Bad press for heir hunters

[LizzieW]

Dudley

I haven't even found a branch of cousins who died out.  My father's cousins either didn't marry, married but had no children but died many years ago most probably without any assets or married and had children who now have their own children. 

The one exception was my father's half cousin (they shared the same grandmother who was married twice, so different grandfathers).   Her husband  died from wounds the day before Armistice, but she herself didn't die until many years later, 1950s or 60s.  She had money which she'd inherited from her own mother who had married (years after having her daughter) to a rich man with children, but who got some inheritance from him.  Apparently when she (my father's half aunt) died, there were advertisements in newspapers asking for any relatives to come forward.  I've been told by a distant ancestor, that some 1st cousins once removed saw the advert and claimed the estate.  They didn't let on that this lady actually had cousins who were still living and they, according to my distant relative, inherited a fortune.  Maybe if an heir hunter company had been in existence in the 1950s/60s the money would have been shared out.  As I know of at least 10 cousins, they wouldn't have had a large amount each, but would have been grateful for what they got.

Too late now to do anything about it.  All the cousins are dead and I have no idea what happened to the money. 

[violeign]

I think the point that violeign was making is that it is not the Treasury's job to see that the money gets to the heirs.  It is the Treasury's job to hold (and use) unclaimed monies for the nation.

If one heir puts in a claim and the claim is found to be valid (i.e. they are within the degrees of relationship to have a true claim), then it becomes their responsibilty to ensure that all of the money goes to the rightful heirs.  That is all the work that the heirhunters are claiming responsibilty for - I presume that they have insurance that covers them against mistakes, only one of the things that that independent heir needs to worry about.

[added: you're probably fine if you're a close heir that has been overlooked (half-brother or half-sister perhaps that the other marriage was not found in initial searches), but if, like me, you're a descendant of over forty cousins on just one side of the family as would have been so in the case I mentioned earlier, then I wouldn't want the responsibility of ensuring that all heirs are found]

Precisely. The Treasury do not care how many entitled relatives there are. Once one has been shown to exist they legally cannot have any further interest in the estate. It then becomes the responsibility of the Personal Representative of the estate or their appointed agents (ie administering solicitors) to ensure all of the entitled relatives get their proper share.

[FraserandFraser]

Thanks for the support, this all shows what can happen when a comedian decides on "Twitter" that the BBC should pay him more money rather than making a day time TV program.

It is even more ironic that the comedian in question spent 100's of thousands of pounds of BBC money travailing all over the world looking for people with his name. You would have thought he could see how hard it was to find people, who not only have the correct name but also the correct date of birth and parents.

To concentrate on the fact that the top fee charged by any probate firm is 40% is like saying that all car firms charge the same as a Bugatti Veyron.




 

[Nick29]

"The estate cannot be dealt with until all claims to it have been received. Individuals have six months from the date when probate was granted to make claims against the estate."

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/choosingandusing/commonlegalproblems/probate.page

[violeign]

"The estate cannot be dealt with until all claims to it have been received. Individuals have six months from the date when probate was granted to make claims against the estate."

http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/choosingandusing/commonlegalproblems/probate.page

That is once an administering solicitor has been appointed, not once the Treasury Solicitor has been notified that there are entitled kin.

[Infamous]

These heir's do have a choice to sign or not.
monica meg

I agree and untill someone knocks on their door they've no idea that they are heirs.

[FraserandFraser]

The administrator still has a legal duty to account for all the heirs. The six months is the time for creditors to apply for repayment from the estate not heirs

[Indaloman]

My wife received a letter from a heir Hunter company asking her to sign away 33.3% plus VAT. I phoned all the family and asked not to sign anything. I then managed to get the commission down to 25%. But some interesting history came out of it. My wife's great grandfather bought shares in West Ham United when it was the Iron Foundry football team. All the beneficiaries received 2000 shares each. Unfortunately the Icelandic company who bought West Ham forced us to sell to them, a shame as we wanted to keep them in the family.

[violeign]

The administrator still has a legal duty to account for all the heirs. The six months is the time for creditors to apply for repayment from the estate not heirs

Indeed.