Re: g_b Re: [gb] Insurance nominee addition - any turnaround
I am not sure about the lawyer's opinion but, last year or so, I visited to ICICI prudential to change the nominees of my Life Term Policy. They said, unless the WILL states something specific, they (ICICI PRU) prefer to pay the claim to WIFE (in case of married person). So I think, Insurance Co differ to Lawyer's opinion on Point #1. > 1- the law gives precedence to the relatives of the deceased, even if there is a will to the contrary --- Reuse Paper by Both Sided Printing On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Bharat wrote: > ** > > > > a) I doubt whether "1)the law gives precedence to the relatives of the > deceased, even if there is a will to the contrary" is correct. Though I > agree statement 2 is correct. Yes the will can be challenged by the > relatives, but it can be challenged > even in a case where property has been bequeathed to some relatvies, other > relatives can still challenge it. > b) Mere nomination in insurance policy is not enough. Nomination gives > nominee only the right to receive the money and not ownership of it. He > becomes a trustee of the sum, to be passed on to the legal heirs. So one > needs to make a will and mention clearly what is supposed to go to whom. > Better get it witnessed and registered. > c) One has a right to dispose off money earned by him, in any way one > likes; but not inherited property, as you have not earned it. > I am not a legal expert buy having worked in financial sector and dealt > with death claims, had to refer to relevant parts of the law time and > again. Still must clarify, that this is only my understanding > > > --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Manoj wrote: > > > > This was one if the themed gb meets we had a couple of years back > > > > The legal view by the lawyer we had at the gb was as follows: > > 1- the law gives precedence to the relatives of the deceased, even if > there is a will to the contrary > > 2- the relatives can always claim and fight legal battles ( though the > birla case subsequent to the meet tilts the balance in favor of a non blood > relative) > > 3- the only sure way of ensuring that your partner gets your property is > to will it and publicly disown your family with the adverts in newspapers > --- not something one really likes to do :( > > > > The above is from the gb discussion which i remember, though i would > also love an easier and better solution > > > > Regards > > Manoj > > > > >
g_b Re: [gb] Insurance nominee addition - any turnaround
a) I doubt whether "1)the law gives precedence to the relatives of the deceased, even if there is a will to the contrary" is correct. Though I agree statement 2 is correct. Yes the will can be challenged by the relatives, but it can be challenged even in a case where property has been bequeathed to some relatvies, other relatives can still challenge it. b) Mere nomination in insurance policy is not enough. Nomination gives nominee only the right to receive the money and not ownership of it. He becomes a trustee of the sum, to be passed on to the legal heirs. So one needs to make a will and mention clearly what is supposed to go to whom. Better get it witnessed and registered. c) One has a right to dispose off money earned by him, in any way one likes; but not inherited property, as you have not earned it. I am not a legal expert buy having worked in financial sector and dealt with death claims, had to refer to relevant parts of the law time and again. Still must clarify, that this is only my understanding --- In gay_bombay@yahoogroups.com, Manoj wrote: > > This was one if the themed gb meets we had a couple of years back > > The legal view by the lawyer we had at the gb was as follows: > 1- the law gives precedence to the relatives of the deceased, even if there > is a will to the contrary > 2- the relatives can always claim and fight legal battles ( though the birla > case subsequent to the meet tilts the balance in favor of a non blood > relative) > 3- the only sure way of ensuring that your partner gets your property is to > will it and publicly disown your family with the adverts in newspapers --- > not something one really likes to do :( > > The above is from the gb discussion which i remember, though i would also > love an easier and better solution > > Regards > Manoj >
g_b Re: [gb] Insurance nominee addition - any turnaround
This was one if the themed gb meets we had a couple of years back The legal view by the lawyer we had at the gb was as follows: 1- the law gives precedence to the relatives of the deceased, even if there is a will to the contrary 2- the relatives can always claim and fight legal battles ( though the birla case subsequent to the meet tilts the balance in favor of a non blood relative) 3- the only sure way of ensuring that your partner gets your property is to will it and publicly disown your family with the adverts in newspapers --- not something one really likes to do :( The above is from the gb discussion which i remember, though i would also love an easier and better solution Regards Manoj
