What Can We Learn From a Millionaire’s Disinherited Baby?

Mark Talbot, a UK resident, died in 2022 at the age of 63 leaving behind an awesome last will, drafted in 2014, making his wife, Rosemary his beneficiary. In that will, he specifically excluded his daughter Emma McDaniel and explained in the will that he had not seen her in decades and had no contact with her.

Years later, Mark and Emma reconnected and developed what the court described as a “close relationship”. They spent time together, went on holiday (vacation for us in the US LOL), and eventually Emma helped care for Mark and his mother.  Unfortunately, Mark never updated his will and when he died, his old will still excluded Emma from his estate.

As you can imagine, litigation ensued.

Emma brought a claim in England under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975, arguing that her father’s estate did not make reasonable financial provision for her. The court considered her financial need, her family circumstances, her health issues, her caregiving role, and the relationship that had developed between father and daughter before his death. Ultimately, the court awarded her about $165K from the estate.

So, what can we learn from this disinherited daughter’s estate battle?

Of course, we can talk about the dangers of stale estate planning documents (your will is not like a crockpot. You cannot just set it and forget it.) But we can also talk about how this would have gone down here, in the Sunshine State. Florida DOES NOT have the same general rule allowing a disinherited adult child to ask the court for “reasonable financial provision” just because the child has financial need.  In Florida, you can disinherit your adult children if you want.

But what if the last will states a disinheritance of a child, “because we are estranged” or “ I have not seen the child and we are not in contact,” and then there’s a reunion worthy of a Hallmark movie? Would that “reason” for disinheritance create a problem?  That’s a very good question for a litigation attorney LOL (and we don’t want to create a litigation attorney experience in our estate plan). 

Specifically, this is why we don’t explain WHY we’re disinheriting the good people. Less is more! No need to go into detail in your last will as to who did what to you when and why they suck. We can put all of that in a separate letter to the no-goodniks. We want to keep our last wills straight and to the point. If you really want to get creative, we can put language like “for reasons known best to me.” Who can contest that?

So, there you have it!  We learn that disinheriting someone is an art (am I giving myself too much credit here LOL). The disinheritance language should be clear, but we don’t want to give away the farm. But really, we learn that the last will (and the estate plan in general) is something that evolves along with your relationships.