Does a deputy or attorney get paid for what they do?

One of the most frequently asked questions around becoming a deputy or attorney, is whether or not a person can be paid for doing this role. The short answer is “no”, although a deputy or attorney may be able to pay themselves for any out-of-pocket expenses reasonably incurred in discharging their functions. They may also, subject to permission, be able to claim the cost of any care provided.

Below we look at what type of expenses and costs can be claimed as a deputy or attorney, and what steps can be taken to ensure that these are deemed reasonable.

What are the rules around expenses incurred by deputies or attorneys?

Even though managing another person’s affairs can be time-consuming, where that person lacks the mental capacity to do this for themselves, this is not a role for which a deputy or attorney can usually charge for their services. That said, a deputy or attorney is not expected to be out-of-pocket for what they are required to do, where all kinds of costs may be incurred, from postage costs for admin tasks to the cost of fuel when running errands, such as collecting benefits or doing banking.

Needless to say, reasonable expenses will also cover the cost of recouping any money spent by the deputy or attorney in paying a third party, such as paying a cleaner to clean the person’s house or paying a builder to carry out repairs to that property. Importantly, however, the deputy or attorney must be able to justify any costs incurred, for example, they must have done their due diligence for any property repairs, such as sourcing several different quotes from reputable and reliable firms.

What are the rules around the cost of care provided by a deputy or attorney?

When it comes to care costs, the position is far more complex.

Whilst it may be possible to claim a gratuitous care allowance for the cost of providing care to the person lacking mental capacity, or even case management services, such as liaising with relevant professionals or managing and overseeing support workers, a deputy or attorney should always seek permission from the Court of Protection first. This is because the deputy or attorney does not have the authority to remunerate themselves in this way, or any other family member, where to do so without the court’s express permission would be in breach of their fiduciary duty.

Instead, the court must be asked to assess the reasonableness or level of remuneration which the deputy or attorney, or any other family member undertaking care and case management services, should be awarded. This is a figure to represent the commercial cost of care as the ceiling, reduced by 20% to reflect the fact that these payments are not subject to Income Tax.

What records should deputies or attorneys keep of costs incurred?

In all scenarios, either when claiming expenses or seeking permission for care costs, careful records must be kept by the deputy or attorney of any costs incurred and tasks undertaken. Being able to provide clear proof and justification for claims made is absolutely paramount when it comes to what is reasonable, including when expenses were incurred and when tasks were undertaken, together with any evidence of this. In this way, there can be no questions over what is legitimate.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, either express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert advice should be sought.

Dealing with a bankrupt beneficiary

Acting as a personal representative carries with it significant responsibilities, especially when it comes to distributing the deceased’s estate to the right beneficiaries. Below we look specifically at the rules relating to bankrupt beneficiaries, together with the potential consequences of getting this wrong.

What happens if a beneficiary is bankrupt?

When dealing with the estate of someone who has died, either as a named executor of the deceased’s Will, or as an administrator where a person has died intestate, it’s important to check whether any of the beneficiaries have been declared bankrupt. This is because, where a person has been made bankrupt, any assets to which a beneficiary would otherwise be entitled should not be handed over directly to the bankrupt beneficiary, but to the trustee in bankruptcy instead.

The trustee will essentially take over the financial affairs of the bankrupt individual, including taking control of any inheritance received where, with the exception of paying that person any living expenses, these funds will be used by the trustee to pay off creditors in order of preference.

What are the consequences of distributing assets to a bankrupt beneficiary?

The executor or administrator of an estate has a legal duty to distribute the residuary estate to the right beneficiaries. This would normally be the named beneficiaries under the terms of any Last Will and Testament or, alternatively, those beneficiaries entitled to inherit under the rules of intestacy.

However, in the context of any bankrupt beneficiary, the correct person to which any funds should be given becomes the trustee in bankruptcy, not the beneficiary themselves.  As such, if an executor or administrator mistakenly distributes all or part of the deceased’s estate directly to a bankrupt beneficiary, and that beneficiary refuses or is no longer able to return the money, the trustee could bring a claim against them to recover the amount paid. In other words, where a personal representative pays the wrong person, and that money cannot be recovered from that person, the personal representative will become accountable.

A bankrupt beneficiary is under a duty to declare their inheritance to the trustee in bankruptcy, where any failure to do so constitutes a criminal offence. However, it is easy to envisage cases where a beneficiary, unexpectedly in receipt of funds that they thought would be swallowed up by their bankruptcy, may decide to conceal their sudden windfall and/or spend it before the mistake is discovered. In this scenario, the executive or administrator would unfortunately be held liable for the unrecovered sums, in addition to the trustee in bankruptcy’s legal costs in claiming this back.

How can a personal representative avoid liability around bankrupt beneficiaries?

The best way to avoid liability around bankrupt beneficiaries is to seek legal advice, costs which can be recouped by an executor or administrator from the deceased’s estate. In this way,  experienced solicitors can undertake the task of establishing whether any beneficiaries are undischarged bankrupts at the time of the deceased’s death, or if any beneficiary was made bankrupt before the estate administration was finalised. If so, any legacy should be paid directly to the trustee in bankruptcy.

Only if the amount passed to the trustee in bankruptcy exceeds the amount owed to the bankrupt’s creditors, can anything be paid to the beneficiary. However, even in these circumstances, everything should still be paid over to the trustee, tasking them with paying any remaining sum to the beneficiary.

 

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, either express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert advice should be sought.

The responsibility and risks of being an executor

Many people will feel privileged to act as an executor, being trusted with the responsibility of dealing with someone’s estate after they’re gone and ensuring that the deceased’s wishes are honoured. However, with this responsibility comes significant personal financial risk if an executor makes a mistake. So what are the responsibilities of an executor and what happens if they get this wrong?

What are the responsibilities of being an executor?

After someone has died, the executor to an estate has the role of administering that estate and ensuring that the beneficiaries receive everything to which they’re entitled under the terms of the Will. It is, therefore, important that any executor acts in the best interests of the beneficiaries at all times and the correct procedures are followed.

This means that each executor will need to identify and value all of the assets in the estate. They will then need to calculate and pay any Inheritance Tax that may fall due and apply for a Grant of Probate. Once the grant is received, any assets can be sold, all debts can be discharged and, once estate accounts have been prepared and approved, the residuary estate can be distributed to the beneficiaries.

What are the risks associated with being an executor?

Administering and distributing a deceased’s estate can be complex, involving various risks to the executor if they get this wrong, including but not limited to:

  • Clearing debts: the executor must ensure that all of the deceased’s debts are identified and paid, where any failure to clear outstanding debts may mean that a claim can be made against the executor in the future, even if they were unaware of the existence of the debt due to an innocent oversight or genuine mistake. The risks to the executor are also exacerbated where there are insufficient funds to pay off all debts, as creditors must be paid in strict order of priority.

  • Identifying beneficiaries: the executor must ensure that all beneficiaries who are entitled to inherit are identified. This is not always straightforward, for example, where the deceased’s Will provides for their estate to be shared between ‘all of their children’, but it is not clear how many or who these children are. This type of uncertainty is commonplace in the context of modern families, comprising several descendants from different marriages or relationships. Again, any failure to identify a beneficiary may mean that an executor is held personally liable to the extent of any legacy that any given individual would’ve been entitled to receive.

Other risks can arise around claims made against the estate from individuals who believe that they’re entitled to a share, disputes arising between those with an interest in the estate, or even where an executor mistakenly pays a bankrupt beneficiary, rather than the trustee in bankruptcy. In all of these scenarios, there is the potential for personal liability on the part of the executor.

How can the risks of being an executor be avoided?

The job of winding up someone’s affairs after their death is one that involves both responsibility and financial risk for an executor. It is, therefore, imperative that an executor seeks early legal advice, ensuring that the correct procedures are followed to minimise any exposure to personal liability — from advertising for creditors to checking for any bankrupt beneficiaries.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, either express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert advice should be sought.

Dealing with hidden assets on divorce

On the breakdown of a marriage, it is not uncommon for the wealthier spouse to seek to hide their assets in an effort to try to defeat any claim on divorce. However, any party who tries to conceal their financial worth can expect the court to flex its’ judicial muscles, when this comes to light.

Below we look at the importance of disclosure during financial remedy proceedings and what steps can be taken by the court in favour of the financially weaker spouse to deal with underhand tactics. 

What are the rules relating to disclosure on divorce?

When a marriage irretrievably breaks down, and the division of martial assets cannot be agreed, the court may need to make an order. To do this, and to do so fairly in all the circumstances, the parties will be required to provide the court with what is known as ‘financial disclosure’. This is the process whereby both parties to a marriage are ordered to disclose details of their income, property and assets. This should include assets held jointly and individually. It should also include assets acquired prior to, during and even after the marriage has ended. In this way, the court can assess the parties’ respective economic needs, obligations and responsibilities in the context of their financial worth on divorce.

In some cases, there may be assets that one spouse knows nothing about. Still, even if one party has no knowledge that a particular asset exists, this must be disclosed to the court. This is because the parties are legally required to provide full and frank disclosure of their entire financial circumstances.

What are the consequences of non-disclosure on divorce?

There are various ways in which a financially stronger spouse may attempt to defeat or reduce a claim made against them on divorce. These can include converting assets into cash, temporarily transferring assets to family members, placing assets into sham trust mechanisms and moving assets offshore. However, whilst attempts to deploy these kinds of tactics can occasionally be pulled off, the courts have wide-ranging powers when it comes to dealing with anyone who is not playing fair. These include:

  • Assessing an award based on the inferred wealth of a party, even if assets can no longer be located

  • Notionally ‘adding back’ an asset to the matrimonial pot, as if the asset transfer had not taken place

  • Varying or reversing the transfer of assets into a trust or other corporate structure

  • Awarding a larger proportion of English-based assets in recognition that these are easier to locate.

 The courts can also revisit an order once made, setting this aside and ordering a party to pay any legal costs arising from resolving issues about previously undisclosed assets. More importantly, if a party is found by the court to have deliberately hidden assets, they could be potentially prosecuted for fraud.

If you know or suspect that your former spouse is seeking to hide or dissipate assets on divorce, expert legal advice should be sought immediately to help protect your position financially.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, either express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert advice should be sought.

Equity Release FAQs

Equity release schemes are aimed at those 55 or over looking to free up some equity in their property, while continuing to live there and without making monthly repayments. Needless to say, there are both benefits and drawbacks to these types of schemes, where answers to the following frequently asked questions will help homeowners to make an informed decision.

What is equity release and how does this work?

A growing number of people in later life are finding themselves ‘property rich but cash poor’, where equity release is the process by which a homeowner can extract some or all of the wealth tied up in their property by way of regular payments or a cash lump sum.

There are two main types of equity release schemes:

  • a lifetime mortgage: where a loan is secured against the property, but ownership retained, and the loan repaid from the homeowner’s estate once they die. The interest on the loan can either be repaid at regular intervals, or rolled up and repaid on redemption of the loan;

  • a home reversion plan: where part or all of the property is purchased by the scheme provider, but the seller will be permitted to live in the property rent-free under a lifetime lease. When the property is sold, typically after the seller dies or moves into long-term care, the provider will be entitled to their percentage share by way of repayment.

What are the benefits of equity release schemes?

There are various benefits to equity release, although the advantages involved will depend on the nature of the scheme. In broad terms, equity release schemes will:

  • give you tax-free cash, with the freedom to spend this on anything you want

  • allow you and others to benefit from your wealth during your lifetime

  • enable you to continue living in your current home, without the upheaval of moving.

The ‘no-negative equity guarantee’ offered by lenders approved by the Equity Release Council also means that the amount of money borrowed against the value of your home, plus any rolled-up interest, can never go above the value of that property.

What are the drawbacks of equity release schemes?

There are various drawbacks with equity release, although again the disadvantages will depend on the nature of the scheme. However, in broad terms, equity release schemes will:

  • be unlikely to pay you the full market value for your home, where you will receive far less money, comparatively, than you would from selling the property on the open market

  • diminish the value of your estate, where this will reduce the amount of inheritance that your beneficiaries would otherwise receive after you die

  • potentially reduce your right to means-tested benefits, including funding for social care.

Which equity release scheme is right for me?

For each of the two equity release schemes, there are various options available, where it’s important that both the immediate and future needs of the homeowner are matched with the right type of scheme. The importance of seeking expert advice from a qualified professional cannot be underestimated, so that you fully understand the long-term implications, with sufficient knowledge of the risks, rewards and legal obligations under your preferred scheme.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any error or omission. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert legal advice should always be sought.

Key considerations when buying a repossessed property

Buying a repossessed property can provide investors and developers with an excellent opportunity to purchase an apartment or house at a significantly discounted price — in some cases, by as much as 30% less than their market value. Repossessed properties can also provide first-time buyers with a chance to get onto the property ladder. However, there are a number of key considerations that must be taken into account. This is because the process of buying a repossessed house is very different than through traditional methods.

Below we look at three of the most important factors that you will need to consider before buying a repossessed property.

#Key consideration 1 — the risk of being gazumped

Even though a lender has the right to repossess a property in circumstances where the borrower had been unable to meet their mortgage repayments, the lender is under a legal obligation to obtain the best possible price to cover any outstanding debt. This means that when an offer is made by a prospective buyer, the lender, or estate agent on their behalf, will usually publish a 'notice of offer’ in the local press inviting higher bids. In consequence, there is no certainty that your initial offer will be sufficient to secure the property, exposing you to the possibility of being gazumped and losing the property altogether, or being forced to increase your offer. Even then, the property will remain on the open market until completion.

#Key consideration 2 — the unavailability of replies to enquiries

As the repossessed property is being sold by or on behalf of the lender, who will have no personal knowledge of the property, they will be unlikely to be able to provide answers to many of the standard enquiries raised during the conveyancing process. This can include detail of any disputes with or complaints about neighbours, any notices or proposals that may affect the property, any rights and informal arrangements with neighbouring properties, or any alterations or changes to the property and whether consents and approvals were sought. This means that you must carry out a thorough visit to the property to satisfy yourself of such matters, and raise any queries that you may have with either your solicitor and/or surveyor.

#Key consideration 3 — the need to act very quickly

When buying a property under normal circumstances, timescales are relatively relaxed, typically to be agreed between the parties. In contrast, when buying a repossessed property, whether through an estate agent or auctioneers, time is of the essence. This is because the lender will want to recoup their money as quickly as possible. When buying a property at auction, once the hammer goes down, contracts are treated as exchanged. This means that you must pay a 10% deposit or reservation fee on the day, with the remaining balance usually payable within a period of 14 to 28 days. Even when buying a property through an estate agent, exchange of contracts is generally requested within 28 days of an offer being accepted, so you must have your finances in place so that you are able to proceed immediately.

There are a whole host of other factors to take into account when buying a repossessed property, where expert advice should always be sought first.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any error or omission. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert legal advice should always be sought.

 

How to repay a help-to-buy equity loan

If you took advantage of the government’s help-to-buy scheme to put you on the property ladder, you may now be looking to pay off the equity loan that was used towards the cost of buying your property. This could be because you’re selling up, have cash savings or are looking to remortgage. Below we look at some of the factors involved in how to repay an equity loan, including how much this will cost, the process to be followed and if a solicitor will be needed.

How much will it cost to pay off an equity loan?

The total amount of help-to-buy equity loan that you will need to repay is not fixed to the amount originally borrowed, but instead calculated based on the market value of your property at the time that you choose to repay and the equity loan percentage amount.

This means that the repayment amount can be lower or higher than the amount originally borrowed. If you are selling, the repayment figure will be calculated based on either the approved current market value or the agreed sale price, whichever is the higher. The amount you will need to repay also includes interest, fees and any outstanding payments.

What is the process to repay an equity loan?

The process to repay an equity loan will depend, in part, on your method of repayment. As your equity loan will be secured as a second mortgage over the title deeds to your property, you may be looking to increase your borrowing on your first mortgage and use this to pay off some or all of your equity loan. If you want to repay just part of your equity loan through remortgaging, you’ll first need to get permission from the administrator for Homes England to change your mortgage provider and increase your borrowing on your existing mortgage.

Provided permission has been sought from Homes England, where applicable, or where you are using the proceeds of sale or cash funds to repay your equity loan, you will then need to instruct an RICS-approved surveyor to inspect your property and provide a valuation report to confirm its current value. You will be responsible for the surveyor’s costs in this regard.

Once you have the valuation report, this will need to be submitted to Target Services Ltd, together with their loan redemption form and administration fee, in order to obtain a redemption figure. Target is a private company appointed by Homes England to administer the repayment of equity loans under the help-to-buy scheme. The valuation report will be valid for a period of 3 months from the date of issue. If repayment does not take place within this timescale, you will need to arrange and fund the cost of an additional desktop valuation.

Is a solicitor needed to deal with the repayment process?

Given that your equity loan will be secured against your property, a specific legal process will need to be followed to ensure its removal once you have paid this off in full. This means that you will need to instruct a solicitor to carry out the legal conveyancing to repay the loan, including checking with Land Registry that the equity charge has been removed.

The legal fees for your solicitor dealing with the transaction will vary depending on the nature of your financing for the repayment of the help-to-buy equity loan.

 

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any error or omission. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert legal advice should always be sought.

Does cryptocurrency go into the matrimonial pot on divorce?

When couples cannot agree on the division of marital assets on divorce, or even where agreement has been reached but the court is required to approve a draft consent order, consideration must be given as to the nature and value of any assets owned or available to either party. In this way, a court order can be made that’s fair in all the circumstances.

In most cases, this will include all physical assets, such as the marital home, as well as any savings or investments, such as stocks and shares, and occupational pensions. But what about digital assets, such as cryptocurrency? Should this also form part of the matrimonial pot?

What is cryptocurrency?

Cryptocurrency is a form of digital currency based on blockchain technology and secured by cryptography. Bitcoin is the best-known cryptocurrency, and the one for which blockchain technology was invented. It’s essentially a medium of exchange, such as the pound sterling, but is virtual and uses encryption techniques, both to control the creation of monetary units and to verify the transfer of funds. Cryptocurrencies don't have a central issuing or regulating authority, instead using a decentralised system to record transactions and issue new units.

Can cryptocurrency be taken into account?

When making a financial remedy order on divorce, the court is under a duty to have regard to all the circumstances of the case, taking into account a wide range of different factors. These factors include the income, earning capacity, property and any other financial resources which each party to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future.

As with any other form of money or investment, this means that cryptocurrency is an asset, albeit a digital asset, that the court will almost certainly put into the matrimonial pot when assessing the parties’ financial worth and considering what’s fair in all the circumstances.

That said, whether or not cryptocurrency will form part of the overall settlement ordered or approved by the court will ultimately depend on the totality of resources available to either party — to be considered in the context of their respective financial needs, obligations and responsibilities. The welfare of any children under 18 will be an overriding factor here, where relevant, although other factors can include the age of the parties, the length of the marriage and the standard of living enjoyed by the family before the breakdown of the marriage.

Does cryptocurrency have to be disclosed?

Given the encrypted nature of cryptocurrency, it can be tempting for any party in possession of this type of digital asset to decide not to disclose to the court either its existence or its true value. There may even be cases where a spouse may attempt to dissipate more easily traceable physical assets through investment in cryptocurrency in order to defeat their spouse’s claim.

However, when asking the court to make a financial remedy order on divorce, or even when seeking the court’s approval of a draft settlement agreement, the parties are under an ongoing duty to provide full and frank disclosure, including disclosure of any digital assets.

In cases of non-disclosure, where this comes to light, the court has the power to set aside transactions and order that such assets be added back to the matrimonial pot for distribution upon settlement. If an order has already been made, the court can also overturn such order, with significant costs and other financial consequences for the non-disclosing party.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any error or omission. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert legal advice should always be sought.

Remember to register non-taxable trusts

As part of the UK’s implementation of the 5th Money Laundering Directive (5MLD), and so as to give greater transparency as to the beneficial ownership of trust assets, HMRC has extended the requirement for trust registration to most non-taxable UK trusts. However, with only a small fraction of the anticipated numbers added to the register since it opened to these additional types of trusts last year, trustees should be urgently turning their attention to the impending deadline date and the potential penalties for any failure to register.

What are the new rules for registering trusts?

Set up by HMRC in 2017, the Trust Registration Service (TRS) is a digital platform which trustees must use to fulfil their trust registration obligations. The main purpose of the TRS is to reduce the risk of trusts being used as a vehicle for money laundering, where the register includes details of all parties to the trust, including the settlor, trustees and beneficiaries.

Prior to 6 October 2020, there was no requirement to register trusts with no tax liability, where only taxable UK trusts paying certain UK taxes needed to be placed on the TRS register. However, under the new rules, most express trusts in existence since 6 October 2020 must be registered, even those with no tax liability, unless they are specifically excluded. The registration requirement also extends to some non-UK trusts, including those with land or property in the UK, or at least one UK-resident trustee and a UK business relationship.

What is the registration deadline date?

Even though the new rules in relation to the registration of trusts were introduced on 6 October 2020, it took some time for HMRC to upgrade the existing TRS to take account of the new changes. Accordingly, the TRS only opened on 1 September 2021 for registrations which were brought into scope of the trust register by the requirements of the 5MLD.

However, with a deadline date of 1 September 2022, this has still given trustees a total of 12 months to register a non-taxable express trust, although it has been reported that only a small fraction of the estimated one million trusts affected by the rule changes have been registered to date. This means that for the thousands of trusts yet to be registered, trustees will have to act quickly to meet the deadline date and avoid any financial penalties. This includes any registrable trusts in existence on or after 6 October 2020, even if they have since ceased.

Where a trust is set up or otherwise becomes registrable in the 90 days immediately before 1 September 2022, the trust must instead be registered within 90 days of its creation date. Equally, non-taxable trusts created after 1 September 2022 must register within 90 days.

If you have either created a trust or are the trustee of a trust which has not yet been registered with HMRC, you are strongly advised to consider the guidance on HMRC’s website and, where necessary, to seek expert advice to check if you are caught by the new registration rules.

For assistance in registration a trust please call 01524 386500. 

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, either express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert advice should be sought.

How are trust assets treated on divorce?

Following a break-up, trusts are one way in which the economically stronger spouse may seek to ring-fence property to protect this from going into the matrimonial pot on divorce. Solely owned assets may have even been placed in trust prior to getting married, in addition to or in lieu of a pre-nuptial agreement. However, it’s a common misconception that trusts assets cannot be taken into account by the court when assessing the parties’ financial worth, and considering what’s fair in all the circumstances when it comes to the division of marital assets.

Below we look at how any trust interest will be treated on divorce, where separated spouses are unable to agree on a financial settlement and the court is asked to intervene. 

What are trusts and trust assets?

There are various different types of trusts that can contain a whole host of trust assets. In broad terms, a trust can contain both money and property given to it by a ‘settlor’.  These assets will then be legally owned by appointed ‘trustees’ who hold the assets for the benefit of those specified within the terms of the trust, known as the ‘beneficiaries’.

For instance, a residential property placed in a lifetime trust may allow the beneficiary of that trust to reside in the property for the duration of their lifetime, or a beneficiary may benefit from interest on savings placed in a discretionary trust, albeit at the trustees’ discretion.

Trusts can be set up for various legitimate and non-marital reasons, including tax avoidance, to give third parties beneficial interests in property, to provide a discretionary income for a class or classes of beneficiaries, and estate planning for future generations. In some cases, trusts may also be set up specifically to protect the wealth of the settlor-spouse on divorce.

Will trust assets be ring-fenced on divorce?

When it comes to financial remedy proceedings, the court may be called upon to look beyond the complexities of any trust mechanism to examine the reality of the financial situation.

The fact that trustees have legal ownership of any trust assets, or control over the way in which these are managed, doesn’t automatically mean that any benefit derived from the trust should be disregarded when it comes to the matrimonial pot. This is the case, even if the trust was put in place prior to getting married, or otherwise set up with a genuine purpose. There may also be allegations over whether or not a trust has been solely created as a means of defeating the financial claim of the economically weaker spouse in anticipation of divorce.

Either way, under section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, the court has a duty to consider all financial resources available to both parties, either now or in the foreseeable future, including any trust interest. The court also has wide and varied powers to make orders that achieve a fair outcome in each case, including awarding the non-beneficiary party a greater share of non-trust assets. This means that trust assets may be treated as either income or capital that can be brought into account, regardless of the reasons behind the trust.

Needless to say, the court is likely to take an even more robust approach when bringing trust assets into account if it considers the trust to be a sham. It’s therefore vital that expert legal advice is sought prior to entering into a trust arrangement, either prior to getting married or following the breakdown of a marriage, or when pursuing or defending trust asset claims in the context of divorce and financial remedy proceedings.

Legal disclaimer

 

The matters contained herein are intended to be for general information purposes only. This blog does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a complete or authoritative statement of the law in England and Wales and should not be treated as such. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the information is correct, no warranty, express or implied, is given as to its’ accuracy, and no liability is accepted for any error or omission. Before acting on any of the information contained herein, expert legal advice should always be sought.