Latest news with #executor
Daily Mail
4 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
My dad left £1,442 of old stamps when he died - but Royal Mail won't give me the cash: SALLY SORTS IT
I am executor for the estate of my father who died last year, aged 93. He left 1,661 unused non-barcoded postage stamps with a face value of £1,442.19. I contacted Royal Mail to ask if they could be cashed in as we are never going to use so many stamps. I was advised to post them with a Swap Out form because they were not bar-coded, include a Grant of Probate certificate, and request a cash value rather than replacement stamps. I added a note to the form indicating I did not wish to 'swap out' but wished the cash value instead. Royal Mail simply replaced them with newer bar-coded stamps and will not budge. K.W., Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire. Sally Hamilton replies: You were furious when Royal Mail delivered the response that it would not let you cash in the stamps. You have no use for so many stamps and could do with the money to meet bills owed by your father's estate. As stamps are not legal tender, they cannot be used to pay official bills – though some individuals might accept them if you owe them money. In an age of email and WhatsApp, I can appreciate your frustration at sitting on a pile of postage stamps, ranging from 152 x 1p stamps and 114 x 2p stamps, to the handier 1st and 2nd class items. I suggested it might be easiest to share them between beneficiaries or relatives and friends. But you said the two beneficiaries of the estate are pensioners, including yourself, who send just a couple of Christmas cards a year. Although I use post quite often, when I purchased a pack each of first and second class stamps last week, the teller even exclaimed at the extortionate £13.46 price tag. Anyway, your complaint to Royal Mail customer services was essentially returned to sender with confirmation it could not exchange your stamps for cash. You felt particularly sore as the £19.55 you paid to send the stash of outdated postage by secure delivery to the swap out service was refunded in the form of stamps (aargh). When you escalated matters to the Postal Review Panel, which oversees gripes the Royal Mail doesn't resolve itself, it simply referred unhelpfully to the fact it could not 'make changes to the terms and conditions of any Royal Mail product or service'. Scam Watch TSB customers should beware a scam text from fraudsters purporting to be from the bank, consumer website Which? warns. The message appears on your phone as being from 'TSB', but scammers have spoofed its sender ID, meaning it appears to be a legitimate text from the bank. The text claims your 'internet banking phone numbers were changed' and to call the number in the message to cancel this change. Do not call this number, as it will put you through to a fraudster who will try to steal your personal and financial information. Instead, forward suspicious texts to 7726, so they can be reported. Since the message wasn't getting through to customer service, you came to me. You had read, in December 2023, about a reader who had purchased too many stamps in error from her local post office but on my intervention was permitted to return half of them to Royal Mail for cash. Although your position was not the same (in that case the customer had receipts to show for her barcoded stamps), I thought Royal Mail might show some leniency. But I'm afraid I could not persuade Royal Mail to budge. It said your position with the older stamps was different to the previous case and responded with a firm 'no', stating 'the swap out scheme is designed to offer replacements for invalid stamps, but it does not include a monetary refund option'. A Royal Mail spokesman said: 'We are very sorry to hear about the passing of her father. While we appreciate this has been a challenging period, we would like to clarify that our policy does not allow for cash refunds on unused, non-barcoded stamps. 'Based on this, she was directed to our swap out scheme, which enables customers to exchange old stamps for valid replacements.' Options for your stamps are to either sell or give them away. Selling is legal, though sellers should expect to offer a discount. There are also specialist traders. One I found online was offering 99p for a £1.70 first class stamp. Giving away unused stamps to charity is useful for estates wanting to reduce an inheritance tax liability, as charitable gifts of assets, including stamps, are tax-free. Specialist firm Xchange Master works with charities, including the RNIB, to convert stamps into funds for use by the charities, and says the organisations usually receive most of the stamps' face value. Holiday cottage plumbing fail Earlier this year I was diagnosed with prostate cancer and underwent surgery which was successful but left me with urinary problems. My wife and I decided to book a short break but because of my condition deliberately chose a place with separate bedrooms and two toilets. We booked one in Whitstable through Sykes Cottages that advertised two bedrooms and two bathrooms, and paid £439. The holiday was due to start on June 3 but a few days before Sykes told us one of the toilets was out of order. There was no indication when it would be repaired as the plumber was waiting for parts. I replied that because of my medical issue this was not acceptable and asked for a refund. This was refused. A.M., Bromley, Kent. Sally Hamilton replies: You were not pleased to receive an email from Sykes stating the company judged 'one toilet to be a reasonable solution for your party of two guests'. Quite the contrary. You had gone out of your way to find accommodation with two loos and repeatedly explained this when you complained. Sykes pointed to its cancellation policy which says late cancellation will result in forfeiture of the full amount. Normal rules should not apply, I believe, as the cancellation was prompted by the property not being as advertised. The Consumer Rights Act 2015 says holidaymakers are entitled to the accommodation promised and as described. On my intervention, Sykes immediately agreed to refund you. A spokesman for Sykes Holiday Cottages says: 'We understand A.M.'s reasons for wanting to cancel his booking and are sorry to hear of his experience. 'A payment to cover the cost of the holiday has now been paid and we have been in touch to confirm this with him.' Straight to the point My wife, daughter and I went to the AO Arena in Manchester in December to watch Les Miserables. We arrived early so had something to eat, but when we arrived at the venue later we were shocked to see the show had already started. In the interval we found out many other people were also late. The head of guest experience at the arena confirmed wrong information had been advertised. My ticket had the correct time but the website showed the wrong time. C.N., via email. You have now had a full refund. *** Three years ago I had solar panels installed for £14,500 but in April they stopped working after a power cut. I had a 12-year warranty with the company that made the panels so I contacted it. But three months later it still hasn't sent out the inverter part I need, which costs about £600. Nobody answers the phone when I call and I only get messages saying the part will arrive 'soon'. S.H., Yorkshire. The manufacturer apologises. The inverter has now arrived and you have been given a £300 Amazon voucher as a goodwill gesture. *** I tried to close my broadband account, but the provider said there was an 'issue' so couldn't close it. I cancelled my direct debit then got a letter which said my service would be cut off. I called to settle the remaining balance – £296 – but was told again my account couldn't be closed. Last month, I got a letter stating my account had been handed to a debt collector. The company backed down and said it would wipe off my debts, but I've now been rejected for a mortgage. B.S., via email. Your account is now closed, the debt has been waived and credit agencies have removed this incident from your record. Write to Sally Hamilton at Sally Sorts It, Money Mail, Northcliffe House, 2 Derry Street, London W8 5TT or email sally@ — include phone number, address and a note addressed to the offending organisation giving them permission to talk to Sally Hamilton. Please do not send original documents as we cannot take responsibility for them. No legal responsibility can be accepted by the Daily Mail for answers given.
Times
23-07-2025
- Business
- Times
The inheritance tax raid on pensions will pile misery on grieving families
Coping with the loss of a loved one is hard enough, without the stress of sorting out their financial affairs. But government changes are about to make the whole process a lot more painful. In October 2024, the chancellor said that from April 2027, unspent pension pots would be counted as part of your estate for inheritance tax purposes. At the moment, money left in a pension can be passed on free of inheritance tax, but the government took the view that pensions were too often being used to avoid tax when you die, rather than simply providing for your retirement. • Families face red tape nightmare over inheritance tax on pensions The original proposal was that, in the future, the executor (or other person winding up the estate) would have to contact all the pension firms of the person who had died, find out how much money was left in each, work out how much inheritance tax was due from each, and then send this information to each pension company. Many pension firms expressed concern about all of this, not least the risk that they would face penalties for not paying inheritance tax within six months of the death, even if they had not been notified about the death until months afterwards. In response, HM Revenue & Customs this week made changes that will ease the burden on pension firms — but put more on to grieving families. Instead of the pension schemes being responsible for ensuring that inheritance tax on the pension assets is paid, the executor of your estate will now be responsible. HMRC has set out a 'five step' process that executors will have to go through. This includes finding and contacting pension firms, asking them about the size of any pension pots and who the beneficiaries are, and dealing with those beneficiaries to make sure that they pay the tax due on their share of the estate. Only once all of this has been done can the executor apply for probate and deal with the rest of theestate. The whole process of winding up financial affairs could still be going on a year or more after someone's death. • Will you pay the price for the chancellor's pension shake-up? HMRC said that most estates do not pay inheritance tax and that if the only beneficiary of a pension is a spouse, then inheritance tax does not apply in any case. But the executor will only know who the beneficiaries are once they have contacted all the pension firms, and all of this will take time. There could also be delays where a pension scheme's trustees have 'discretion' over who gets the money, and until the trustees have all the information that they need to reach a decision it will not be possible to finalise the inheritance tax position. There will also be new complexities for the beneficiaries of the pensions. Under the new rules, the person benefiting from a pension can be paid the full amount from the pension and then pay the inheritance tax due on it. But you also have to pay income tax on inherited pensions, so by the time they get the inheritance they are likely to have paid income tax on the full amount. There will now be a process for such people to claim an income tax refund on the part of the bequest that they never really benefited from, because it was paid on to HMRC in inheritance tax. It is simple for a chancellor to say that pensions should not be used as an inheritance tax loophole, to close the loophole, bank the proceeds and move on. But for tens of thousands of grieving families every year, they will not be able to move on. They will instead be faced with many months of additional bureaucracy that will make the process of bereavement all the more painful to Webb was the pensions minister from 2010-2015 and is now a partner at the pensions consultancy LCP
Irish Times
22-07-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
My family lives abroad. Does that cause problems with my father's will?
I am an executor on my father's will. He died earlier this year and we are now trying to organise his estate. He did not have much other than his home, so it is not overly complicated. But I am having trouble getting answers to some questions which I need to sort out the tax affairs with Revenue . First, he was a pensioner receiving the State pension and the Revenue form wants a 'personal claim number'. I thought this would be his PPS number, but a quick Google search tells me it is a different number. Also, some of my siblings live abroad and they and their children are named in the will. Does that create any problems? Mr DS READ MORE Getting to grips with a loved one's estate always sounds easier than it turns out to be. Inevitably, there are legacy credit union accounts or prize bonds or tiny, long-forgotten shareholdings to be found and sorted. People think that, because they are close family, they know everything about a parent or sibling. This is rarely the case. That's why most families leave the digging and sorting to a solicitor. First, they're more familiar with what to look for and second, by the nature of their business, they are familiar with what is required in dealings with the Revenue and the Probate Office. Your issue with the personal claim number is a case in point. Everyone in receipt of a social welfare payment – a State pension or anything else – has a personal claim number. This number is required on the Statement of Affairs that must be submitted to the Revenue Commissioners as part of the probate process. It is not something I came across before but it certainly makes sense. Following your query, I did a Google search and it does, rather unhelpfully, state that this personal claim number is distinct and separate from a person's unique Personal Public Service (PPS) number. That is not the case and is just one example of why one should always be careful about the Encyclopaedia of Google. Having contacted the Department of Social Protection , they assure me that a person's PPS number acts as their personal claim number precisely because it is a unique identifier. Your second point is less black and white. As you can imagine, inheritances across borders can get complicated, not least because of the very different approaches to taxing estates and inheritances in different countries, even within the EU. Just because your siblings and their children live abroad, they could have a liability to Irish capital acquisitions tax (inheritance tax) as your dad lived here and his home is physically in the State. Whether they will actually end up having to pay tax in Ireland depends on how much they receive. I'm not going to get into what they owe in whatever country or countries they actually live in, not least because you have not identified them. Revenue will certainly require everyone receiving a benefit valued at more than €12,000 to be identified with a PPS number in the Statement of Affairs. Far anyone living or working in Ireland, this is not a problem. Similarly, if you were born in Ireland since 2000, you will automatically have been assigned a PPS. For anyone else, including children who were born abroad and never worked in Ireland, they will need to apply to the Department of Social Protection's Client Identity Services unit at cis@ They will need proof of identity (a passport), proof of address and a reason why the PPS is required. Stating that it is because of inheritance is valid. You also have to fill in a questionnaire and, if the number is to be sent to a third party, such as an executor, a consent form. Please send your queries to Dominic Coyle, Q&A, The Irish Times, 24-28 Tara Street, Dublin 2, or by email to , with a contact phone number. This column is a reader service and is not intended to replace professional advice
Times
01-07-2025
- Business
- Times
I mistakenly paid my late dad's £8,600 debt. Now HSBC won't give it back
In June 2022 I made a mistake and paid HSBC more than £8,600 to clear my late dad's debt, thinking that it was the responsibility of surviving relatives to do that. I later discovered that I didn't need to take on that responsibility and I've been chasing the bank for almost two years for a refund. I am really at my wits' end with it. I was the executor of my dad's estate, so when he died I was responsible for sorting out his finances. I had never had this role before, and found this process not only difficult, but traumatic and stressful on top of my grief. There were two outstanding credit card debts in his name. One was worth about £6,000 with NatWest, and the other £8,639 with HSBC (via a John Lewis credit card). I didn't want this debt hanging over my widowed mother's head while we waited for probate to be granted, which I know can take up to a year, so I decided to pay the debts myself, thinking that I could later recover the funds from his estate. I also thought it was my responsibility as executor to clear this debt. However, I later discovered that there was nothing left in my father's estate, apart from the family house he owned with my mother. That meant that there were no funds in the estate for me to get my money back. I asked NatWest and HSBC for a refund in June 2023. NatWest paid the money back promptly, but HSBC didn't. I issued a formal complaint in June last year, but got nowhere. In January of this year, I complained to the financial ombudsman, but I was told that it couldn't help me, because the credit card was in my father's name. I now don't know where to turn. Could you help?Name and address supplied • Read more money advice and tips on investing from our experts I was very sorry to hear of the loss of your father. Dealing with the death of a parent is hard enough, and dealing with the admin that comes with a bereavement only adds to the upset. You're not alone in finding this process difficult. More than 680,000 bereaved relatives have trouble dealing with this sort of admin every year, according to the charity Marie Curie. You paid your dad's debts with good intentions, only to discover there was no way to get the money from his estate. Relatives are not personally responsible for clearing any outstanding debts of a loved one, unless they acted as a guarantor or took out a joint loan together. If there isn't enough money or assets in an estate to pay the debts, they will usually be written off. HSBC did not refund the money because it no longer had any information about your dad's account. That is because NewDay took over from HSBC as the provider of John Lewis Partnership credit cards in 2022. So when you asked HSBC to return your funds the following year, there was nothing on the bank's system about your dad. The bank has still apologised, however, for taking so long to get to the bottom of this and has refunded you the £8,600 and paid £500 compensation. HSBC said: 'We are sorry for the issues the executor has faced in getting a refund on the payment he made on his late father's credit card, which we appreciate relates to a really difficult time.' • EDF has sent debt collectors over a £3,000 bill we don't owe I bought Amazon gift cards from my local Sainsbury's store in November as a Christmas present for my grandchildren. After realising that I had bought too many, I decided to keep a £200 gift card for myself. I didn't get around to using it until March, because I went away on a two-month cruise in January. When I finally opened it, I realised that the code needed to redeem the money was illegible because two letters had been scrubbed off. I thought Amazon was responsible for refunding me for the faulty card, so I contacted its customer service department. I spent two months chasing for an update before Amazon finally emailed in April to say that it was the responsibility of Sainsbury's to refund me. I immediately emailed the supermarket to ask for my money back. I was told to visit my local branch where I bought the gift card, but the manager told me that it wasn't the shop's responsibility to issue a refund. I'm now stuck between Amazon and Sainsbury's — please could you help? Ke, Bromley • Fraudster stole my identity and went on £900 shopping spree While gift cards can seem like a great idea, they can quickly become a nuisance. They usually come with an expiry date, so there's a risk of losing the money if they are forgotten about, or lost down the backseat of a car (which once happened to me). If the retailer behind the gift card goes bust, it is also unlikely you'll get your money back. I also hear of situations where customers, like yourself, are stuck in limbo if they buy a faulty gift card from a different company to the one at which the gift card can be spent. And it is not uncommon for both companies to blame each other. As to which company should refund you, it usually depends on the terms and conditions set by the party that sold the gift card. In your case, Sainsbury's said it worked with Amazon to resolve your case, and now your Amazon account has been credited with £200 for you to spend. Amazon said: 'Even though customer satisfaction is our utmost priority, we recognise that we are not perfect and we are sorry for the inconvenience.' I felt that it shouldn't have taken two months for Amazon to have answered a simple question. But Sainsbury's should also have done more to ensure you got your money back. After all, it was the one which sold you the faulty gift card. Your case is a great reminder that you should not take no for an answer if companies try to shirk their responsibilities when it comes to faulty goods. • £1,027,659 — the amount Your Money Matters has saved readers so far this year If you have a money problem you would like Katherine Denham to investigate email yourmoneymatters@ Please include a phone number
Malay Mail
30-06-2025
- Business
- Malay Mail
Tax rule change: No more 2pc deduction for deceased agents, dealers and distributors effective August 1, says IRB
PUTRAJAYA, June 30 — The Inland Revenue Board (LHDN) will no longer accept the two per cent tax deduction involving deceased agents, dealers or distributors (Resident Individuals) (EPP), effective Aug 1. In a statement today, LHDN said the decision was made as the term 'individual' under Section 2 of the Income Tax Act (ACP) 1967 is defined as a living person or 'natural person'. 'Therefore, if an EPP has passed away, they are no longer categorised as an individual under this provision. 'In the event that income is still received after the death of the EPP, it must be managed by the executor, administrator, heir or legal representative and reported under the Deceased Person's Estate (TP) file,' said the LHDN. The statement added that the executor, administrator, heir or legal representative of the deceased must register the TP file at any LHDN office by completing the Notification of Taxpayer's Demise (CP57) form and submitting supporting documents, including a copy of the death certificate and the grant of probate or letter of administration. In this regard, LHDN advised the paying company as well as the heirs' representatives or estate administrators to take note of the ruling and act accordingly in managing the deceased's income, in line with existing tax laws and procedures. For users' convenience, LHDN said Form CP57 can be downloaded from its official portal via quick access at According to LHDN, under Section 107D of the ACP 1967, companies are required to make a two per cent tax deduction on cash payments to a deceased EPP. The deduction is applicable to resident individuals who have been appointed by the paying company as EPPs and who receive payments from sales proceeds, transactions or schemes carried out in that capacity. — Bernama
