Wrong claimant in small claims case

[EMcT]

Hi,

 

I have received a claim from the small claims court.

The claim relates to an Estate I was the administrator for.

The claimant is not a beneficiary of the Estate but an agent for some of the beneficiaries.

 

 

However, the name of a beneficiary is not stated on the claim form

as I suspect the Agent has not been retained by any beneficiary to make this claim.

 

Should I just reject this claim as it is not made by a beneficiary.

 

The value of the claim is about £150 and I would be reasonably confident of winning the case

but absolutely not 100% as it relates to expenses incurred in administering the Estate.

It would be down to the court in their interpretation.

 

Your comments would be much appreciated.

[AndyOrch]

Hi EMct and Welcome to CAG

 

I have moved your thread to the correct Forum (General Legal Issues).

 

Regards

 

Andy

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

Can you type up the POCs [particulars of claim] please, minus any identifying information?

 

HB

[EMcT]

Thank you for your response.......however I'm not sure what information you are looking for?

 

Please explain further?

 

Thanks

[EMcT]

Particulars of Claim

This is a claim for the reimbursement of fees wrongfully deducted from the proceeds of an estate by the administrator.

 

That's it!!

[honeybee13]

Wow! That's short.

 

Do you know what the £150 concerns please? When you say you were administrator, is that because there was no will left?

 

HB

[AndyOrch]

Have you checked with the beneficiaries that he has permission to act/issue the claim?

[EMcT]

The claim relates to the purchase of certificates to aid research into the family tree of the Deceased. The Deceased died intestate. The claimant was an agent for some of the beneficiaries. There were about 30 beneficiaries.

[AndyOrch]

And in purchasing these certificates was used to administer the estate to locate the beneficiaries ?

[EMcT]

Yes.

 

We now have 2 questions on the forum.

 

Is the claimant a correct claimant.

And has he a legitimate claim in the first place.

 

My own opinion is in both cases he is wrong.......just want some feedback from you guys.

 

Cheers

[honeybee13]

Andy's the expert on legal, not me, but is this agent some kind of heir hunter, EMcT?

 

HB

[EMcT]

Yes! A big Heir Hunter!

[AndyOrch]

Well I have already pointed to both queries in post #7 ...only you can provide that answer...which will answer both your points.

[AndyOrch]

Yes! A big Heir Hunter!

 

And who appointed them?

[EMcT]

No I have not checked with the beneficiaries if they have retained the Claimant......remember there are 30 of them and it could be any one of them. I suspect the claimant has not been retained by a beneficiary.

 

In any case would the claim not be more 'legal' if it was in the name of a beneficiary.

[EMcT]

The Claimant is appointed by each Beneficiary individually.!

[AndyOrch]

He may not be acting for a Beneficiary...hence the claim is in his name.....if he has been used to discover the whereabouts of beneficiaries...and only the executor can authorise this service...then the money is owed to the claimant.

 

I really dont see where any beneficiaries come into it...unless you appointed their services...then there is no claim.A Beneficiary can not conduct in the executing of an estate.

[EMcT]

Thanks for that Andy.

 

In summary

 

1 If he has not been retained by a beneficiary to make a complaint / claim about expenses incurred by the Administrator, then his claim is invalid.

 

and

 

2 As he has not been retained to find beneficiaries by the Administrator, he has no entitlement to claim in his own right.

 

Have I got that correct

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

Yes....he needs to claim from the person that appointed him.

[Michael Browne]

Is the £150 the total amount that you as administrator spent on certificates tracing the beneficiaries or is it just a proportion?

[EMcT]

It is the total amount.

[Michael Browne]

Unless I'm missing something, the claim doesn't make financial sense.

 

Even if the heir hunter is acting for one of the beneficiaries and the court finds that the fees were wrongfully deducted, then, presumably, the £150 then forms part of the estate and has to be shared between the 30 beneficiaries and the heir hunter will only be due 15%-20% of the share of the beneficiary he is representing, which is hardly worth the effort.

[honeybee13]

£150 on genealogical research to find beneficiaries doesn't sound a lot to me, fwiw. I did some for a family estate on the internet and it took me a few hours to find people.

 

How does the heir hunter [HH] know about you deducting the £150?

 

HB

[EMcT]

Yes it is absurd.

 

The claimant knows about the expenses from the Estate Accounts I sent every beneficiary.