It is National Write a Will Week this week and, according to sources quoted by the Daily Telegraph, about 30 million people in Britain don’t have a will. That equates to about 70% of the population.
Everyone should have a will and they should have a will that has been written by a solicitor. There are numerous alternative options to using a solicitor to make a will. None of them are at all satisfactory.
It is possible to buy a will making kit or use a will writer. The difficulty in using these options is that the likelihood is that you or the will writer have little or no legal experience. In addition, will writers are unregulated and uninsured.
Another option would be to rely on the rules of intestacy. Those are the rules that are laid down to govern somebody’s estate when they die if they haven’t left a will. The rules very often do not work in a way that you would expect them to.
There is no alternative to having your will drafted by a solicitor that specialises in the field. Badly drawn wills can often cause more trouble than they are worth and, in the long run, can be far more expensive and cause no end of hurt. There is no substitute to getting a properly drafted will put in place.
Read more about Hart Brown
Friday 29 October 2010
Wednesday 27 October 2010
House prices heading for a fall, surveyors warn
The report does confirm the trend experienced by Hart Brown’s residential property department over the last 2 or 3 months. The number of transactions has reduced with buyers becoming much more circumspect before offering on properties. The first 6 months of 2010 saw activity levels close to those of the heady days of 2007 but this was mainly due to a release of frustration from pent up buyers who had sat on their hands during the worst of the recession.
Once the fears of the public became reality in the form of massive public spending cuts following the election, buyers once again faded away at the same time as a number of sellers put their properties on the market. The political uncertainty at the time of the election saw some sellers holding fire in marketing until after the election which in hindsight can be seen as unwise. Since the election the balance has indeed swung in favour of buyers who, on a supply and demand basis, have more properties to choose from.
Some reports suggest that September’s lending figures show the lowest number of approved mortgages were the lowest for 10 years.
Due to uncertainty over jobs and the medium term concerns over the performance of the property market the % of transactions becoming abortive is higher than for some many months with many sellers who lose buyers selling at a good 5 or 10% less than the original offer.
The rental market is extremely buoyant which is a bad sign for the residential market as potential buyers are moving into temporary accommodation to gauge the market in the hope and now, expectation, of a further drop in prices.
As for the longer term view interest rates hold the key. The timing of any rise in rates will be absolutely key. Any rise ion the next 6 to 9 months would probably kill the market stone dead and cause some house owners huge problems. Coming out of fixed rates or tracker deals into above base rate products would see mortgage payments increase considerably and without pay rises result in many mortgages becoming unaffordable. Fire sales or repossessions would follow. We need to remember that rates came down in huge chunks, 1% and 0.5%, and are likely to go up at a similar rate, especially if inflation keeps running away.
A chill wind will blow over the already fragile residential property market this winter and possibly extend into the middle of 2011
Read the the article here
Read more about Hart Brown's conveyancing department
Article author: David Knapp
Once the fears of the public became reality in the form of massive public spending cuts following the election, buyers once again faded away at the same time as a number of sellers put their properties on the market. The political uncertainty at the time of the election saw some sellers holding fire in marketing until after the election which in hindsight can be seen as unwise. Since the election the balance has indeed swung in favour of buyers who, on a supply and demand basis, have more properties to choose from.
Some reports suggest that September’s lending figures show the lowest number of approved mortgages were the lowest for 10 years.
Due to uncertainty over jobs and the medium term concerns over the performance of the property market the % of transactions becoming abortive is higher than for some many months with many sellers who lose buyers selling at a good 5 or 10% less than the original offer.
The rental market is extremely buoyant which is a bad sign for the residential market as potential buyers are moving into temporary accommodation to gauge the market in the hope and now, expectation, of a further drop in prices.
As for the longer term view interest rates hold the key. The timing of any rise in rates will be absolutely key. Any rise ion the next 6 to 9 months would probably kill the market stone dead and cause some house owners huge problems. Coming out of fixed rates or tracker deals into above base rate products would see mortgage payments increase considerably and without pay rises result in many mortgages becoming unaffordable. Fire sales or repossessions would follow. We need to remember that rates came down in huge chunks, 1% and 0.5%, and are likely to go up at a similar rate, especially if inflation keeps running away.
A chill wind will blow over the already fragile residential property market this winter and possibly extend into the middle of 2011
Read the the article here
Read more about Hart Brown's conveyancing department
Article author: David Knapp
Monday 25 October 2010
Cheryl Cole's malaria battle
Recently in an interview with Piers Morgan, Cheryl Cole disclosed that when she was in intensive care with malaria, she asked her mother to arrange for someone to visit her to help her make her will. Making a will is not the preserve of the older generations. Everyone over the age of 18 should consider making a will. Youngsters often forget that some of the more adventurous activities that they take part in can lead to serious injury or death.
No one really wants to think about such morbid provision. However, an experience such as that of Cheryl Cole focuses the mind! She was fortunate to get through her illness and I hope that Cheryl has now made proper provision for the future rather than leaving it until it is too late.
Find out more about making a will
Find out more about the author of this article.
No one really wants to think about such morbid provision. However, an experience such as that of Cheryl Cole focuses the mind! She was fortunate to get through her illness and I hope that Cheryl has now made proper provision for the future rather than leaving it until it is too late.
Find out more about making a will
Find out more about the author of this article.
Friday 22 October 2010
Pre-nuptial agreements
Yesterday, the long awaited decision in the Radmacher v Granatino case was announced by the Supreme Court, the highest court in England.
The court said that pre-nup agreements should be followed where they had been “freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of implications unless in the circumstances prevailing it would not be fair to hold the parties to their agreement”.
Ms Radmacher (whose fortune is estimated to be £100 million) and Mr Granatino had signed a pre-nup stating that neither would make a financial claim against the other in the event of a divorce. However, the agreement did not anticipate children.
Mr Granatino was awarded a sum to pay his debts, a regular child maintenance sum (for when the children stayed with him) and two sums to purchase a house in London and Germany, with the ownership of both properties reverting to Ms Radmacher once the children had grown up. He received no share of his wife’s fortune in accordance with the pre-nup.
However, was this decision fair and would the award have been higher if it had been a woman in Mr Granatino’s position? Let us have your views!
Find out more about Hart Brown's family department
Read more about the Author of this article, Natasha Crocker.
The court said that pre-nup agreements should be followed where they had been “freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of implications unless in the circumstances prevailing it would not be fair to hold the parties to their agreement”.
Ms Radmacher (whose fortune is estimated to be £100 million) and Mr Granatino had signed a pre-nup stating that neither would make a financial claim against the other in the event of a divorce. However, the agreement did not anticipate children.
Mr Granatino was awarded a sum to pay his debts, a regular child maintenance sum (for when the children stayed with him) and two sums to purchase a house in London and Germany, with the ownership of both properties reverting to Ms Radmacher once the children had grown up. He received no share of his wife’s fortune in accordance with the pre-nup.
However, was this decision fair and would the award have been higher if it had been a woman in Mr Granatino’s position? Let us have your views!
Find out more about Hart Brown's family department
Read more about the Author of this article, Natasha Crocker.
Wednesday 20 October 2010
Government Spending cuts
We like you, will no doubt discover the full gory impact of today’s expenditure cuts announcement, gradually over the next few days. Such is the detail and nature of these things, that several days after the main headlines are losing their initial impact, news of further implications and ramifications will seep into the public domain.
However the real impact will come some way down the line as the various benefit cuts, tax increases and additional costs (such as the hike in rail fares) start to directly hit your wallet. The vast cocktail of measures makes it very difficult for anyone to quickly assess the precise affect on them. Nevertheless, the coming weekend’s papers and professional economists’ blogs will no doubt make a good stab at quantifying the bad news for a range of ‘case study’ families.
For some of our clients the changes could require a rethink of their f
uture financial plans and using our experience and lifetime cashflow modelling software, we will be able to demonstrate the effect of changes such as increased expenditure and deferring retirement age (increase in State pension age to 66).
We also expect many more people to ask us to help them examine carefully their pension arrangements, particularly those people whose jobs are in jeopardy or whose pension benefits are being diluted. We fully expect that many final salary pension schemes will require increased contributions for lower benefits at a later pension age.
We won’t know for some time whether the medicine the coalition has administered has saved the day or pushed us towards a double-dip recession. Economists seem fairly equally divided on this point. All we can say for now is that we are here for our clients, ready to listen and provide practical advice.
Find out more about Hart Brown's Financial Planning Department
Read more about the author of this article
However the real impact will come some way down the line as the various benefit cuts, tax increases and additional costs (such as the hike in rail fares) start to directly hit your wallet. The vast cocktail of measures makes it very difficult for anyone to quickly assess the precise affect on them. Nevertheless, the coming weekend’s papers and professional economists’ blogs will no doubt make a good stab at quantifying the bad news for a range of ‘case study’ families.
For some of our clients the changes could require a rethink of their f
uture financial plans and using our experience and lifetime cashflow modelling software, we will be able to demonstrate the effect of changes such as increased expenditure and deferring retirement age (increase in State pension age to 66).
We also expect many more people to ask us to help them examine carefully their pension arrangements, particularly those people whose jobs are in jeopardy or whose pension benefits are being diluted. We fully expect that many final salary pension schemes will require increased contributions for lower benefits at a later pension age.
We won’t know for some time whether the medicine the coalition has administered has saved the day or pushed us towards a double-dip recession. Economists seem fairly equally divided on this point. All we can say for now is that we are here for our clients, ready to listen and provide practical advice.
Find out more about Hart Brown's Financial Planning Department
Read more about the author of this article
Wednesday 13 October 2010
Never never land
The National Patient Safety Agency defines “never events” as serious, largely preventable patient safety incidents that should not occur if the available preventative measures have been put in place by healthcare providers. The initial list of 8 “never events” included
• Wrong site surgery
• Retained instrumentation post-surgery
• Wrong route administration of chemotherapy
• Misplaced naso /oro-gastric tube not detected prior to use
• Maternal death from post partum haemorrhage following elective caesarean section
• Intra venous administration of mis-selected concentrated potassium chloride
A total of 111 never events were reported in 2009/10. Of these 57 related to wrong site surgery. This is despite the introduction of the “Surgical Safety Checklist”. A further 41 related to misplaced naso/oro-gastric tubes. Clearly the end of year report for the NHS should read “could do better.”
If you would like further advice on a potential clinical negligence claim please visit our website
Caroline Kerr, Solicitor, Clinical Negligence Department
• Wrong site surgery
• Retained instrumentation post-surgery
• Wrong route administration of chemotherapy
• Misplaced naso /oro-gastric tube not detected prior to use
• Maternal death from post partum haemorrhage following elective caesarean section
• Intra venous administration of mis-selected concentrated potassium chloride
A total of 111 never events were reported in 2009/10. Of these 57 related to wrong site surgery. This is despite the introduction of the “Surgical Safety Checklist”. A further 41 related to misplaced naso/oro-gastric tubes. Clearly the end of year report for the NHS should read “could do better.”
If you would like further advice on a potential clinical negligence claim please visit our website
Caroline Kerr, Solicitor, Clinical Negligence Department
Wednesday 6 October 2010
Lord Young's address to the Conservative Party Conference
This week Lord Young addressed the Conservative Party Conference about the operation of health and safety laws. Britain has one of the lowest incidences in Europe of accidents and deaths in the workplace. He concluded that the regulations in place, in relation to the construction and heavy industries, work well. In Lord Young’s view it is the overzealous application of these regulations in relation to non hazardous activities that creates the problem.
Employers, managers and head teachers, he said, are driven by a fear of being sued and not by a desire to prevent accidents. Lord Young was especially critical of the untrained and inexperienced “health and safety” consultants, employed by small businesses that recommend disproportionate safety measures. These businesses follow the recommendations of these unqualified consultants in the belief that compliance is a requirement of the terms of their insurance. This results in ludicrous policies such as the refusal of a restaurant to provide customers with toothpicks. Whilst we welcome a review of the practices of insurance firms and health and safety consultants had it not been for the enforcement of our health and safety laws by judges in personal injury cases up and down the country perhaps we wouldn’t have one of the lowest incidences in Europe of accidents and deaths in the workplace.
Read more about Hart Brown's personal injury department here
Employers, managers and head teachers, he said, are driven by a fear of being sued and not by a desire to prevent accidents. Lord Young was especially critical of the untrained and inexperienced “health and safety” consultants, employed by small businesses that recommend disproportionate safety measures. These businesses follow the recommendations of these unqualified consultants in the belief that compliance is a requirement of the terms of their insurance. This results in ludicrous policies such as the refusal of a restaurant to provide customers with toothpicks. Whilst we welcome a review of the practices of insurance firms and health and safety consultants had it not been for the enforcement of our health and safety laws by judges in personal injury cases up and down the country perhaps we wouldn’t have one of the lowest incidences in Europe of accidents and deaths in the workplace.
Read more about Hart Brown's personal injury department here
Tuesday 5 October 2010
Was the Government right to make child benefit cuts?
Yesterday, the Chancellor, George Osborne announced that child benefit payments will no longer be paid to couples where one parent earns over £44,000.00 per year or single parents who are working and earning over £44,000.00 per year.
However, couples who are both working and each earn up to £44,000.00 will still be able to claim child benefit.
The impact of this will therefore be on single parents who work and stay at home parents, whose partner or spouse works and earns over £44,000.00 a year.
In reality, couples who are both working, each earning up to £44,000.00, having a joint income of potentially £88,000.00 will still be able to claim child benefit, but couples with only one income of £45,000.00 will not.
There has been much protestation in the news about these cuts today as many people rely on child benefit as a source of income. Traditionally, the parent in receipt of child benefit has been able to use this for the benefit of the children for example to pay for holidays or Christmas without it being pooled with the family income.
Do you think the Government was right to make such a cut? Or do you think that there are other benefits that should be cut instead? Have you been affected by this latest news? Let us hear your views.
Article:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11464300
Anne Thomas, Legal Executive, Family Department, Hart Brown
However, couples who are both working and each earn up to £44,000.00 will still be able to claim child benefit.
The impact of this will therefore be on single parents who work and stay at home parents, whose partner or spouse works and earns over £44,000.00 a year.
In reality, couples who are both working, each earning up to £44,000.00, having a joint income of potentially £88,000.00 will still be able to claim child benefit, but couples with only one income of £45,000.00 will not.
There has been much protestation in the news about these cuts today as many people rely on child benefit as a source of income. Traditionally, the parent in receipt of child benefit has been able to use this for the benefit of the children for example to pay for holidays or Christmas without it being pooled with the family income.
Do you think the Government was right to make such a cut? Or do you think that there are other benefits that should be cut instead? Have you been affected by this latest news? Let us hear your views.
Article:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11464300
Anne Thomas, Legal Executive, Family Department, Hart Brown
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)