FNB Wills

[R13...]

He said no will at all ...

Yes, the father left no will

If the shady relatives were named as beneficiaries, it was only fair that the estate went to them, because those were the last wishes of the testator.

The estate went to the magistrate to wrap up, but the extended family felt that they ought to be entitled to their son's estate in place of his children (his wife had also passed on). Now the relatives didn't go and challenge this in court, they somehow got the magistrate and a lawyer to dispose of the cars for next to nothing - sold to their friends for kickbacks. And they somehow managed to access his bank accounts and clean those out. I think this was done on the pretext of using the money to pay tuition for the kids and so on, but the kids only saw about 20k of 500k.

I tried to explaining to my cousins that these things are easy to investigate and sort out, but they thought 20k is a lot of money and weren't interested. The only real money they saw was his pensions because they were beneficiaries and the company paid them directly (and that too got them too drunk to follow up properly on the rest of the estate).

 

[Budza]

Yes, the father left no will

I tried to explaining to my cousins that these things are easy to investigate and sort out, but they thought 20k is a lot of money and weren't interested. The only real money they saw was his pensions because they were beneficiaries and the company paid them directly (and that too got them too drunk to follow up properly on the rest of the estate).

Jeepers. What a 'mare

 

[Arthur]

Yes, the father left no will


The estate went to the magistrate to wrap up, but the extended family felt that they ought to be entitled to their son's estate in place of his children (his wife had also passed on) ... too drunk to follow up properly on the rest of the estate).

That can only happen when the "extended family" (other than his parents in this case?) could satisfy the court that (a) he (and thus estate) had a duty of support (which he does, to his parents), and (b) they actually needed that support, and then (c) only to the extent of the support required, which cannot trump that owed to more immediate family (parents are not extended family). The rules for intestate succession have been well established for well over a millennium now.

Makes me think the person who told you this isn't telling all the facts.

In any event, except in very specific circumstances a will cannot exempt the estate from the testator's ordinary duty of support at common law, particulary if it can be shown that the family received support before the testator died.

 

[blunomore]

That can only happen when the "extended family" (other than his parents in this case?) could satisfy the court that (a) he (and thus estate) had a duty of support (which he does, to his parents), and (b) they actually needed that support, and then (c) only to the extent of the support required, which cannot trump that owed to more immediate family (parents are not extended family). The rules for intestate succession have been well established for well over a millennium now.

Makes me think the person who told you this isn't telling all the facts.

In any event, except in very specific circumstances a will cannot exempt the estate from the testator's ordinary duty of support at common law, particulary if it can be shown that the family received support before the testator died.

Good post. Intestate succession is well established.

 

[ClintX]

This three page long thread is probably doing more to discourage people from getting wills than encouraging them to do so. Just get a will! You can always move it later on as any new will supercedes all previous wills.

A major point that needs to be raised, if you have minor kids and you don't have a will, and monies are left to the kids, this will end up in the Guardian's Fund. You do not want this to happen. Ensure you have a will which sets up a testamentary trust for the kids. Again you can nominate trustees in your will.

Rather than squabble about where to hold the will, get one done for free somewhere and then squabble. The 3.5% executors fees will probably be less painful than having to deal with the above fund.

 

[Dolby]

Best is to appoint a family friend or relative as executor, e.g. your spouse.

I'd avoid this route too - rather get a 3rd party.

When money is involved, things turn horrible - no matter how nice things seemed beforehand.

 

[blunomore]

I'd avoid this route too - rather get a 3rd party.

When money is involved, things turn horrible - no matter how nice things seemed beforehand.

I know from reading this post that people have mixed views about this. Some say yes, others no.

 

[Wietze]

I haven't read all these posts, so these points may have been made already:

I would advise against having your bank be your executor.

You may have a lot of debt with your bank and on the other hand a large fund of money elsewhere.

If you have a neutral executor, then the bank is just one of your creditors to satisfy and they have to wait in line. If the bank is the executor, then who do you think will get their money first? In that case your loved ones will be the ones who wait. Remember, the executor sees all your assets and can determine how and in which order they should be used.

The safest is to elect a friend, who has some common sense, is knowledgeable and won't rip off your beneficiaries, to be your executor. Preferably not someone who will benefit from your inheritance, unless it is someone who is due to receive the full inheritance. However, you could elect a beneficiary as a co-executor.

If you have a trust, then your co-trustees or the independent trustee would be the logical choice.

Whatever you choose to do, you need to re-visit your will/ testament every 2 to 3 years to see if you are still happy with your earlier decisions.

A funeral policy could be an important piece of your arrangements for the event of your death, provided you make a specific person or persons a beneficiary, as it pays out within days. Better still is for your intended beneficiary to take out (to own) and pay for the insurance on your life her/himself. They will then always know whether the premiums are up to date or not. After all, they have the most at stake as they have to deal with the fall-out after your death. You can of course regularly transfer the required funds to their account to enable the premium payment.

 

[blunomore]

You may have a lot of debt with your bank and on the other hand a large fund of money elsewhere.

If you have a neutral executor, then the bank is just one of your creditors to satisfy and they have to wait in line. If the bank is the executor, then who do you think will get their money first? In that case your loved ones will be the ones who wait. Remember, the executor sees all your assets and can determine how and in which order they should be used.

It does not work like that. When a deceased estate is wound up (just like with an insolvent estate) there is a distinction between preferential and non-preferential creditors.

A bank would e.g. be a prefential creditor. In other words, the preferential creditors get paid what is owing to them from the estate first and whatever is left (if anything) will be divided amongst the heirs (beneficiaries) as set out in the will.

 

[ellraven]

You get 1000 points of ebucks per month to have FNB be the executor of your will.

If I have this it raises my ebucks level from 3 to 4.

Is this not worthwhile? Will the yearly return on ebucks not be more than the R60 they charge, and in the long run also be worthwhile, as you can re look and change the executor again after a few years.

 

[diapason]

You get 1000 points of ebucks per month to have FNB be the executor of your will.

If I have this it raises my ebucks level from 3 to 4.

Is this not worthwhile? Will the yearly return on ebucks not be more than the R60 they charge, and in the long run also be worthwhile, as you can re look and change the executor again after a few years.

A will is too important a document to be thought of in terms of ebucks or minimal costs. Just remember that in the case of your demise someone will have to deal with the executor and maybe meet with them at least a couple of times. Who will that person be, and will it be convenient for them to go to a bank's Wills Dept which tend to be in city centres - you cannot just go to your local branch.

I speak from experience. My late Dad who died about 9 years ago was with Standard Bank. I was the one who had some sort of financial and admin clue and ended up dealing with SB. I had to go to their relevant section in central Cape Town - at their convenience. They tended to lose documents. I live in the Southern Suburbs and know my driving limitations, so had to travel via the Main Road or Lower Main, and then negotiate my way around town. I was working at that point and depending on what time they wanted to see me, I had to sometimes take a day's leave. 9 years ago I visited my work while on compassionate leave to fax death certificate and other docs to them - they lost them. Nowadays scanning docs and e-mailing probably makes things easier but the person dealing with the Executor still needs to have time available and probably still needs some face-to-face visits. Unless you are dealing with a large family where many people can chip in timewise. In a smaller situation the person who deals with the Executors may also be significantly involved in arranging the funeral/memorial service.

Bear in mind that your will is not about you, it's about the people you leave behind. Who is most likely to deal with all the issues? Do those people live relatively close to you? If so, have your will drawn up at a suburban legal practice with which you can build up a relationship. They would also be useful should you ever sell property or have other legal issues.

 

[Messugga]

You get 1000 points of ebucks per month to have FNB be the executor of your will.

If I have this it raises my ebucks level from 3 to 4.

Is this not worthwhile? Will the yearly return on ebucks not be more than the R60 they charge, and in the long run also be worthwhile, as you can re look and change the executor again after a few years.

Unless you die say, tomorrow, while they're still the executor.

 

[biometrics]

You can have your will with FNB for the points and then draw up another that replaces that without informing them.

 

[diapason]

You can have your will with FNB for the points and then draw up another that replaces that without informing them.

That's dishonest!

 

[biometrics]

That's dishonest!

I haven't done that. Someone mentioned that you can create a new will at any time.

 

[bigboy529]

Leaving your will at a bank or even worse, nominating them as executor is the worst thing you can do. They will firstly delay the process for as long as possible which will be a shlep for those left behind no matter how you look at it. Secondly they will charge a huge percentage for their services, they will do everything possible to suck the estate dry till nothing is left.

 

[diapason]

Leaving your will at a bank or even worse, nominating them as executor is the worst thing you can do. They will firstly delay the process for as long as possible which will be a shlep for those left behind no matter how you look at it. Secondly they will charge a huge percentage for their services, they will do everything possible to suck the estate dry till nothing is left.

The highest percentage they can charge is 3.99%, ie 3.5% plus VAT.

 

[ProfA]

Little bit of misinformation here.
The average time to wind up ANY estate is between 8 months and 3 years.
This is why you have life insurance, with a nominated beneficiary. This does not form part of your estate and is paid out immediately.

Should I die, my fiancee will be able to pay off the house and car and live comfortably for a long time, before the estate is even looked at.

Even more misinformation. Life insurance policies do form part of the estate in determining the value of the estate. Only when a beneficiary is a spouse does that value get deducted again and thus not become part of the estates value.

 

[Sinbad]

Even more misinformation. Life insurance policies do form part of the estate in determining the value of the estate. Only when a beneficiary is a spouse does that value get deducted again and thus not become part of the estates value.

A life policy with a nominated beneficiary is a stipulatio alteri

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that when a person takes out a life insurance policy and nominates a beneficiary for that policy, this constitutes a stipulatio alteri, that is to say, a contract for the benefit of a third party. That nomination can be revoked by the insured party at any time during his or her lifetime. If on death, the nomination has not been revoked, the insurer must make an offer to the nominated beneficiary. On acceptance, that beneficiary becomes a party to the insurance contract and acquires an enforceable right against the insurer to require payment of the proceeds of the policy. Section 63 of the Long-Term Insurance Act does not regulate the payment of the proceeds of the policy because the proceeds of the policy go directly to the beneficiary, and not to the estate of the deceased.

(thanks pinball wizard)