What happens if a person is thought to be dead and their estate is administered, and then they turn up alive?
In-house repeater?
Rules about breaking the rules. How do I do it well?
Why does Deadpool say "You're welcome, Canada," after shooting Ryan Reynolds in the end credits?
Why using two cd commands in bash script does not execute the second command
Where is the 1/8 CR apprentice in Volo's Guide to Monsters?
Good allowance savings plan?
Is Mortgage interest accrued after a December payment tax deductible?
How could a scammer know the apps on my phone / iTunes account?
Connecting top and bottom SMD component pads using via
Have researchers managed to "reverse time"? If so, what does that mean for physics?
Know when to turn notes upside-down(eighth notes, sixteen notes, etc.)
Fill color and outline color with the same value
What interface is this on my hard drive?
Does the statement `int val = (++i > ++j) ? ++i : ++j;` invoke undefined behavior?
How to deal with a cynical class?
Humanity loses the vast majority of its technology, information, and population in the year 2122. How long does it take to rebuild itself?
Co-worker team leader wants to inject his friend's awful software into our development. What should I say to our common boss?
Sword in the Stone story where the sword was held in place by electromagnets
Can anyone tell me why this program fails?
Why doesn't the EU now just force the UK to choose between referendum and no-deal?
Russian cases: A few examples, I'm really confused
How do anti-virus programs start at Windows boot?
Why would a flight no longer considered airworthy be redirected like this?
Official degrees of earth’s rotation per day
What happens if a person is thought to be dead and their estate is administered, and then they turn up alive?
Suppose a person disappears and is thought to have died (e.g. massive fireball plane crash, 'nobody could have survived that') and so their estate was administered.
And then, after their property has gone to some beneficiaries and maybe on-sold or distributed to the beneficiaries of the estates of beneficiaries who have died, etc, the person turns up alive, e.g. parachuted at the last minute while everyone was distracted by something else.
What happens to the property that was dealt with through the person's estate? Is it all clawed back?
The jurisdiction is Victoria, Australia.
wills succession
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
add a comment |
Suppose a person disappears and is thought to have died (e.g. massive fireball plane crash, 'nobody could have survived that') and so their estate was administered.
And then, after their property has gone to some beneficiaries and maybe on-sold or distributed to the beneficiaries of the estates of beneficiaries who have died, etc, the person turns up alive, e.g. parachuted at the last minute while everyone was distracted by something else.
What happens to the property that was dealt with through the person's estate? Is it all clawed back?
The jurisdiction is Victoria, Australia.
wills succession
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
For starters the "nobody could have survived that" does not grant a death certificate. Remains are searched for, identified, etc. If that is not possible, as much evidence as possible should be collected to reconstruct what happened (did that person effectively board the plane, etc.). All of this would take time, and until it ends you can administer his state. So I guess that the first to happen would be to question the "dead" what as he been doing all those months...
– SJuan76
Feb 27 '17 at 18:20
It does happen now and then. There was a case in Ohio a while back. Interesting question that is worth researching. My guts says that bona fide purchasers for value (e.g. creditors or people to whom the estate was sold) are protected and that there is no right to refund if the inheritance has been spent. Terminations of marriages that result in subsequent remarriage also probably remain void.
– ohwilleke
Feb 28 '17 at 18:08
Under Nevada law, for instance, the administrator of the estate may be personally liable in negligence for the value of mistakes made in any distribution. That's one reason they may be required to post an estate/executor/probate/fiduciary bond for the entire value of any distribution. They may go to great lengths to "get it right". In a situation of questionable death, it might be routine for a court to demand such bond. However, in the case of missing persons, the presumption of death may become final at 6 years, the bond released, and distributions considered final. Your laws may vary.
– Upnorth
Sep 8 '17 at 19:29
I would imagine that they need to ask a court to restore their property to the extent it can be. If the beneficiaries acted in good faith, genuinely thinking that the person was dead, I can't imagine a court would penalise them with debt, only ask them to return what remains in their possession of the state. It's similar to when someone is overpaid or otherwise accidentally given money and they spend it in good faith. But I'm just guessing based on how it works in other countries with similar legal systems.
– user
Sep 11 '17 at 15:31
add a comment |
Suppose a person disappears and is thought to have died (e.g. massive fireball plane crash, 'nobody could have survived that') and so their estate was administered.
And then, after their property has gone to some beneficiaries and maybe on-sold or distributed to the beneficiaries of the estates of beneficiaries who have died, etc, the person turns up alive, e.g. parachuted at the last minute while everyone was distracted by something else.
What happens to the property that was dealt with through the person's estate? Is it all clawed back?
The jurisdiction is Victoria, Australia.
wills succession
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
Suppose a person disappears and is thought to have died (e.g. massive fireball plane crash, 'nobody could have survived that') and so their estate was administered.
And then, after their property has gone to some beneficiaries and maybe on-sold or distributed to the beneficiaries of the estates of beneficiaries who have died, etc, the person turns up alive, e.g. parachuted at the last minute while everyone was distracted by something else.
What happens to the property that was dealt with through the person's estate? Is it all clawed back?
The jurisdiction is Victoria, Australia.
wills succession
wills succession
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
asked Feb 27 '17 at 9:23
Patrick ConheadyPatrick Conheady
2,6911730
2,6911730
For starters the "nobody could have survived that" does not grant a death certificate. Remains are searched for, identified, etc. If that is not possible, as much evidence as possible should be collected to reconstruct what happened (did that person effectively board the plane, etc.). All of this would take time, and until it ends you can administer his state. So I guess that the first to happen would be to question the "dead" what as he been doing all those months...
– SJuan76
Feb 27 '17 at 18:20
It does happen now and then. There was a case in Ohio a while back. Interesting question that is worth researching. My guts says that bona fide purchasers for value (e.g. creditors or people to whom the estate was sold) are protected and that there is no right to refund if the inheritance has been spent. Terminations of marriages that result in subsequent remarriage also probably remain void.
– ohwilleke
Feb 28 '17 at 18:08
Under Nevada law, for instance, the administrator of the estate may be personally liable in negligence for the value of mistakes made in any distribution. That's one reason they may be required to post an estate/executor/probate/fiduciary bond for the entire value of any distribution. They may go to great lengths to "get it right". In a situation of questionable death, it might be routine for a court to demand such bond. However, in the case of missing persons, the presumption of death may become final at 6 years, the bond released, and distributions considered final. Your laws may vary.
– Upnorth
Sep 8 '17 at 19:29
I would imagine that they need to ask a court to restore their property to the extent it can be. If the beneficiaries acted in good faith, genuinely thinking that the person was dead, I can't imagine a court would penalise them with debt, only ask them to return what remains in their possession of the state. It's similar to when someone is overpaid or otherwise accidentally given money and they spend it in good faith. But I'm just guessing based on how it works in other countries with similar legal systems.
– user
Sep 11 '17 at 15:31
add a comment |
For starters the "nobody could have survived that" does not grant a death certificate. Remains are searched for, identified, etc. If that is not possible, as much evidence as possible should be collected to reconstruct what happened (did that person effectively board the plane, etc.). All of this would take time, and until it ends you can administer his state. So I guess that the first to happen would be to question the "dead" what as he been doing all those months...
– SJuan76
Feb 27 '17 at 18:20
It does happen now and then. There was a case in Ohio a while back. Interesting question that is worth researching. My guts says that bona fide purchasers for value (e.g. creditors or people to whom the estate was sold) are protected and that there is no right to refund if the inheritance has been spent. Terminations of marriages that result in subsequent remarriage also probably remain void.
– ohwilleke
Feb 28 '17 at 18:08
Under Nevada law, for instance, the administrator of the estate may be personally liable in negligence for the value of mistakes made in any distribution. That's one reason they may be required to post an estate/executor/probate/fiduciary bond for the entire value of any distribution. They may go to great lengths to "get it right". In a situation of questionable death, it might be routine for a court to demand such bond. However, in the case of missing persons, the presumption of death may become final at 6 years, the bond released, and distributions considered final. Your laws may vary.
– Upnorth
Sep 8 '17 at 19:29
I would imagine that they need to ask a court to restore their property to the extent it can be. If the beneficiaries acted in good faith, genuinely thinking that the person was dead, I can't imagine a court would penalise them with debt, only ask them to return what remains in their possession of the state. It's similar to when someone is overpaid or otherwise accidentally given money and they spend it in good faith. But I'm just guessing based on how it works in other countries with similar legal systems.
– user
Sep 11 '17 at 15:31
For starters the "nobody could have survived that" does not grant a death certificate. Remains are searched for, identified, etc. If that is not possible, as much evidence as possible should be collected to reconstruct what happened (did that person effectively board the plane, etc.). All of this would take time, and until it ends you can administer his state. So I guess that the first to happen would be to question the "dead" what as he been doing all those months...
– SJuan76
Feb 27 '17 at 18:20
For starters the "nobody could have survived that" does not grant a death certificate. Remains are searched for, identified, etc. If that is not possible, as much evidence as possible should be collected to reconstruct what happened (did that person effectively board the plane, etc.). All of this would take time, and until it ends you can administer his state. So I guess that the first to happen would be to question the "dead" what as he been doing all those months...
– SJuan76
Feb 27 '17 at 18:20
It does happen now and then. There was a case in Ohio a while back. Interesting question that is worth researching. My guts says that bona fide purchasers for value (e.g. creditors or people to whom the estate was sold) are protected and that there is no right to refund if the inheritance has been spent. Terminations of marriages that result in subsequent remarriage also probably remain void.
– ohwilleke
Feb 28 '17 at 18:08
It does happen now and then. There was a case in Ohio a while back. Interesting question that is worth researching. My guts says that bona fide purchasers for value (e.g. creditors or people to whom the estate was sold) are protected and that there is no right to refund if the inheritance has been spent. Terminations of marriages that result in subsequent remarriage also probably remain void.
– ohwilleke
Feb 28 '17 at 18:08
Under Nevada law, for instance, the administrator of the estate may be personally liable in negligence for the value of mistakes made in any distribution. That's one reason they may be required to post an estate/executor/probate/fiduciary bond for the entire value of any distribution. They may go to great lengths to "get it right". In a situation of questionable death, it might be routine for a court to demand such bond. However, in the case of missing persons, the presumption of death may become final at 6 years, the bond released, and distributions considered final. Your laws may vary.
– Upnorth
Sep 8 '17 at 19:29
Under Nevada law, for instance, the administrator of the estate may be personally liable in negligence for the value of mistakes made in any distribution. That's one reason they may be required to post an estate/executor/probate/fiduciary bond for the entire value of any distribution. They may go to great lengths to "get it right". In a situation of questionable death, it might be routine for a court to demand such bond. However, in the case of missing persons, the presumption of death may become final at 6 years, the bond released, and distributions considered final. Your laws may vary.
– Upnorth
Sep 8 '17 at 19:29
I would imagine that they need to ask a court to restore their property to the extent it can be. If the beneficiaries acted in good faith, genuinely thinking that the person was dead, I can't imagine a court would penalise them with debt, only ask them to return what remains in their possession of the state. It's similar to when someone is overpaid or otherwise accidentally given money and they spend it in good faith. But I'm just guessing based on how it works in other countries with similar legal systems.
– user
Sep 11 '17 at 15:31
I would imagine that they need to ask a court to restore their property to the extent it can be. If the beneficiaries acted in good faith, genuinely thinking that the person was dead, I can't imagine a court would penalise them with debt, only ask them to return what remains in their possession of the state. It's similar to when someone is overpaid or otherwise accidentally given money and they spend it in good faith. But I'm just guessing based on how it works in other countries with similar legal systems.
– user
Sep 11 '17 at 15:31
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This is a pretty detailed summary of the legal issues around missing persons. The relevant info is on p.8:
Where a grant of representation is made on the
presumption of death, the personal representative
must get permission from the Court before they can
distribute the missing person’s estate. The Court
may place conditions on the grant. For example,
it may set a limit on how much of the property
can be distributed, or it may make the personal
representative agree to give back any money or
property they receive from the estate if the Court
later revokes (cancels) the grant. If a grant is made on
the presumption of death and the missing person is
later found to be living, the grant may be revoked by
the Court. If this happens, people who have received
property from the estate will not have to give it back,
provided the personal representative has acted ‘in
good faith’ (that is, they have acted according to the
law and distributed the estate in the honest belief
that the missing person has died). These provisions
exist to protect the interests of the missing person.
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f17398%2fwhat-happens-if-a-person-is-thought-to-be-dead-and-their-estate-is-administered%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This is a pretty detailed summary of the legal issues around missing persons. The relevant info is on p.8:
Where a grant of representation is made on the
presumption of death, the personal representative
must get permission from the Court before they can
distribute the missing person’s estate. The Court
may place conditions on the grant. For example,
it may set a limit on how much of the property
can be distributed, or it may make the personal
representative agree to give back any money or
property they receive from the estate if the Court
later revokes (cancels) the grant. If a grant is made on
the presumption of death and the missing person is
later found to be living, the grant may be revoked by
the Court. If this happens, people who have received
property from the estate will not have to give it back,
provided the personal representative has acted ‘in
good faith’ (that is, they have acted according to the
law and distributed the estate in the honest belief
that the missing person has died). These provisions
exist to protect the interests of the missing person.
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
add a comment |
This is a pretty detailed summary of the legal issues around missing persons. The relevant info is on p.8:
Where a grant of representation is made on the
presumption of death, the personal representative
must get permission from the Court before they can
distribute the missing person’s estate. The Court
may place conditions on the grant. For example,
it may set a limit on how much of the property
can be distributed, or it may make the personal
representative agree to give back any money or
property they receive from the estate if the Court
later revokes (cancels) the grant. If a grant is made on
the presumption of death and the missing person is
later found to be living, the grant may be revoked by
the Court. If this happens, people who have received
property from the estate will not have to give it back,
provided the personal representative has acted ‘in
good faith’ (that is, they have acted according to the
law and distributed the estate in the honest belief
that the missing person has died). These provisions
exist to protect the interests of the missing person.
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
add a comment |
This is a pretty detailed summary of the legal issues around missing persons. The relevant info is on p.8:
Where a grant of representation is made on the
presumption of death, the personal representative
must get permission from the Court before they can
distribute the missing person’s estate. The Court
may place conditions on the grant. For example,
it may set a limit on how much of the property
can be distributed, or it may make the personal
representative agree to give back any money or
property they receive from the estate if the Court
later revokes (cancels) the grant. If a grant is made on
the presumption of death and the missing person is
later found to be living, the grant may be revoked by
the Court. If this happens, people who have received
property from the estate will not have to give it back,
provided the personal representative has acted ‘in
good faith’ (that is, they have acted according to the
law and distributed the estate in the honest belief
that the missing person has died). These provisions
exist to protect the interests of the missing person.
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
This is a pretty detailed summary of the legal issues around missing persons. The relevant info is on p.8:
Where a grant of representation is made on the
presumption of death, the personal representative
must get permission from the Court before they can
distribute the missing person’s estate. The Court
may place conditions on the grant. For example,
it may set a limit on how much of the property
can be distributed, or it may make the personal
representative agree to give back any money or
property they receive from the estate if the Court
later revokes (cancels) the grant. If a grant is made on
the presumption of death and the missing person is
later found to be living, the grant may be revoked by
the Court. If this happens, people who have received
property from the estate will not have to give it back,
provided the personal representative has acted ‘in
good faith’ (that is, they have acted according to the
law and distributed the estate in the honest belief
that the missing person has died). These provisions
exist to protect the interests of the missing person.
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
answered 24 mins ago
Dale MDale M
55.1k23578
55.1k23578
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f17398%2fwhat-happens-if-a-person-is-thought-to-be-dead-and-their-estate-is-administered%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
For starters the "nobody could have survived that" does not grant a death certificate. Remains are searched for, identified, etc. If that is not possible, as much evidence as possible should be collected to reconstruct what happened (did that person effectively board the plane, etc.). All of this would take time, and until it ends you can administer his state. So I guess that the first to happen would be to question the "dead" what as he been doing all those months...
– SJuan76
Feb 27 '17 at 18:20
It does happen now and then. There was a case in Ohio a while back. Interesting question that is worth researching. My guts says that bona fide purchasers for value (e.g. creditors or people to whom the estate was sold) are protected and that there is no right to refund if the inheritance has been spent. Terminations of marriages that result in subsequent remarriage also probably remain void.
– ohwilleke
Feb 28 '17 at 18:08
Under Nevada law, for instance, the administrator of the estate may be personally liable in negligence for the value of mistakes made in any distribution. That's one reason they may be required to post an estate/executor/probate/fiduciary bond for the entire value of any distribution. They may go to great lengths to "get it right". In a situation of questionable death, it might be routine for a court to demand such bond. However, in the case of missing persons, the presumption of death may become final at 6 years, the bond released, and distributions considered final. Your laws may vary.
– Upnorth
Sep 8 '17 at 19:29
I would imagine that they need to ask a court to restore their property to the extent it can be. If the beneficiaries acted in good faith, genuinely thinking that the person was dead, I can't imagine a court would penalise them with debt, only ask them to return what remains in their possession of the state. It's similar to when someone is overpaid or otherwise accidentally given money and they spend it in good faith. But I'm just guessing based on how it works in other countries with similar legal systems.
– user
Sep 11 '17 at 15:31