Nothing for nothing

[Gob]

A woman who has been claiming benefits for years has launched a legal battle to get the £200,000 inheritance she thought would afford her the 'easy life' after her mother died, a court has heard.



Christine Watts, 47, has 'done nothing to get a job' since she became unemployed in 2005, because she expected to be rescued by a share of her mother’s estate, the High Court heard.

However Miss Watts, of Eastbourne, East Sussex, was left without a penny when her mother, Valerie, changed her will on her deathbed.

Instead she left her house in Dartford, Kent, and all her savings to her son Gary, 44.

Now Miss Watts is challenging the validity of the January 2011 will, arguing that it must have been forged or was not properly executed.

In any event, she claims to be entitled to 'reasonable provision' from her mother’s estate.

Mr Watts says he deserves his inheritance for the years he spent caring for his mother, but his sister is fighting to convince Judge Catherine Newman QC that she is due a fair share.

The court heard Miss Watts was adopted by Valerie and her then husband Leonard in 1967 from a national children’s home when she was aged just 10 months.

Her brother was taken in three years later when less than a year old.

Her counsel, Jordan Holland, told the court she has back problems and psychological issues which make it impossible for her to work.

He argued that made her 'dependent' on her late mother, despite being an adult.

But Neil McLarnon, for Mr Watts, accused her of making no effort to find work whilst she waited for her mother to die.

'You have not done anything to get a job,' the barrister told her.

[rubato]

I'd give her the money, she looks like a dogs Butt.

Yrs,
Rubato

[dgs49]

Presumably, England has laws and precedents covering these sorts of disputes. Whether the will was valid or it wasn't will be determined by the evidence available.

I doubt that any English court would give a fig what her expectations or needs are, or whether she "deserved to be treated better" in the will.

People who live their lives on the assumption of a great inheritance (and I've known many of them) aren't worth a warm bucket of spit, IMHO.

God bless the child that's got his own.

[Gob]

I doubt that any English court would give a fig what her expectations or needs are, or whether she "deserved to be treated better" in the will.

People who live their lives on the assumption of a great inheritance (and I've known many of them) aren't worth a warm bucket of spit, IMHO.

.

Agreed.

[Scooter]

Presumably, England has laws and precedents covering these sorts of disputes. Whether the will was valid or it wasn't will be determined by the evidence available.

I doubt that any English court would give a fig what her expectations or needs are, or whether she "deserved to be treated better" in the will.

There is nothing simple about a case like this, and posting such rubbish once again gives the lie to any claim you make about having darkened the doors a a law school. There is almost always a legal presumption that children will inherit from their parents, and a will that favours one child to the complete exclusion of another will be viewed as suspect. If it can be established that the younger Ms. Watts was dependent on her mother for support, that will greatly increase the probability that she will share in her mother's estate.

If the new will truly expresses the elder Ms. Watt's wishes, then she got some really bad advice in having drafted it as she did.

[rubato]

In the extended family there was a grandchild excluded from a will. He was given $1 and there was a note saying that he would receive nothing more. Just so it was clear to all that the exclusion was intentional, not an oversight.

yrs,
rubato

[Sue U]

I agree with Scooter.

Miss Watts, of Eastbourne, East Sussex, was left without a penny when her mother, Valerie, changed her will on her deathbed.

Deathbed changes to a will are inherently suspect, coming at a time when undue influence can be greatest. If you're going to make those kinds of changes, you should have them documented as thoroughly as possible, leaving no doubt as to your intent. Get impartial witnesses, put it on video.