"I also have to ask why he's not realised all the assets as I am still receiving dividends through the post which I hand on to him. I don't understand why he had not done this, because until all assets have been sold or disposed of the financial side of mummy's estate cannot be closed down! ... "
"With regard to the disposal of mummy's assets I have never received any paperwork from Iain he has just sent me cheques at various times. As far as I was aware there were no assets left. With hindsight I believe I may have trusted Iain too much and think that making Jan executor of your will is the best thing. Whether you leave Iain as an executor is up to you but it sounds as if he hasn't done the complete job on mummy's estate."
"...A few days ago, March, I passed another dividend cheque over to him! "
"I tend to agree with you. I am concerned that you are passing dividend cheques to Iain but I am not receiving any money however small. "
"1 have thought about Iain's lax attitude regarding dispensing bequests of mummy's will. He should of course produced a list of her assets and their values at the time of her death... You must insist that he gives you a copy... "
"One thing I would say is if you contact Iain like asking for the list assets for probate will I am sure upset him. He will realise that you are checking up on him.. .1 will be interested in his reaction. I am sure he will be furious, but it is his own fault!"
". . .l am not going to query anything about ma's will with Iain.. .Even if I found out he had done something dodgy the ill feeling is not worth the effort."
"...I think your decision is correct if only to keep our family together. It crosses my mind that how could Iain do such a thing? And be oblivious to the disfress he causes you and me! I have lost sleep over this! "
"I think you got it right in an earlier letter — he just doesn't think small amounts of money are important. He also isn't someone who is interested in detail so with hindsight I should have been executor on ma's will as admin and detail is what I am good at. "
"l am contacting you about the invoice you sent Jan for the iPad Iain bought for you. Both Jan and I are surprised that Iain bought you an iPad with such a large memory. I am sure you did not need this capacity and it will have cost you over a El 00 more than a smaller memory version. There may have been good reasons and Jan will talk to you about this next weekend. I would not mention this to Iain until you have spoken to Jan. "
"Well well well. This morning I read an alert on my computer regarding the number of unread email messages in Pa account (part of a heath robinson warning system I put in place following Pa's long stay in hospital). "
"I am astonished by your email...l cannot understand your unfortunate way you have reacted to a query over the cost of the iPad.. .1t disappoints me that you could say what you did in your memo... "
"...I am horrified by Iain letter, I can't believe he sent it...l have refused to go over on Friday, as I feel Iain is not in a mood to be reasoned with so I will wait until he has calmed down."
"[Having explained that he discovered Mr. Hayward's iPad was not working] I could have taken it back to Apple and got them to repair it. However, I had already replaced my iPad with a Surface...so instead of spending any money I simply reconfigured my iPad to become your and swapped the units over. I probably should have told you at the time, but quite frankly a lot else was going on and this was trivial... "
"...I think [Iain] is a little cross with me as he has deleted my old email address already, can't believe it. It is as though he is out to desfroy the little business I have left.. .1 have to question what has happened to him?...Something has happened and he can't handle it! MONEY perhaps. "
"Dear Jan and Fiona, "
". . .1 have to return to the credit card payment I made to Apple computers = E700...on your behalf. As you know I paid for a top of the range iPad but received from you an old well used iPad...I need to be refunded the money...l look forward to hearing from you... " 37 There is no email in response from lam. Witmn a couple of weeks, however, Mr. Hayward had asked Iain about the whereabouts of other of his items which he believed Iain had. Iain says that he thought it was sensible to visit Mr. Hayward 10 discuss this. Iain says that, when he arived at Mr. Hayward's house, Mr. Hayward accused him of stealing those items. Iain and Mr. Hayward then argued and, according to Iain, shouted at each other. Iain says: "
"I think we're going to leave it for the time being...l'm not really going to be able to give you an answer on that really until I [Imow] what we're dealing with..."
"Iain: . We had an agreement to split the inheritance 50/50. "
"The agreement...refers to a conversation we held at some point in the past. [The conversation] took place after I had fallen out with my father and he would get unreasonably angry and suggest he never wanted to see me again. My memory of the conversation is that I asked my brother that if my father ever cut me out of his will my brother would "look after me"
"I never tried to encourage my father to change his will. I never suggested that Jan should be his executor. I knew my father was planning to make a will. Neither I nor any member of my family helped with the correspondence. My father told me what he was planning to do. He gave me lots of reasons for why he wanted to change his will. One reason was the way Iain spent money on cars and toy helicopters. I don't recall him mentioning as a reason Iain's administration of our mother's estate."
"I didn't check whether I'd received a cheque. My memory was that between 2009 and 2013 1 had not received any money. When I wrote the email I believed what I said was frue."
"I said my brother is a chancer...l was saying that there was a bit of money he kept. I believed that there was a small amount of money which my brother had not passed to me. My father had said that he had got a dividend cheque on 30 March and this was after I had received the cheque from my brother. I didn't receive any further money from my mother's estate after the 5 March cheque."
"My daughter had applied to be a leisure assistant in a park. I asked my father for a reference for her. Reading Council said that she needed another reference because a relative could not be a referee. I rang my father and asked him how Reading had found out that he was my daughter's grandfather. He did not adlnit that he had said he was her grandfather. I knew that a family referee was not allowed. I expected it never to come to light that he was her grandfather."
"I wanted to get off the phone. I was fed up with Iain's phone calls"
"Grandfather said that he was changing his will because he didn't think Iain looked after money very well. Grandfather brought up changing his will on a number of occasions and did so when he was discussing Iain and Iain's money."
"...Until the day my grandfather died, he was in possession of all his mental faculties and I was able to have meaningful conversafions with him regarding the material I was covering in my [medical] degree."
"...I saw no sign that he was not clear of mind. I believe he had a full understanding of what was going on around him and remained as sharp as I had known him... "
"...Of course, you and I both know that you are perfectly mentally capable of making your new will and know exactly what you are doing... "
"In my opinion, there is insuffcient evidence in the medical records to justifr a diagnosis of dementia. On the contrary the testator's performance [in certain tests] suggest that he was not demented... "
"The symptoms of anaemia are fatigue, breathlessness and generalised physical weakness.. .1t is theoretically possible that a symptom of anaemia is confusion. In this case Mr. Hayward's anaemia would probably have been gradually getting worse slowly. Sudden anaemia from a haemorrhage is more likely to cause confusion than slow onset anaemia caused by malignancy...lf a person is fatigued he may be unable to act with his customary clarity."
"Mr. Hayward may have been mistaken as to whether he had given his business to Iain in 2006/7 but I do not think that that mistake is attributable to a disease of the mind."
"I was in the car when Fiona and I had the initial discussion. She telephoned me. I can't recall who mentioned equal shares.. .1t was a very brief conversation about making an agreement. Exactly what terms were talked about I can't be precise on. I said perhaps we would talk through this later. We then had a conversation at Christmas. We discussed various options. One option was that we would look aner each other. I said I was only comfortable with a simple agreement that we would equally share."
"I can't recall who said we should look after each other in the Chrisfrnas conversation."
"I accept from my observation that in the summer of 2013 my father understood that he was giving his property to persons of his choice on his death and that he understood the nature and extent of his obligations to relatives and others. I query whether he understood the extent of his property."
". . .1.. .had permission from my father to access his email. ..His email account was therefore configured onto my version of Outlook and I was able to see the number of unread messages in his inbox... "
"I set up father's email service so I could read his emails. I did this in 2011. He knew about this. I could check my father's unread emails by clicking on his email folders. After his stay in hospital in 2012 1 did this more frequently...lt would be more accurate to say that I had opened my father's inbox and Fiona's email appeared."
"It is essenMal...that a testator shall understand the nature of his act and its effects; shall understand the extent of the property of which he is disposing; shall be able to comprehend and appreciate the claims to which he ought to give effect, and, with a view to the latter object, that no disorder of the mind shall poison his affections, pervert his sense of right, or prevent the exercise of his natural faculties, that no insane delusion shall influence his will in disposing of his property and bring about a disposal of it which, if his mind had been sound, would not have been made."
"...Although talk of presumptions and their rebuttal is not regarded as specially helpful nowadays, the courts realistically recognise that, for example, if a properly executed will has been professionally prepared on insfructions and then explained by an independent and experienced solicitor to the maker of the will, it will be markedly more diffcult to challenge its validity on the grounds of either lack of mental capacity or want of knowledge and approval than in a case where those prudent procedures have not been followed."
"Knowing and approving of the contents of one's will is traditional language for saying that the will "represented [one's] testamentary intentions" see per Chadwick LJ in Fuller v. Strum[2002] 1 WLR 1097 , para.59. The proposition that Mrs. Gill knew and approved of the contents of the will appears, at first sight, very hard indeed to resist. As a matter of common sense and authority, the fact that a will has been properly executed, after being prepared by a solicitor and read over to the testafrix, raises a very strong presumption that it represents the testatrix's intentions at the relevant time, namely the moment she executes the will... "
"consider all the relevant evidence available and then, drawing such inferences as it can from the totality of that material, it has to come to a conclusion whether or not those propounding the will have discharged the burden of establishing that the testatrix knew and approved the contents of the document which is put forward as a valid testamentary disposition. The fact that the testatrix read the document, and the fact that she executed it, must be given the full weight apposite in the circumstances, but in law those facts are not conclusive, nor do they raise a presumption."
" ..Particularly in a case with a large number of witnesses, heard over many days, it does not seem to me wise to consider an issue in two stages, when those stages ultimately involve the same question, namely, given the effect of the factual and expert evidence, did Mrs. Gill appreciate what was in the will when she signed it? To be fair to the judge, the approach which he adopted can be derived from earlier cases, and was supported by both counsel."
"When we move on to knowledge and approval what we are looking for is actual knowledge and approval of the contents of the will. But it is important to bear in mind that it is knowledge and approval of the actual will that count: not knowledge and approval of other potential dispositions. Testamentary capacity v, includes the ability to make choices, whereas knowledge and approval requires no more than the ability to understand and approve choices that have already been made.. .Normally proof of instructions and reading over the will will suff1ce...The judge's starting point in our case was one of "initial suspicion", given that the disputed will was prepared and executed without a solicitor and without Mrs. Simon having been medically examined. But having heard the evidence he held that his initial suspicion had been dispelled. He found it clear that Mrs. Simon knew that she was making a will, took a conscious decision to make it and approved its terms... "
"The fact that words or dispositions have been inserted in a will by mistake does not necessarily mean that the testator must be taken not to have known and approved of them... : "
"...I accept that, in an appropriate case...proof of requisite knowledge and approval can and will also require proof that the testator understood not just the nature of the testarnentary provision he was proposing to make, but also its effect... " 122. What was in issue was whether she understood and approved the contents of the will she executed. To this issue the quality of her understanding was relevant. So at least thought the Respondent, who led evidence designed to show that she was able to understand and approve the contents of a very complicated will — not, of course, the language of art in which it was couched, but the character of the disposition that she was making... 123. "...In more than one passage of his summing-up the learned judge encouraged the jury to freat the will and codicil as standing or falling together. That might be unobjectionable if he had then gone on to point out how fraught with suspicion was the codicil. He failed to do so. Counsel for the respondent, who, I take this opportunity of saying, conducted his case with great ability and proper candour, was constrained to admit that the effect of the codicil can hardly have been explained to the testafrix. It is very certain that the jury did not understand that its effect in the likeliest confrlgency was to benefit the respondent by several thousand pounds. Had they done so they might have found it more difficult to believe that the testatrix understood and approved its contents. Who can say what repercussion this might have had upon their view of her understanding and approval of the contents of the will also? "
"There is no serious dispute about the law. The approach that I should adopt may be summarised as follows: i) In a case of a testamentary disposition of assets, unlike a lifetime disposition, there is no presumption of undue influence; ii) Whether undue influence has procured the execution of a will is therefore a question of fact; iii) The burden of proving it lies on the person who asserts it. It is not enough to prove that the facts are consistent with the hypothesis of undue influence. What must be shown is that the facts are inconsistent with any other hypothesis. In thc modern law this is, perhaps no more than a reminder of the high burden, even on the civil standard, that a claimant bears in proving undue influence as vitiating a testamentary disposition; iv) In this context undue influence means influence exercised either by coercion, in the sense that the testator's will must be overborne, or by fraud. v) Coercion is pressure that overpowers the volition without convincing the testator's judgment. It is to be distinguished from mere persuasion, appeals to ties of affection or pity for future destitution, all of which are legitimate. Pressure which causes a testator to succumb for the sake of a quiet life, if carried to an extent that overbears the testator's free judgment discretion or wishes, is enough to amount to coercion in this sense; vi) The physical and mental strength of the testator arc relevant factors in determining how much pressure is necessary in order to overbear the will. The will of a weak and ill person may be more easily overborne than that of a hale and hearty one. As was said in one case simply to talk to a weak and feeble testator may so fatigue the brain that a sick person may be induced for quietness' sake to do anything. A "drip drip" approach may be highly effective in sapping the will; vii) There is a separate ground for avoiding a testamentary disposition on the ground of fraud. The shorthand used to refer to this species of fraud is "fraudulent calumny"
"He seems a bit of a chancer who given the opportunity may take more than he is entitled to"
"...He does not seem to know right from wrong i.e. that E700 he charged me in exchange for an iPad that was almost unsaleable and missing the keyboard etc.... "
"An agreement may lack contractual force because it is so vague or uncertain that no definite meaning can be given to it without adding further terms. For example, in G. Scammell & Nephew Ltd v. Ouston, the House of Lords held that an agreement to acquire goods "on hire-purchase" was too vague to be enforced since there were many kinds of hire-purchase agreements in widely different terms, so that it was impossible to specifr the terms on which the parties had agreed."
"Another factor relevant to the issue of contractual intention is the degree of precision with which the agreement is expressed. In one case it was held that a husband's promise to let his deserted wife stay in the matrimonial home had no contractual force because it was not "intended by him, or understood by her, to have any confractual basis or effect"