Genealogy Chat

Thanks Madmeg.

As you said - really interesting. Pl thank your friend for me.

Aha, just to say, my solicitor friend has emailed me to confirm exactly what you have said - no evidence of a father, (the removal of his name from the certificate renders it as being no father named), no reregistration, therefore illegitimate according to legislation a that time. And therefore no direct blood connection with any other children of the subsequent marriage.

What an interesting thread.

Best wishes

Madmeg

So all done and dusted? The doubt about the mother's registration is taken as a negative, rather than a positive.

A very interesting post. Don't delete it, cos I haven't come across anything like this before and it might help someone in the future.

Best of luck

Meg

Thanks to everyone especailly Madmeg.

The certs got lost in the snow on their travels to the Executor (now arrived). The solicitor accepted my verbal description and have advised that cousins mother WAS born illegitmate and that we have no need to find any of the relatives on that side. (there being no trace of a re-registration).

So - roll on one twentyfourth of not a lot!

Thanks Kathryn. The birth & subsequent marriage were both before 1900 and there is no sign of the birth being reregistered.
I think the later amendmnets in the law just confuse everything.

I've just finished writing to the Executor telling him he now needs proper advice on this before I spend any more money trying to find any more family.

If they are not eligible then we don't need to track them down and will then know what to do if they answer any advert.

thanks for all the input everyone.

The Legitimacy Act 1923 allowed parents to legitimise a child by marrying after it's birth. So if the couple married after 1923 and undertook the relevant process (simple reregistration at the office) then their child is fully legitimate in the eyes of the law. The birth certificate of the child would have been ammended in that case and reregistered in the appropriate year. But no matter wich reference you use you should only get one certificate. If the certificate doesn't state fathers name as you suggest, then they may well not have reregistered the child. I don't really know where that leaves you in terms of the will seeing as the parents did eventualy marry, and I guess it doesn't help you in tracking people down. But that's the relevant legislation anyway I think.

Kate x

Madmeg - thanks for the pm have pm'd you back.

Hi Nameless

I have a friendly solicitor I can ask for you. But I'm not sure I've got it right.

Can I run this by you?

Your cousin has no children. If she were married (and husband still alive), but parents dead he would inherit the entire estate. So I guess he is dead, or she wasn't married.

So we then move back to her parents. If they are dead, we move to their other children - but you say there are none.

We therefore go back to her grandparents. I am assuming that her paternal grandparents have been identified, and their issue also. So that sorts out 50% of the estate. The other 50% would be allocated to her maternal grandparents, of which only one is certain - her maternal grandmother.

However, if the maternal grandmother is deceased, her share goes to (1) your cousin's uncles and aunts of the full blood (of which there can't be any) and then (2) uncles and aunts of the half blood (of which there could be several - and their issue). So I think you do have to consider them, irrespective of the fact that her mother was illegitimate.

EDIT - I think that my paragraph is rubbish. If there are full-blood siblings of the father, and none of the mother, the father's siblings (or their issue) inherit the lot. If there are full-blood siblings of both father and mother, both groups inherit. So I now see that the crux of this is whether the cousin's mother is considered to be a full-blood relative of the children born after her grandmother's marriage, on the grounds that the father named (but crossed out) was the same man who fathered the subsequent children. The fact that the mother was illegitimate - and the birth was not formally legitimised (i.e. not re-registered) may or may not be relevant (i.e. I don't have a clue).

Was the mother registered with the "father's" surname?

As to finding them - another story. I would imagine that the advert should be made in the paper local to where the deceased was living at the time - but possibly also in the area where they were born. I do see these in my own local paper sometimes, where the deceased lived miles away. I suppose you have to cover your back in case someone pops out of the woodwork - though quite why someone who has had no connection with the deceased in years should benefit is beyond me.

A very good reason for people to make a will - and at any age - and amend it as life progresses.

Good luck

Thanks to everyone - I'm passing this on the the one hiolding the Letters of Admin.

To make it a bit clearer.

Widow Mrs A marries widower Mr B. Daughter of Mrs A, Aa, gets pregnant & is sent away to have the baby. Aa gives the fathers name as son of Mr B, Bb. On realising that Aa is not married the registrar removes the name of Bb. Some years later Mr Bb & Miss Aa marry and have children. The granddaughter of Miss Aa dies intestate. The birth & later marriage are all pre 1900. The birth of the baby is not reregistered.
Brens said ' Any person who was treated as a 'child of the family' of the deceased '. If my cousin had that sort of sibling I would agree but we can't post date the rules to deaths prior to that ruling.

I would definitely do as Flick suggests and go along to CAB for advise.

Have you thought of contacting the Bona Vacantia office and ask your question relating to the birth certificate with the fathers name crossed out. They should definitely know the answer as they deal with claims of the people who die intestate daily. They may even be able to give you some free advice

The contact is

https://www.bonavacantia.gov.uk/output/contact-us.aspx

Many thanks Bren - I'll pass that on to the POA - he didn't know about the London Gazette.
Not knowing the 'other' family - goodness know what local paper to use as my cousin moved miles away from any home area.

So sorry that you had such problems over your son - my condolences.

Am signing off now - will ceck in again tomorrow.

Letters of administration have to be published in the local press and also in the London Gazette
So you may get people making a claim against the estate because the name is the same as a person who owes them money
When our son died we had claims about people with the same name who had lived in Southampton, Doncaster, Middleborough and Leeds

Bren

Thanks. As I said, Letters of Admin have been granted. It is her Power of Attorney that has it. There were no siblings and no children.

My cousins mother was born in the 1880's so it is descendants of her Full Blood siblings we need to look for - but do we need to as there seems to be no 'legal' proof that her father is the one named and crossed out on her birth cert.

Kay????

Thanks - didn't realise that it had to be a national newspaper.

Letters of Administration have aleady been granted. We've already worked out the % of the share on one side and who is entitled but it is just what to do about whatever relative there may be on the other.

Who can make an inheritance claim?
To be eligible to make an Inheritance Act Claim, you need to have been related to the deceased in one of the following ways:

A husband, wife, civil partner or cohabitee of the deceased
A former husband, wife or civil partner of the deceased who was receiving maintenance and has not remarried/entered into a new civil partnership
A child of the deceased
Any person who was treated as a 'child of the family' of the deceased
Any person who was partly or wholly maintained by the deceased immediately before the death
Can I make an Inheritance Act claim?
To make an Inheritance Act Claim with YourDispute, you first need to be able to answer 'yes' to the following three questions:

Did the deceased live in England, Scotland or Wales?
Is it within 6 months of the date of grant of representation? The grant of representation is a document issued by the Court which gives permission to those named in the grant to distribute the deceased's estate.
Does the estate have a value of more than £100,000?
What you need to do next:
i hope this might help you to sort out your problem

Entitlements of claim will pass down to the next generation if the main has died,

You have to have it displayed in a national paper for those with a vested interest to come forward,,usually its all done by a solicitor whose handling the probate.so you dont have to find or locate anyone.....if no one comes forward then after a respectable time the effects are dealt with.

If you are doing it yourself then there maybe legal loops that could fail you.

It's finding the potential claimants! We know all of them on one side but have no knowledge of the other - indeed it is quite possible that they have died out. But if they would have had an entitlement I think we have to trace them as far as we can then advertise. None of us are going to want to share out the pennies again if they suddenly come forward.
I think, morally, the man is father to all the children but Legally?
PS- so far I'm a lot cheaper - but then I haven't passed my bill over yet!!

Oh dear, I wouldn't care to try to work that one out......if people only knew the chaos they cause by not taking a little time to prepare a Will!!

Have you tried the CAB?

You might get some help there............if only in the form of the name of a Solicitor who would give you an hour's consultation without charge.

I would have thought that a right to inheritance would have to be proved by any potential claimants, and if the father is not named (or named and crossed out) on their birth certs, it would be difficult fro them to validate the claim. The snag is that , if such claims were made, the legal profession would have a great time and probably a very profitable one also.

Yes Flick, I agree but can we, legally, stop the hunt?

I would have thought that the only way to PROVE this would be to use DNA