MY TARGET IS ONE MILLION INHERITANCE HORROR STORIES POSTED ON THIS PAGE.
YOUR PRIVACY: I don't want any of your personal data. Storing and handling personal data is a monumental practical and regulatory nuisance and it's not for me. Because I don't and won't retain any of them, whether you happen to give them to me advertently or inadvertently, your personal data won't be at any risk of ever being compromised. Choose to be eunonymous, pseudononymous or anonymous. The identifier you want me to use will be appended to your posted story on this page of this static website and will not exist in any database, including any website CMS (which I don't use on this site. 'CMS' is fancy-shmancy for 'content management system', which is shmancy-fancy for a dynamic database used to store and manage data deployed on a dynamic website, which this isn't). I automatically delete permanently all emailed personal data on receipt except your chosen moniker and your email address. If you happen to email me any other personal data, such as your real name, address or phone number, I'll automatically delete it permanently on reading it. And of course I will never engage in any trade in any email address with anyone for any reason. The email itself will exist on my email provider's system unless you tell me in the email to delete it. If you tell me in the email to delete it, I'll delete it on reading your instruction.
WHAT AND HOW TO EMAIL ME: Are you or have you been, or do you know or know of, a victimised testator or heir, or family? Shafted concerning inheritance by an executor, administrator, judge, regulator, police, prosecutor, testator, heir, auction house, bank, bookkeeper, accountant, auditor, or your own specialist lawyer? Perhaps you're that rarest of service providers, a contrite whistleblowing lawyer weary of your double life, split personalities and multiple personas? Whoever, whatever and wherever you are, email me your civil and or criminal inheritance horror stories at stories@MrInheritance.com (a relatively secure encrypted protonmail account).
All MrInheritance.com email to me — whatever of it remain [<= subjunctive] after my deletions — is comprehensively and unconditionally confidential indefinitely
Email me as many authentic inheritance horror stories as you wish on any before- and or after-death inheritance subject, situation, dispute, controversy or issue in any jurisdiction
Choose to be accredited or not
Keep each story pithily substantive
No problem if your story is similar to any one or more others posted here
Keep it rational. Rational is internally and externally tractable, reliable, robust and sustainable. Emotional is not
I might ask you to email me data of your choice authenticating the story
I'll post your stories on this page, maybe after some judicious editing
I'll always email you the proposed post for your approval before I post it
If you want to send me documents, please upload them to a cloud repository of your choice and email me the relevant access details (you thus control the whole process).
Thanks! Check out my inheritance crime consulting firm, and some of my forthcoming inheritance crime-related books.
1: My First Inheritance Err: executor not paying attention, her lawyer overpays heirs
1989-ish: My maternal grandmother ZB apparently left me £100. ZB's will's executor BA had chosen badly and wasn't paying attention. Her lawyer (??) paid me out £200 (and asked for it back. Riiiight.). Apparently she — the lawyer — was thrown out of the profession and went to prison. First inheritance lessons:-
the testator to choose the executor wisely
the executor to choose her helpers wisely
the executor to stay away from lawyers unless necessary — they usually are not — and micro-managed and micro-controlled
the lucky heir should argue that he gets to keep a marginally erroneous payment
the executor is personally liable to the estate for any financial misfeasance, financial ineptitude, etc.
the heirs must insist on genuinely full complete whole-truth honest pellucid real-time executor accounts with all underlying primary source material and the entire file, and must scrutinise, analyse, evaluate, verify and gross- and net-value the merits of every relevant transaction and all underlying facts and circumstances.
2: Triple Trouble: (1) testator conned by three dud specialist lawyers; (2) his estate potentially in big trouble if in the wrong hands; (3) item: his wills' executor conned by two dud specialist lawyers. Executor works it out for himself
Testator conned by three lawyers giving wrong information and dud advice. His estate then very vulnerable to unscrupulous estate manager and or his lawyers churning, cooking, baking, fermenting that information and advice. And so it proved! American lawyer (JD) practising dubiously in London advises testator MH, an American living in London, that he needs a New Jersey will. Wrong.
Two solicitors (JH, JR1) in an English law firm in Dorset advise MH that he also needs an English will. Right about the English will; wrong about two wills and an American will. Confusion and trouble for the future!
MH pays all three deadbeat shyster lawyers. Dies.
MH's two wills' executor (PM: see §§3 and 4 below) hires Big City full-of-shit lawyer (JR2; clicking heels, off ski-ing etc) and his sagely ruminating, smirking, morally inanimate, intellectually inert bovine lumpen dumkopf comatose carcass of an assistant (DBS; I accurately convey the impression she made on us) to assist.
The pair of them see the openings. Though the solution is obvious, they make more trouble over the illusorily technically difficult two wills — oh, how they churned it! — and bill monstrously criminally (when I visited them to protest, I got, apparently in their own defense, a smug 'We used to weigh the file'. I bet you did, John, I bet you did).
I don't think any of the many other shyster deadbeat lawyers PM and I dealt with evoked such disgust as this pair of self-infatuated imbeciles.
An appalled PM fires JR2 and DBS and hires another fancy lawyer (AP) who quickly advises, correctly, what PM (not a lawyer) had already worked out for himself: tear up the New Jersey will.
Criminal billing, lies, incompetence, more lying, more cheating, more criminal billing, more incompetence, outrageous dishonesty, and throughout a sense of entitlement and impunity, from one US lawyer (JD) and four English solicitors (JH, JR1, JR2, DBS).
I wonder who else these lawyers have screwed. I wonder who they're screwing now.
3.1 'Leave everything to me": 'Sonny' Bond Street filofax pseudo-upper-class wideboy screws his own wheelchaired 'Mumsy'; pictures all gone!
This is an ongoing saga that has its place elsewhere, but I'll mention it here to fill up space. It's an English-Swiss version of the Marshall-Morrissey screwing of Brooke Astor (no relation). Manipulative ingratiating professional nuisance Captain The Honourable 'Sonny' FB steals the art collection of 'Mumsy' AN. He just lifts the pictures off the walls of her flat at the Lausanne Palace Hotel and fences them through a luvvy at Christie's, and sells one or two privately, and gives some away. He lies that she gave them to him, wanted to give them to him, would have given them to him, wanted to change her will in his favor, etc etc. Tries to get her to change her will. Tries to get her to execute a codicil (maybe she did…). He hosed this frail, wheelchair-bound, post-stroke, friendless, helpless, not expected to live long, etc lady good and proper — with the fulsome help throughout of her own two English solicitors and her own Lausanne lawyer. Of course there's a multiply criminal enduring power of attorney and a multiply criminal ordinary power of attorney, in favor of FB and PM, probably never invoked, drafted by FB's English lawyers who then appoint themselves as, also, her lawyers ("I am your lawyer do you agree?"); her Swiss lawyer was appointed by the English lawyers. FB consigns her to various Swiss nursing homes. She then dies. Sole co-executor sole co-heir FB then steals more pictures and fences them with another luvvy at another famous auction house. The English and Swiss lawyers go along with and assist everything: idiopathically and derivately criminally. Sole co-heir sole co-executor sole co-power-attorney PM has the job of sorting it all out. So many dud and or dishonest English and Swiss specialist lawyers. So much apparent absence of Swiss law clarity on fundamental points, as if this situation is unique and unprecedented. Lots of intense work to reconstruct AN's picture collection and try to get AN's English and (PM: 'immovable') Swiss lawyers, AN's estate managers' English and Swiss lawyers (the same lawyers) and FB's English and Swiss lawyers (the same until he uses other lawyers), etc. The whole thing ends up killing him. All this is merely Part 1 of an incredible story of life, death and monumental dishonesty and greed by FB, three lawyers, two auction houses and a few others. (Don't like being exposed? I haven't started, and I'm ready for you.) Part 2 is summarised in #4 below.
3.2 "She's very good." She sure is! Very professional solicitor criminal and her gang (women lawyer criminals are the worst)
This is an ongoing saga that has its place elsewhere (and is already alluded to at https://www.inheritancecrime.com/discussion), but I'll mention it here briefly to fill up space, not quite in the usual format, and I haven't had time to distill it or make it less repetitious, but I know the case so well that the facts just flow and every time I write about it I discover new angles and nuances and if you study it you'll get the idea. It's a direct continuation, a peculiar evolution, of #3 above. Its numerous procedural and substantive inner-office, back-office, front-office, recourse, public relations and support systems criminality re issues, incidents, episodes, relationships and transactions, and the various organised crime aspects, and the international and multi-jurisdictional aspects, are full of the deepest technical interest. I'll try to keep it simple.
PM has died. He was a 25% heir of AN's residuary estate. As of PM's death, AN's estate had not been fully administered. PM leaves a will leaving his net residuary estate — including his 25% share in AN's estate — to eight heirs.
First, a few simple points, of perhaps only marginal relevance, of Swiss succession law (some points below have been the subject of prolonged extensive debate between me and a supposedly eminent local notaire and I think he is wrong wrong wrong on all points concerning PM's estate manager's rights and functions in relation to AN's estate and AN's estate's heirs and the Swiss case he cited is on a different point):-
On general principles, PM's estate (per his will's express stipulations, to be administered solely in accordance with English law unless another law applies) doesn't succeed to PM's 25% share of AN's estate (per her will's express stipulation, to be administered solely in accordance with Swiss law). It follows that PM's estate manager as such has no role in the affairs of PM's heirs once they have been properly transplanted into AN's estate. She has no right as such to chaperone PM's heirs or infiltrate AN's estate or infiltrate the affairs of AN's estate's heirs individually, in combination or collectively
Rather, PM's heirs succeed, individually and collectively, in their own right and in their own respective proportions, to PM's 25% share. They infiltrate AN's estate lawfully and without any chaperoning from PM's estate manager. They are on their own. Of course they can collectively appoint an executor, and each of them can appoint his her or its personal representative to deal with his her or its interest in AN's estate. But none of that has anything to do with PM's estate or PM's estate manager
Once their means of transport to AN's estate — PM's will — has been properly authenticated and approved (how (English full grant of probate), by whom (English court), when, where, in favor of whom (PM's estate manager) are all irrelevant if all is in order), and recognised by the Swiss whatever (certificat d'hérétiers from the juge de paix, in this case), PM's heirs individually and collectively achieve automatic admission to AN's estate regardless of who they are, whence they come and how they come. The fact is that they are now, in effect, in AN's will
Of course one has a primal hesitation about how PM's heirs were, have been and continue to be legitimated for purposes of their infiltration of AN's estate. PM's estate manager criminally applied for, obtained, retained and exercised her judicial appointments as PM's estate's interim administrator and ad col grantee; and ditto the full grant of probate of PM's will and thus her appointment as full administrator. How all this criminality affects the validity of the probate grant — whether to that extent PM's heirs ever lawfully succeeded to PM's interest in AN's estate — is an interesting question. I think there's no point in treating the grant as void, or trying to obtain a declaration from a genuinely fully informed English court judge that it and everything else is void, even if it is void, because, whatever all the criminal cedents and antecedents, probate (however void) of PM's will got PM's heirs where they needed to be — into AN's estate, including for purposes of them administering AN's estate — and it is impossible to do the unravelling necessary to effectuate the avoidance and anyway I don't see anyone litigating any of this (there has to be some English law doctrine somewhere that an English judicial decision obtained criminally is still valid if impossible to unravel its effects)
That still leaves the position and activities of PM's estate manager. However PM's estate's heirs infiltrate AN's estate, how PM's estate manager infiltrates AN's estate, or rather the affairs of AN's heirs, is another thing. Once her own pseudo-official and (if it be her criminal, wholly unfounded argument) pseudo-collective-personal-representative infiltration process has been initiated and as it proceeds, how she and her gang then behave in relation to AN's estate and the AN-related affairs, rights and functions of AN's heirs individually, in combination and collectively, is and continues to be monstrously criminal procedurally and substantively. However extensive you may think is the selective abbreviated summary below, it doesn't relate the procedural and or substantive criminality she and her gang perpetrated in relation to both AN's estate and the victim heir, which of course will fill volumes. Whether or not she really does have any chaperone or other legal right to do any of it, and what she actually does and doesn't do, is of course somewhat relevant to her criminality. But let's not forget that whatever her civil rights in relation to AN's estate and AN's heirs individually, in combination and or collectively, and however criminal her various infiltrations, such infiltration is not in principle necessarily of itself harmful, however cunning, calculated and preparatory, if she then repines, demurs, refrains and does nothing with it. Having infiltrated, her criminality is then in her acts and defaults of arrogation.
Trusted co-executor TR disclaims because he's a greedy shit-headed coward. Remaining co-executor co-heir RA is removed as executor by the other heirs because their ringleader HN doesn't trust him to not go after HN's 'ordinary course of business' buddy FB, HN and HN's wife. RA is replaced by interim and then full administrator "She's very good" solicitor ('I must make my own decisions') CMG, who criminally obtains appointment as interim administrator by lying to the heirs and the court, barges in, and in an early criminal manoeuvre jettisons with highly indicative criminal timing data that would not be of any interest to any innocent administrator of PM's estate and would be of elemental importance to every innocent estate manager of AN's estate, and assembles a gang of five or six or more other solicitors from her firm and two or three barristers PR, MB and CE, and seven fully supportive heirs, and proceeds to comprehensively rampage over PM's estate and — without those all-important data — AN's estate. CMG or whoever is doing her work for her handles PM's plain vanilla estate so-so. It starts to get technically fascinating at the outset. PM's (English) estate includes PM's 25% interest in AN's (Swiss) estate. As I understand multiple multi-jurisdiction testamentary succession, PM's heirs succeeded to PM's 25% share of AN's estate as soon as PM's will had been probated. Criminal administrator CMG, having criminally conned PM's heirs (or at least all but one of them) into consenting to her becoming administrator; having criminally conned a Chance'ry Division judge into rubber-stamping her application to be interim administrator; having criminally applied for and criminally obtained an ad col grant and criminally misused it, then proceeds to multiply criminally apply for and obtain a full grant of probate of PM's will. We'll look elsewhere at the effect of that criminality. But did she ever utilise this full grant? When and in relation to what did she invoke it? Who else was comprehensively confused about where, how, why and in relation to what she fitted in to AN's estate and the affairs of AN's heirs? The technical legal position is that on a legitimate legal full grant of probate of PM's will, PM's heirs migrate to PM's interest in AN's estate, taking PM's share of AN's residue in accordance with their own respective shares of PM's residue, without being chaperoned in any way by PM's estate's criminal administrator, who, full grant or not, criminal or not, has no jurisidiction, function, power or interest whatever in anything to do with AN's estate (we'll leave aside her criminally applied for, obtained and utilised ad col grant, an important criminal sideshow); and once installed in AN's estate, they are entitled and required to make their own decisions about recovering AN's and AN's estate's stolen art and cash with no gratuitous interference from anyone, especially including this criminal administrator with or without her criminally obtained full grant. If you have a vivid imagination, you might be able to guess a tiny fraction of the full horror of what then happens to AN's estate, and its unfinished front-office business, and what has actually happened, and what continues to happen, continuing, continuum and continuosity style, including to the stolen pictures and cash, thanks to CMG, her firm, her criminal barristers, her criminal Swiss lawyer friend, eight heirs and various other connections and contacts. Absolutely nothing to do with CMG having any grant. Her English grant is worthless in Switzerland. And PM's estate has no assets or liabilities in Switzerland! And AN's estate is not PM's estate. and the migrating {PM estate to AN estate} heirs have not collectively given her, as a private citizen, permission to represent them personally collectively. Grant or no grant, she is not entitled to be anywhere near AN's estate or AN's heirs collectively. She and her gang have just barged in and criminalised the entire AN estate. Corruption, dishonesty, greed, criminal conflicts, false accounting, fraud, criminal infiltration, criminal arrogation, theft, embezzlement, perjury, extortion, coercion, sabotage, vandalism all round, on all relevant issues, in all relevant relationships and transactions, by around FIFTEEN specialist lawyer criminals, another Chance'ry Division judge who was obviously on the take, and eight criminal heirs. This barely conveys the full picture. And of course the villains now think they have got away with it (PM's estate might, as her firm puts it, well be 'closed' — there was never much there in the first place for CMG to mess up — but AN's estate and the extraordinary and extraordinarily timed, coordinated, calculated, executed, concealed plain-view and other criminality of CMG, her gangs, associates and accomplices, in various criminally obtained, fictitious and bogus capacities, and other principals and accessories — especially the lawyers and the criminal heirs — are another matter). And of couse FB has died. In this saga, there's FB's estate: a real class act of criminal infiltration, arrogation, deceit, deception, duplicity, fraud, concealment, etc. by CMG's firm, principally to take sole control of FB's estate's data — highly incriminating of FB and CMG and her firm, and HN, and others — and more. I wonder where FB's estate's papers are now. My forthcoming formal report on the case pixelates the story and astorises the evidence. It will make a good screenplay and your hair stand on end.
4. A Rajastan Story: high society lows
A former acquaintance of mine (let's call him M) is the second son of Rajput father. Father dies leaving (as I recall) everything, or at least the main residence, to the first-born son. No title deeds. The solitary apprehensive vulnerable nervous cowardly widow understandably sides (though there's nothing legal on which she can or would need to take sides) with her first-born who now has the family property (we all know what can happen to frail elderly helpless friendless widows in India at the hands of their own children). M is understandably aggrieved comprehensively. Sleeps with a shotgun (for himself, the brother, the mother?) Lots of hauteur. But everyone's human. No-one takes the high road. No-one shows any mercy to anyone else.