"Can't take it with you" - have your thought about you will?

The BBC programme “Can’t take it with you”, aired on Friday night, reiterated the thinking that about 70% of us will die without leaving a valid will. The programme centred around two couples, who were in second relationships, struggling to resolve the thorny issue of what should happen to their estates on their deaths.

The resulting wills would not have tested a competent solicitor specialising in the area. However, the most interesting issue arising was the question of “how do you reach a stage at which a solution between the parties can be agreed upon?”. The answer to that is COMMUNICATION!. Communication with your partner and communication with the family. It is so often the case that people are not prepared to discuss what is, after all, eventually going to happen to us all, death. Many examples could be listed where families have not spoken prior to someone’s death and the result is an acrimonious mess.

There are six episodes in this series and the three lessons to be taken from the first episode are:-

Communication; and,

Obtain specialist advice from a solicitor practising in the area of wills, it is too important not to get the will right. A badly drawn will might even be worse than having no will at all!; and

Don’t put off making a will because it is too difficult to think about.

Making a will can be difficult emotionally and, in extreme cases, can test relationships. However, not resolving the issues and leaving it can be more hurtful to those left to pick up the pieces. Wills are essential documents to have in place particularly in the most difficult situations. If you are finding that you are putting off making a will because it is difficult for you to consider then you probably need one in place more than others!

Find out more about the author of this article, Shaun Parry-Jones

find out more about the BBC series "Can't take it with you"

ex-BBC presenter wins ageism and victimisation claims

Today ex-BBC Countryfile presenter, Miriam O’Reilly won her claims of ageism and victimisation at London Central Employment Tribunal. The compensation to be awarded will be decided at another hearing in a few weeks time, however, a figure of around £100,000, including lost earnings and an amount for injury to feelings, is likely to be awarded.

Miriam O’Reilly, 53, was one of four female presenters who were dropped from Countryfile when it was moved it from Sunday mornings to a primetime slot early Sunday evenings. The others included Juliette Morris, Charlotte Smith and Michaela Strachan. The current Countryfile presenters are Matt Baker and Julia Bradbury and both are significantly younger than Miriam.

In its judgment, the tribunal said "if the claimant had been 10 to 15 years younger, she would have been given proper consideration to remain as a presenter of Countryfile. The discrimination was not justified. The wish to appeal to a primetime audience, including younger viewers, is a legitimate aim. however, we do not accept that it has been established that choosing younger presenters is required to appeal to such an audience."

The tribunal rejected the BBC's suggestion that it had devised and adopted proper criteria for choosing the new Countryfile presenters and said that the explanation of the selection process offered in evidence by the BBC was "complacent".

The tribunal also found that the decision which not to give Miriam O'Reilly any further writing work on Countryfile magazine was "an act of victimisation" resulting from "annoyance as to the allegations that [Miriam O’Reilly] was making".

This case is a reminder to even the most high profile employers that employers should ensure that clear, objective and non-discriminatory selection criteria should be used throughout all employment policies in order to reduce the risk of employment tribunal claims and promote equality in the workplace.

Find out more about how Hart Brown can help with a discrimination claim