Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <usunir$1is0a$3@dont-email.me>, at 11:38:05 on Thu, 14 Mar
> 2024, Handsome Jack <Jack@handsome.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <l5bhdtF9bjoU6@mid.individual.net>, at 17:24:14 on Tue, 12
>>> Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>On 12/03/2024 15:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <l5ag54F5f0pU1@mid.individual.net>, at 07:56:20 on Tue, 12
>>>>>Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>> On 12/03/2024 03:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <usmthq$3k1uc$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:30:50 on Mon, 11
>>>>>>>Mar 2024, Brian <noinv@lid.org> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course, not everyone has a Will. That can lead to all kinds
>>>>>>>> issues- especially if they have no immediate family.  There is
>>>>>>>>a whole industry around tracing ???lost??? relatives.
>
>>>>>>>  And having watched that TV show recently, it's not about
>>>>>>>*intestacy*,  rather it's tracing the successors who are entitled
>>>>>>>to inherit when  there *is* a will, but all the people mentioned in
>>>>>>>it have pre-deceased.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's actually about unclaimed estates whether or not there was a Will,
>
>>>>> You need to explain what the concept of "unclaimed" means in the
>>>>>context of intestacy rules.
>>>>
>>>>What's so difficult? It means, obviously, where no-one has come
>>>>forward to claim the estate or to administer it.
>>>
>>> And I've explained why that is very unlikely to happen in cases of
>>> intestacy.
>>>
>>> <rinse and repeat>
>>
>>Did you? That's puzzling, because it happens pretty regularly.
>
> What happens pretty regularly, intestate estates with a surviving
> spouse, who is mysteriously untraceable at the first attempt (which is
> the responsibility of the executor).

You have suddenly inserted "with a surviving spouse". Nobody else
was talking about that condition.

In message <l5t5o6Fp82U1@mid.individual.net>, at 09:55:19 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>On 19/03/2024 02:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <l5g7hrF1r66U1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:06:20 on Thu, 14
>>Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>> In message <l5ag54F5f0pU1@mid.individual.net>, at 07:56:20 on
>>>>>>>>Tue, 12 Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 12/03/2024 03:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <usmthq$3k1uc$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:30:50 on Mon, 11
>>>>>>>>>> Mar  2024, Brian <noinv@lid.org> remarked:
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, not everyone has a Will. That can lead to all
>>>>>>>>>>>kinds of  issues-  especially if they have no immediate
>>>>>>>>>>>family. There is a whole  industry  around tracing ‘lost’ relatives.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>  And having watched that TV show recently, it's not about
>>>>>>>>>> *intestacy*,  rather it's tracing the successors who are entitled
>>>>>>>>>> to inherit when  there *is* a will, but all the people
>>>>>>>>>>mentioned in it have pre-deceased.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It's actually about unclaimed estates whether or not there was
>>>>>>>>>a Will,
>
>>> Not all those who die have a spouse.  Not all those who die have a
>>>Will.  Not all those who die have close relatives.
>> Do try to keep up! We are discussing intestate estates where there
>>*is* a spouse.
>
>Are we?
Yes we are. Or trying to at least, while batting off the chaff and
distraction from some of the usual suspects.

>Perhaps you'd identify 'that TV show' you alluded to above that hadn't
>even once been hinted before in this thread.
>
>The only TV show of any relevance to what we were discussing, ie
>tracing lost relatives is, as far as I'm aware, the appropriately named
>Heir Hunters.

Well done, so you did know.

>>> It is those whose estates end up bona vacantia and become of
>>>interest to heir hunters.
>> So not the ones we discussing.
>>
>>> And there are sufficient of those to keep them in the manner to
>>>which they've become accustomed.
>> Possibly so, but off-topic I'm afraid.
>
>They're the ones covered by Heir Hunters. If you just mean others,
>perhaps you should have said a bit more clearly.

I have limited time to post long and detailed replies to chaff and
distraction.
--
Roland Perry

In message <utc534$rqec$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:48:22 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Handsome Jack <Jack@handsome.com> remarked:
>Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 02:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <l5g7hrF1r66U1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:06:20 on Thu, 14
>>> Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> In message <l5ag54F5f0pU1@mid.individual.net>, at 07:56:20 on
>>>>>>>>> Tue, 12 Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 12/03/2024 03:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <usmthq$3k1uc$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:30:50 on Mon, 11
>>>>>>>>>>> Mar  2024, Brian <noinv@lid.org> remarked:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, not everyone has a Will. That can lead to all kinds
>>>>>>>>>>>> of  issues-  especially if they have no immediate family.
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a whole  industry  around tracing ???lost??? relatives.
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  And having watched that TV show recently, it's not about
>>>>>>>>>>> *intestacy*,  rather it's tracing the successors who are entitled
>>>>>>>>>>> to inherit when  there *is* a will, but all the people
>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned in it have pre-deceased.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's actually about unclaimed estates whether or not there was a
>>>>>>>>>> Will,
>>
>>>> Not all those who die have a spouse.  Not all those who die have a
>>>> Will.  Not all those who die have close relatives.
>>>
>>> Do try to keep up! We are discussing intestate estates where there *is*
>>> a spouse.
>>
>> Are we?
>
>No, we weren't. Roland has suddenly inserted "with a surviving spouse".
>Nobody else was talking about that condition.

If the spouse isn't surviving, they are hardly going to turn up to
"claim" their legacy. So I was just trying to clarify the parameters.
--
Roland Perry

On 21 Mar 2024 at 08:40:52 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

> In message <utc534$rqec$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:48:22 on Tue, 19 Mar
> 2024, Handsome Jack <Jack@handsome.com> remarked:
>> Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 02:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <l5g7hrF1r66U1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:06:20 on Thu, 14
>>>> Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <l5ag54F5f0pU1@mid.individual.net>, at 07:56:20 on
>>>>>>>>>> Tue, 12 Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/03/2024 03:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <usmthq$3k1uc$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:30:50 on Mon, 11
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mar 2024, Brian <noinv@lid.org> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, not everyone has a Will. That can lead to all kinds
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of issues- especially if they have no immediate family.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a whole industry around tracing ???lost??? relatives.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And having watched that TV show recently, it's not about
>>>>>>>>>>>> *intestacy*, rather it's tracing the successors who are entitled
>>>>>>>>>>>> to inherit when there *is* a will, but all the people
>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned in it have pre-deceased.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's actually about unclaimed estates whether or not there was a
>>>>>>>>>>> Will,
>>>
>>>>> Not all those who die have a spouse. Not all those who die have a
>>>>> Will. Not all those who die have close relatives.
>>>>
>>>> Do try to keep up! We are discussing intestate estates where there *is*
>>>> a spouse.
>>>
>>> Are we?
>>
>> No, we weren't. Roland has suddenly inserted "with a surviving spouse".
>> Nobody else was talking about that condition.
>
> If the spouse isn't surviving, they are hardly going to turn up to
> "claim" their legacy. So I was just trying to clarify the parameters.

Current spouses are perhaps the least likely relatives to be totally unknown
when someone dies.

--

Roger Hayter

In message <1228076620.d3221b6c@uninhabited.net>, at 09:11:21 on Thu, 21
Mar 2024, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> remarked:
>On 21 Mar 2024 at 08:40:52 GMT, "Roland Perry" <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <utc534$rqec$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:48:22 on Tue, 19 Mar
>> 2024, Handsome Jack <Jack@handsome.com> remarked:
>>> Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 02:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <l5g7hrF1r66U1@mid.individual.net>, at 12:06:20 on Thu, 14
>>>>> Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <l5ag54F5f0pU1@mid.individual.net>, at 07:56:20 on
>>>>>>>>>>> Tue, 12 Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/03/2024 03:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <usmthq$3k1uc$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:30:50 on Mon, 11
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mar 2024, Brian <noinv@lid.org> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, not everyone has a Will. That can lead to all kinds
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of issues- especially if they have no immediate family.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a whole industry around tracing ???lost??? relatives.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And having watched that TV show recently, it's not about
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *intestacy*, rather it's tracing the successors who are entitled
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to inherit when there *is* a will, but all the people
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned in it have pre-deceased.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's actually about unclaimed estates whether or not there was a
>>>>>>>>>>>> Will,
>>>>
>>>>>> Not all those who die have a spouse. Not all those who die have a
>>>>>> Will. Not all those who die have close relatives.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do try to keep up! We are discussing intestate estates where there *is*
>>>>> a spouse.
>>>>
>>>> Are we?
>>>
>>> No, we weren't. Roland has suddenly inserted "with a surviving spouse".
>>> Nobody else was talking about that condition.
>>
>> If the spouse isn't surviving, they are hardly going to turn up to
>> "claim" their legacy. So I was just trying to clarify the parameters.
>
>Current spouses are perhaps the least likely relatives to be totally unknown
>when someone dies.

Yes, I've made that point before, but it seemed to go over people's
heads.
--
Roland Perry

In message <utc54a$rqec$2@dont-email.me>, at 13:49:00 on Tue, 19 Mar
2024, Handsome Jack <Jack@handsome.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <usunir$1is0a$3@dont-email.me>, at 11:38:05 on Thu, 14 Mar
>> 2024, Handsome Jack <Jack@handsome.com> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <l5bhdtF9bjoU6@mid.individual.net>, at 17:24:14 on Tue, 12
>>>> Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>On 12/03/2024 15:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <l5ag54F5f0pU1@mid.individual.net>, at 07:56:20 on Tue, 12
>>>>>>Mar 2024, Norman Wells <hex@unseen.ac.am> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 12/03/2024 03:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <usmthq$3k1uc$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:30:50 on Mon, 11
>>>>>>>>Mar 2024, Brian <noinv@lid.org> remarked:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course, not everyone has a Will. That can lead to all kinds
>>>>>>>>> issues- especially if they have no immediate family.  There is
>>>>>>>>>a whole industry around tracing ???lost??? relatives.
>>
>>>>>>>>  And having watched that TV show recently, it's not about
>>>>>>>>*intestacy*,  rather it's tracing the successors who are entitled
>>>>>>>>to inherit when  there *is* a will, but all the people mentioned in
>>>>>>>>it have pre-deceased.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's actually about unclaimed estates whether or not there was a Will,
>>
>>>>>> You need to explain what the concept of "unclaimed" means in the
>>>>>>context of intestacy rules.
>>>>>
>>>>>What's so difficult? It means, obviously, where no-one has come
>>>>>forward to claim the estate or to administer it.
>>>>
>>>> And I've explained why that is very unlikely to happen in cases of
>>>> intestacy.
>>>>
>>>> <rinse and repeat>
>>>
>>>Did you? That's puzzling, because it happens pretty regularly.
>>
>> What happens pretty regularly, intestate estates with a surviving
>> spouse, who is mysteriously untraceable at the first attempt (which is
>> the responsibility of the executor).
>
>You have suddenly inserted "with a surviving spouse". Nobody else
>was talking about that condition.

We were, because it was about spouses suddenly turning up out of the
blue, and deceased ones are unlikely to do that.
--
Roland Perry