All materials contained on or available from this website are of a general informational nature and do not represent legal advice. Legal materials are relevant to the laws of England and Wales only unless otherwise stated. Whilst reasonable endeavours are taken to ensure that materials are accurate and up-to-date as at the date of publication, LawSkills Limited and contributing authors do not accept liability or responsibility for any loss or damage occasioned to any person acting or refraining from acting on any information contained on this website. Specialist legal or other professional advice should be sought before entering (or refraining from entering) into any specific transaction.
This does not affect LawSkills Limited's or contributing authors' liability for death or personal injury, nor for fraudulent misrepresentation or misrepresentation as to a fundamental matter, nor any other liability which cannot be excluded or limited under applicable law.
AUGUST 21ST 2009 | 02:27 TAGS: PROBATE
Most firms conducting probate work continue to be busy despite the recession although converting enquiries into confirmed cases is increasingly challenging as personal representatives look keenly at prices and levels of service. What follows represents recent additional challenges in this area:
To continue reading this item, you need to subscribe. Click here to find out about the benefits of a subscription to LawSkills
Should a lay trustee whose co-trustee was the Executor and Trust Company of a solicitor’s firm be entitled to argue that he had a reasonable excuse for the late payment of capital gains tax (CGT) on a share sale because HMRC had not drawn the payment on account feature to his attention?
OUR LATEST INTRODUCTION PODCAST
