As I said earlier, she did say, in an interview, something about the proceeds from sales of her last book being an investment for her sons. I remember thinking it was a bit of a Jade Goody moment at the time, albeit Jade's boys were only tiddlers when she was dying and talking about raising money for their futures. So far, the only sense I can make out of this is that she trusted Pattemore to see to her affairs and make due provision for her sons and he's not playing fair.
Correct.
One son says he asked to see the will and Pattemore sat and read it to him rather than give it to him to read for himself.
There's never only one copy of a will...the other copy would be with the solicitor for probate and I'd guess the sons have gone along to the solicitor and viewed the will and decided Pattemore is definitely not playing fair.
Lynda wrote in her final book about the importance of finalising wills before it is too late after the appalling way she was treated by her Canadian relatives when her birth mother died - she was told if she wanted any personal items from her birth mother she'd have to pay for them. I believe she did what she thought was right by her sons and that Pattemore is certainly not playing fair...there's a "You'll get your share when I'm good and ready to give it you" sound to all this. And as for his own offspring getting a slice of the pie...Lynda really should have known better than to have allowed for that.
Besides, even if she left everything to Pattemore it would speak volumes about him if he used that to justify not giving her sons a penny. What kind of person would say 'She left it all to me, it's legal and binding and you're getting nothing'...? Okay, so legally it would all be his...but you'd be a complete selfish and greedy t*sser to not even want to share with them. He even complained when they took their own photo albums when they moved out!
Pattemore appeared on Loose Women shortly after Lynda's death - I had the feeling at the time that the Loose Women were not that enamoured by him.
I felt the same. He is a sleaze, it oozes out of his pores. What on earth did a lady like Lynda see in him?
I agree. The way he goes on TV in garish looking jackets and shirts screams attention seeker. He would say and do anything to stay in the limelight. I am surprised Lynda totally trusted him to deal with her financial affairs and will.
She didn't leave the money to her two sons - they just wish she had and are now trying to dig up lots of dirt to blacken the name of the person she did leave the money to so that they can get their hands on it.
People can "read between the lines" or simply invent scenarios to suit their own preferences but the only fact we know about her intentions is the will that she signed.
Signed whilst on morphine apparently? I'd say that's very contestable grounds to void the will legally.
Signed whilst on morphine apparently? I'd say that's very contestable grounds to void the will legally.
Will done months before she died. Her son has told the reason why they were not directly named in the will - inheritance tax. You can pass monies to your spouse without incurring the tax. .What the person who makes the will in these instances has to do is trust their spouse. It does seem strange that Linda would not leave any money to her sons so I do believe that the 'understanding' was that her husband would then 'gift' her sons a pre agreed amount.
As far as over turning the will is concerned the lawyers who drew up the will will have to say that the intention was to avoid inheritance tax . This can't be a totally rare event. Money left to step parent who then goes back on what has been agreed. Or indeed an actual parent if they are particularly greedy. The fact that this has hit the media says that the sons have gone into shaming mode rather than having a strong legal case.
Why not? They've lost their mum, and their stepfather has behaved in a highly inseneitive way ever since. Whoring himself around the media and tarnishing their mothers memory, Ive always thought he seemed as dodgy as f*ck and saw Linda as a meal ticket and it looks like I'm right.[/QUOTE]
Why not? They've lost their mum, and their stepfather has behaved in a highly inseneitive way ever since. Whoring himself around the media and tarnishing their mothers memory, Ive always thought he seemed as dodgy as f*ck and saw Linda as a meal ticket and it looks like I'm right.[/QUOTE]
Everything in Lynda's final letter to her family outlines how she wanted them to treat each other. If the men in her life thought anything of her, they would respect and honour her guidance. So far, it appears that her sons have done that by, until now, remaining quiet while Pattemore has ridden the media circuit. Whatever their personal weaknesses may be (seeing as they are human), I think they are justified in feeling aggrieved.
Most of you seem to be forgetting one thing here, one of the parties to the marriage is still alive. If, for example, she had left the sons £500,000 each, this might mean that the house would have to be sold to pay them, and that would put Mr Spain out of the marital home. As such, this would be provided for in the will for when Mr Spain dies, therefore she would not be simply "having to trust her husband". It's inconceivable that knowing the importance of making wills, as she herself said, and wanting to make provision for them, that she would then go on not to do this. She could also have left money in trust for them, in which case it will be administered by trustees. I can't stand the man, but them demanding to see the will is out of order, they will have been told what they need to know. i.e. if they've been provided for, so they should just go away and wait for him to pop his clogs. He can't touch the money, if it's in trust. If they are that concerned to see it, they can obtain a copy from the Probate office for a few pounds.
As for the husband "not being blood" and the sons are, no husband is "blood". Also, someone said that she would have signed the will while she was full of morphine. It's unlikely she was on morphine at that point, as she was making television appearances several months later. My husband was only on morphine for a few weeks before he died, and then, not all the time, and he was fully compos mentis until just the day before.
At the end of the day it's no ones business, and I'm sure she knew exactly what she was doing, and had the correct advice. They are just throwing a wobbler, as they've just realised they won't get anything until Mr Spain dies.
Most of you seem to be forgetting one thing here, one of the parties to the marriage is still alive. If, for example, she had left the sons £500,000 each, this might mean that the house would have to be sold to pay them, and that would put Mr Spain out of the marital home. As such, this would be provided for in the will for when Mr Spain dies, therefore she would not be simply "having to trust her husband". It's inconceivable that knowing the importance of making wills, as she herself said, and wanting to make provision for them, that she would then go on not to do this. She could also have left money in trust for them, in which case it will be administered by trustees. I can't stand the man, but them demanding to see the will is out of order, they will have been told what they need to know. i.e. if they've been provided for, so they should just go away and wait for him to pop his clogs. He can't touch the money, if it's in trust. If they are that concerned to see it, they can obtain a copy from the Probate office for a few pounds.
As for the husband "not being blood" and the sons are, no husband is "blood". Also, someone said that she would have signed the will while she was full of morphine. It's unlikely she was on morphine at that point, as she was making television appearances several months later. My husband was only on morphine for a few weeks before he died, and then, not all the time, and he was fully compos mentis until just the day before.
At the end of the day it's no ones business, and I'm sure she knew exactly what she was doing, and had the correct advice. They are just throwing a wobbler, as they've just realised they won't get anything until Mr Spain dies.
The money doesn't appear to have been in trust for the sons. Pattemore told them that he would give them money from his share, which he doesn't appear to have done, instead apparently using it for 3 trips to Dubai, a round the world cruise and a hair transplant in Dublin (what's wrong with Britain?)
I'm on the son's side here. Pattemore appears to be a publicity loving lummox with very little respect for the woman he claimed to love so much.
Most of you seem to be forgetting one thing here, one of the parties to the marriage is still alive. If, for example, she had left the sons £500,000 each, this might mean that the house would have to be sold to pay them, and that would put Mr Spain out of the marital home. As such, this would be provided for in the will for when Mr Spain dies, therefore she would not be simply "having to trust her husband". It's inconceivable that knowing the importance of making wills, as she herself said, and wanting to make provision for them, that she would then go on not to do this. She could also have left money in trust for them, in which case it will be administered by trustees. I can't stand the man, but them demanding to see the will is out of order, they will have been told what they need to know. i.e. if they've been provided for, so they should just go away and wait for him to pop his clogs. He can't touch the money, if it's in trust. If they are that concerned to see it, they can obtain a copy from the Probate office for a few pounds.
As for the husband "not being blood" and the sons are, no husband is "blood". Also, someone said that she would have signed the will while she was full of morphine. It's unlikely she was on morphine at that point, as she was making television appearances several months later. My husband was only on morphine for a few weeks before he died, and then, not all the time, and he was fully compos mentis until just the day before.
At the end of the day it's no ones business, and I'm sure she knew exactly what she was doing, and had the correct advice. They are just throwing a wobbler, as they've just realised they won't get anything until Mr Spain dies.
I agree with this. It sounds the usual turn of events.
And she has said that she will take care of her boys from the proceeds of the book.
There is no guarantee the money will be left to the sons when he dies.
Hasn't he got children of his own?
Indeed but that is a risk that is taken when monies are left to spouse to avoid inheritance tax. Linda could have left directly to her sons but a fair whack of it would have gone in tax. She did what many people do if they die early leave it to spouse to deal with. I assume it was agreed that he would gift her sons an amount from the proceeds of the book. As long as Mr Spain lives for 7 years it would be tax free. Sensible tax planning but it needs an honest spouse for it to work.
People shouldn't just expect to inherit anyway. Cant her kids support themselves? They are about 30. She was married so upon her death her estate passed to her husband. If she thought they could avoid inheritance tax and he would then do the right thing and look after her two kids who are grown up, then she was very naive and should have specifically listed them in her will and what they were to receive.
It's up to him what he does with her estate. It passed to him.
People shouldn't just expect to inherit anyway. Cant her kids support themselves? They are about 30. She was married so upon her death her estate pased to her husband. If she thought they could avoid inheritance tax and he would then do the right thing and look after her two kids who are grown up, then she was very naive and should have specifically listed them in her will and what they were to receive.
It's up to him what he does with her estate. It passed to him.
There is no way Linda would have wanted her sons to miss out on the inheritance
Most normal people want to leave their money to their family
Yes, it does appear she was naive and trusting.
She wasn't to know what a rat he would turn out to be!
People shouldn't just expect to inherit anyway. Cant her kids support themselves? They are about 30. She was married so upon her death her estate passed to her husband. If she thought they could avoid inheritance tax and he would then do the right thing and look after her two kids who are grown up, then she was very naive and should have specifically listed them in her will and what they were to receive.
It's up to him what he does with her estate. It passed to him.
Exactly this idea that someone deserves something just through accident of birth is bizarre.
The amount of people who seem to want her will over turned on the basis of their opinion that the husband is a wrong un,even though they've never met the guy.
Exactly this idea that someone deserves something just through accident of birth is bizarre.
The amount of people who seem to want her will over turned on the basis of their opinion that the husband is a wrong un,even though they've never met the guy.
Don't have to meet him
His actions speak for themselves
Exactly this idea that someone deserves something just through accident of birth is bizarre.
The amount of people who seem to want her will over turned on the basis of their opinion that the husband is a wrong un,even though they've never met the guy.
You say it's bizarre but whilst it's not an automatic entitlement it is what most people decide to do so it's hardly best described as bizarre.
Also people passing comment and opinion on people they've never met is kinda part of the course on a showbiz and entertainment forum.....
Perhaps any assets she had was in property rather than cash, in which case, as tartan18 says, and especially if in both Linda and her husband's names, then the sons have no option but to "wait it out" so to speak. This seems to be the probable issue to me; with the sons maybe being concerned that Michael is borrowing against the property to finance the jet setting, hair transplants etc.? Just my speculation of course, but the fact that she tried to boost the finances with her book would suggest, again, that there wasn't much available money to leave to her boys?
Personally, I don't think any of the men in her life come across very well, and I'll be surprised if this even gets to court; whatever her intentions, Linda signed the will, and even if she was drugged after surgery at the time, in the intervening months she was lucid enough to write a book and appear in several interviews speaking very eloquently about what was happening to her, so I don't think the argument that she wasn't thinking clearly would carry any weight.
My (considerable) experience of family wills tells me that nobody can be trusted following a death and it should all be wrapped up tightly even if some IHT does have to be paid. Second marriages are the worst where the survivor nearly always syphons the money to their side of the family regardless of the wishes of the deceased who earned it.
Comments
Correct.
One son says he asked to see the will and Pattemore sat and read it to him rather than give it to him to read for himself.
There's never only one copy of a will...the other copy would be with the solicitor for probate and I'd guess the sons have gone along to the solicitor and viewed the will and decided Pattemore is definitely not playing fair.
Lynda wrote in her final book about the importance of finalising wills before it is too late after the appalling way she was treated by her Canadian relatives when her birth mother died - she was told if she wanted any personal items from her birth mother she'd have to pay for them. I believe she did what she thought was right by her sons and that Pattemore is certainly not playing fair...there's a "You'll get your share when I'm good and ready to give it you" sound to all this. And as for his own offspring getting a slice of the pie...Lynda really should have known better than to have allowed for that.
Besides, even if she left everything to Pattemore it would speak volumes about him if he used that to justify not giving her sons a penny. What kind of person would say 'She left it all to me, it's legal and binding and you're getting nothing'...? Okay, so legally it would all be his...but you'd be a complete selfish and greedy t*sser to not even want to share with them. He even complained when they took their own photo albums when they moved out!
Her sons have every right to feel aggrieved.
I felt the same. He is a sleaze, it oozes out of his pores. What on earth did a lady like Lynda see in him?
I agree. The way he goes on TV in garish looking jackets and shirts screams attention seeker. He would say and do anything to stay in the limelight. I am surprised Lynda totally trusted him to deal with her financial affairs and will.
Will done months before she died. Her son has told the reason why they were not directly named in the will - inheritance tax. You can pass monies to your spouse without incurring the tax. .What the person who makes the will in these instances has to do is trust their spouse. It does seem strange that Linda would not leave any money to her sons so I do believe that the 'understanding' was that her husband would then 'gift' her sons a pre agreed amount.
As far as over turning the will is concerned the lawyers who drew up the will will have to say that the intention was to avoid inheritance tax . This can't be a totally rare event. Money left to step parent who then goes back on what has been agreed. Or indeed an actual parent if they are particularly greedy. The fact that this has hit the media says that the sons have gone into shaming mode rather than having a strong legal case.
Poor Lynda. She doesn't seem to have had much luck with husbands.
Two violent ones and one who appears to have been a leech.
As for the husband "not being blood" and the sons are, no husband is "blood". Also, someone said that she would have signed the will while she was full of morphine. It's unlikely she was on morphine at that point, as she was making television appearances several months later. My husband was only on morphine for a few weeks before he died, and then, not all the time, and he was fully compos mentis until just the day before.
At the end of the day it's no ones business, and I'm sure she knew exactly what she was doing, and had the correct advice. They are just throwing a wobbler, as they've just realised they won't get anything until Mr Spain dies.
The money doesn't appear to have been in trust for the sons. Pattemore told them that he would give them money from his share, which he doesn't appear to have done, instead apparently using it for 3 trips to Dubai, a round the world cruise and a hair transplant in Dublin (what's wrong with Britain?)
I'm on the son's side here. Pattemore appears to be a publicity loving lummox with very little respect for the woman he claimed to love so much.
I agree with this. It sounds the usual turn of events.
And she has said that she will take care of her boys from the proceeds of the book.
There is no guarantee the money will be left to the sons when he dies.
Hasn't he got children of his own?
Indeed but that is a risk that is taken when monies are left to spouse to avoid inheritance tax. Linda could have left directly to her sons but a fair whack of it would have gone in tax. She did what many people do if they die early leave it to spouse to deal with. I assume it was agreed that he would gift her sons an amount from the proceeds of the book. As long as Mr Spain lives for 7 years it would be tax free. Sensible tax planning but it needs an honest spouse for it to work.
It's up to him what he does with her estate. It passed to him.
Most normal people want to leave their money to their family
Yes, it does appear she was naive and trusting.
She wasn't to know what a rat he would turn out to be!
Exactly this idea that someone deserves something just through accident of birth is bizarre.
The amount of people who seem to want her will over turned on the basis of their opinion that the husband is a wrong un,even though they've never met the guy.
Don't have to meet him
His actions speak for themselves
You say it's bizarre but whilst it's not an automatic entitlement it is what most people decide to do so it's hardly best described as bizarre.
Also people passing comment and opinion on people they've never met is kinda part of the course on a showbiz and entertainment forum.....
What making her happy for over a decade of marriage.
Personally, I don't think any of the men in her life come across very well, and I'll be surprised if this even gets to court; whatever her intentions, Linda signed the will, and even if she was drugged after surgery at the time, in the intervening months she was lucid enough to write a book and appear in several interviews speaking very eloquently about what was happening to her, so I don't think the argument that she wasn't thinking clearly would carry any weight.
Yes I accept he made her happy, but his actions following her death have let him down
Love is blind comes to mind
He wasnt married to her for over a decade -2008-2014 unless definitions have changed since I was at school