately although she signed and dated this new will, she never had it witnessed, and although the will was found, it was invalid, and my half-brother got the money when she died.
-
even more so about the solicitor going into liquidation and - hard luck - no will. You'd have thought there was some kind of provision for something like that from the Law Society or something
The impression that I got was that the will had not been drawn up with a solicitor but with an accountant that said he knew 'how to do wills' - and it was the accountancy firm that went bust
To be honest, a solicitor would be the very last place that I would deposit a will, because they appear to have far too many 'accidental fires', which conveniently seem to get them out of their obligation to keep all their case documents for 10 years. Storing paper is more costly than possible litigation, it seems, assuming any intent is ever proved. When I went through an instestacy claim myself a few years ago, my own action was hampered by the original documents had been destroyed by one of these convenient 'fires' in a solicitors office, although remarkably some documents had been electronically stored.
-
I worked in a solicitors office about 20 years ago (briefly!)
Their safe-storage room was out the back of the building on the way to the car park (which had public access) and the door was never locked during the working day.
Guess where I keep my will?
Linda
-
even more so about the solicitor going into liquidation and - hard luck - no will. You'd have thought there was some kind of provision for something like that from the Law Society or something
The impression that I got was that the will had not been drawn up with a solicitor but with an accountant that said he knew 'how to do wills' - and it was the accountancy firm that went bust
You're muddling 2 programmes. In one programme the solicitor had gone bust so no copy was found, in the other the man used an accountancy firm that also went bust.
-
[quote I do wonder if they have had much luck with the request for help segments in each episode.
I doubt it, but really,really wish they'd tell us!
-
Thinking about the same case, but contrasting with what happens on many programs, a cousin of a deceased is traced but they are found to be dead themselves, so their children are then automatically heirs. Is any consideration given to the will of said cousin - e.g. they may have wanted all their money to go to the cats home (which is where mine is going!) rather than their children?
...I've just watched the Somers/Brophy programme (7th March - yes I'm a little behind!) and they referred to my very point! Neil Fraser even mentioned the Cats Home...!
-
Children are only automatically heirs if their parents died intestate, or if their parents made a will making them heirs.
-
Heir Hunters is currently repeating on BBC1 at 9:15 daily