Best Of

Re. the discussion in the last thread, the Probate Officer will be employed by HM Courts and Tribunal Service i.e. the most well known under-funded part of public life in the last 20 years. It isn’t the “civil service” as is commonly understood.

Isn't it? That's how I understood the "civil service"!

I was puzzled on the last thread by a complaint that a government service was slow and therefore the solution proposed was to cut staff. How is that going to make the service better?

Coz they will be terrified they’ll be the next to go in the next round of cuts. Put the fear of god in them

Give them hard targets to meet and if they don’t meet them - gone

This is the new £350m for the NHS delusion.

It’s really not. We are all going to experience the “fear of god” in the next few years, in regards to our careers and crafts - the civil service will and should be no exception. We should utilise the moment to make them WORK

Fear is not a good way to manage

I find your lack of faith... disturbing

Why Reform is going to win part 8,923


“In the UK, unemployed foreigners who don't speak English are given some of the most sought after housing in London, ahead of English people, and without paying the cost.

I can't get over how absurd this is. Unemployed foreigners could live almost anywhere in the world, yet the system ensures they occupy what is among the most important housing in the world”

https://x.com/jonatanpallesen/status/1965292080839729230?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

Only if they are refugees given leave to remain, we need to ensure they are genuinely in fear of their lives. Minorities at risk from the Taliban who helped western forces and Ukranians from the Russian occupied territories yes, others need to be reviewed

No, they need to be deported. 100,000s of them

And while we’re doing that impose the rule that no refugee or asylum seeker gets free housing in london. It is absurd. They are living in houses which Britons can only dream of. And the Britons are PAYING THEM to live there for free

We have been warned:


Zia Yusuf

@ZiaYusufUK
·
7h
Reform will transform the civil service from a bloated, failed organisation hostile to the interests of the British people into a lean, performant machine that makes our country proud. 🇬🇧

On the face of it, this doesn't sound like anything to be worried about. What do you see as problematic with it?

The risk is the criteria will involve a politicisation of the civil service

Honestly it can't be worse than what we have today.

For example, my dad is executor for his best friend's will, he died a year or so ago. The estate value was barely over the IHT limit, the tax is all paid and yet a year later the probate office is still in jobsworth mode asking for the original will, even though multiple copies have been provided, they had the original previously and have sent it back but for whatever reason they need it again.

This is a tiny, tiny bit of officialdom needed for a nothing size estate where the tax has already all been paid and yet the probate office, the state, is making nonsense paperwork and hassle for my dad as executor and the beneficiaries who still can't close the book on the death of their father.

In what world is this a good job? How have the civil servants in the probate office helped anyone with their nonsense bureaucracy in this instance? Who benefits from them not just getting it done, there isn't going to be some mad revelation which means the estate will suddenly be worth 10x more and loads of tax will be payable. It's this kind of shit that's causing the nation to slow down, these useless bureaucrats sticking their noses in to justify their jobs and pensions and making life miserable for ordinary people.

Get rid of them all I say, 50% cuts in the bureaucracy and stop interfering in people's lives.

As I mentioned a couple of weeks back I'm going through this as executor for my own father. I expect to encounter much state stupidity along the way, including I am told a wait of 16 weeks from submission to probate being granted.

Today I've had a letter from the DWP. It says "yes, we owe the estate some money, please tell us where to send it along with a probate letter".

Except nowhere in the letter does it state a how much they owe. A number which I need in order to obtain said probate.

So, I will have to ring them up, and ask them to send another letter. At which point they will no doubt demand several reams of paperwork to prove I am permitted to see said value. Why not just send everything needed the first time? Even Yorkshire Water, yes, Yorkshire Water managed that.

I can of course calculate it roughly myself - approximately 1 week of state pension, a trivial amount in the grand scheme of things - but HMRC will want the exact figure in writing so that they can claim their 40%.

Ho hum. At least I'm not paying for a solicitor to chase this up (yet).

Is it any wonder I'm thinking of giving enough away to stop the government getting a penny?

FPT but from my experience it is perfectly acceptable to use estimated figures for the probate if you are held up on stuff, especially chickenfeed stuff, like this. Thje figures have to be stated as explicitly estimated. This is a godsend with stuff that is dragging on, especially small stuff. But do check the instructions on your probate paperwork (different for Scotland IIRC).

Plus stuff crops up even months or years after probate. Some is completely unexpected. E.g. my late mother had bought shares in the RBS flotation that caused all the trouble, and was paid compo years after her demise; she had life assurance policies on my dad's life which didn't pay out till he died a decade later; and it turned out that one life assurance company had underpaid by 14K, and so on - I only found out when it occurred to me when doing the final wrap up that the rate of return was suspiciously low ... so I didn't finally settle her estate (I think!) for 10 years after probate.

The main thing, as I understand it, is that HMRC get a sufficiently detailed probate valuation up front to assess whether IHT is liable or not and, if so, to get their chunk before anyone else does.

If there is no IHT payable, it's up to the executor to tell them if enough dosh comes in later to change the figures upward enough to hit the magic IHT level.

If IHT turns out to have been overpaid - usually if a house sells for less than the probate valuation - then you can claim the overpaid IHT back.

Edit: I forget HMRC's wording when they accept the proibate, but they basically say"okay, you've signed this, and that's done, but you have to let us know if anything happens to change the levels of tax due"

Thanks, yes - I expect an estimate will suffice but it would be nice to get things right. It just leaves more things to tie up when you'd much rather just get it over with.

I don't understand why they would send such a letter though - it seems to be deliberately unhelpful.

Maybe there is some legal nicety that I am missing, but it just gives the impression that one department doesn't talk to another. Who and what are these processes for?

I know the feeling, but -

Also: as well as the previous PS which you may or many not have missed, I'd emphasise that there are inevitably loose ends anyway, so it's not as if you won't have to deal with HMRC after the grant of probate. You will usually need to get in touch with HMRC anyway, to deal with tax during the executry period, eg dividends or bank interest that accrued after demise until the accounts were closed. That isn't part of the IHT calculation for the probate valuation (made as if on the day of demise) but forms part of the estate to account to beneficiaries, of course. But in my experience that's usually very simple.

As for keeping the probate valuation updated, I just updated the Excel spreadsheet I used for the probate application with anything new, using red ink, so I could keep track of the pluses and minuses and whether it changed the IHT. It didn't, in my cases, but was ready to use if HMRC ever asked.

Well, the good news is I now have a figure, although they will not send it in writing.

I rang the phone number on the letter, and was told it was the wrong part of DWP (not the 'bereavement service') and was given a different phone number. I rang the new phone number and got through to someone who after a helpful 5 minute discussion gave me a figure.

So that was 2 unnecessary phone calls.

None of the DWP staff were slacking or not doing their allocated job, but a bit of investment or thought in the process and it could have saved 10 minutes of their time and at least that of mine. Multiply that enough times...


As has been pointed out, sacking everyone immediately won't actually help. For a while it actually needs excess so there can be a few lazy sods that go round asking why the hell they are having to do X and them having access to someone with the capacity to fix it. 100% busy people are a hindrance to change.

Amazon is one of the largest companies on the planet, led by a certified genius. For the last couple of weeks I've been trying to persuade them to fix their computer so I can buy more stuff. I've even spoken to actual humans on the electric telephone. TL/DR; it thinks it needs to send me the dvd which I have in my hand already.

Rymans, headed by top BBC Dragon Theo, last week phoned to remind me to collect an order I'd collected the week before.

The idea that the private sector is magically better than the public sector has taken root but is demonstrably false. The common factor is running on a shoestring works most of the time, perhaps nearly all of the time, but, as you say, lacks the capacity and knowledge to deal with edge cases.

And the OPs complaint is that the edge case hasn’t been automated away in way that allowed him to do so online.

Which thinking about the 200 bookmarks for various gov.uk sites doesn’t make sense - because those bookmarks exist due to how impossible it is to find the exact HMRC calculator you need to confirm x rather than y

We have been warned:


Zia Yusuf

@ZiaYusufUK
·
7h
Reform will transform the civil service from a bloated, failed organisation hostile to the interests of the British people into a lean, performant machine that makes our country proud. 🇬🇧

On the face of it, this doesn't sound like anything to be worried about. What do you see as problematic with it?

The risk is the criteria will involve a politicisation of the civil service

Honestly it can't be worse than what we have today.

For example, my dad is executor for his best friend's will, he died a year or so ago. The estate value was barely over the IHT limit, the tax is all paid and yet a year later the probate office is still in jobsworth mode asking for the original will, even though multiple copies have been provided, they had the original previously and have sent it back but for whatever reason they need it again.

This is a tiny, tiny bit of officialdom needed for a nothing size estate where the tax has already all been paid and yet the probate office, the state, is making nonsense paperwork and hassle for my dad as executor and the beneficiaries who still can't close the book on the death of their father.

In what world is this a good job? How have the civil servants in the probate office helped anyone with their nonsense bureaucracy in this instance? Who benefits from them not just getting it done, there isn't going to be some mad revelation which means the estate will suddenly be worth 10x more and loads of tax will be payable. It's this kind of shit that's causing the nation to slow down, these useless bureaucrats sticking their noses in to justify their jobs and pensions and making life miserable for ordinary people.

Get rid of them all I say, 50% cuts in the bureaucracy and stop interfering in people's lives.

As I mentioned a couple of weeks back I'm going through this as executor for my own father. I expect to encounter much state stupidity along the way, including I am told a wait of 16 weeks from submission to probate being granted.

Today I've had a letter from the DWP. It says "yes, we owe the estate some money, please tell us where to send it along with a probate letter".

Except nowhere in the letter does it state a how much they owe. A number which I need in order to obtain said probate.

So, I will have to ring them up, and ask them to send another letter. At which point they will no doubt demand several reams of paperwork to prove I am permitted to see said value. Why not just send everything needed the first time? Even Yorkshire Water, yes, Yorkshire Water managed that.

I can of course calculate it roughly myself - approximately 1 week of state pension, a trivial amount in the grand scheme of things - but HMRC will want the exact figure in writing so that they can claim their 40%.

Ho hum. At least I'm not paying for a solicitor to chase this up (yet).

Is it any wonder I'm thinking of giving enough away to stop the government getting a penny?

FPT but from my experience it is perfectly acceptable to use estimated figures for the probate if you are held up on stuff, especially chickenfeed stuff, like this. Thje figures have to be stated as explicitly estimated. This is a godsend with stuff that is dragging on, especially small stuff. But do check the instructions on your probate paperwork (different for Scotland IIRC).

Plus stuff crops up even months or years after probate. Some is completely unexpected. E.g. my late mother had bought shares in the RBS flotation that caused all the trouble, and was paid compo years after her demise; she had life assurance policies on my dad's life which didn't pay out till he died a decade later; and it turned out that one life assurance company had underpaid by 14K, and so on - I only found out when it occurred to me when doing the final wrap up that the rate of return was suspiciously low ... so I didn't finally settle her estate (I think!) for 10 years after probate.

The main thing, as I understand it, is that HMRC get a sufficiently detailed probate valuation up front to assess whether IHT is liable or not and, if so, to get their chunk before anyone else does.

If there is no IHT payable, it's up to the executor to tell them if enough dosh comes in later to change the figures upward enough to hit the magic IHT level.

If IHT turns out to have been overpaid - usually if a house sells for less than the probate valuation - then you can claim the overpaid IHT back.

Edit: I forget HMRC's wording when they accept the proibate, but they basically say"okay, you've signed this, and that's done, but you have to let us know if anything happens to change the levels of tax due"

Thanks, yes - I expect an estimate will suffice but it would be nice to get things right. It just leaves more things to tie up when you'd much rather just get it over with.

I don't understand why they would send such a letter though - it seems to be deliberately unhelpful.

Maybe there is some legal nicety that I am missing, but it just gives the impression that one department doesn't talk to another. Who and what are these processes for?

I know the feeling, but -

Also: as well as the previous PS which you may or many not have missed, I'd emphasise that there are inevitably loose ends anyway, so it's not as if you won't have to deal with HMRC after the grant of probate. You will usually need to get in touch with HMRC anyway, to deal with tax during the executry period, eg dividends or bank interest that accrued after demise until the accounts were closed. That isn't part of the IHT calculation for the probate valuation (made as if on the day of demise) but forms part of the estate to account to beneficiaries, of course. But in my experience that's usually very simple.

As for keeping the probate valuation updated, I just updated the Excel spreadsheet I used for the probate application with anything new, using red ink, so I could keep track of the pluses and minuses and whether it changed the IHT. It didn't, in my cases, but was ready to use if HMRC ever asked.

Well, the good news is I now have a figure, although they will not send it in writing.

I rang the phone number on the letter, and was told it was the wrong part of DWP (not the 'bereavement service') and was given a different phone number. I rang the new phone number and got through to someone who after a helpful 5 minute discussion gave me a figure.

So that was 2 unnecessary phone calls.

None of the DWP staff were slacking or not doing their allocated job, but a bit of investment or thought in the process and it could have saved 10 minutes of their time and at least that of mine. Multiply that enough times...


As has been pointed out, sacking everyone immediately won't actually help. For a while it actually needs excess so there can be a few lazy sods that go round asking why the hell they are having to do X and them having access to someone with the capacity to fix it. 100% busy people are a hindrance to change.

Amazon is one of the largest companies on the planet, led by a certified genius. For the last couple of weeks I've been trying to persuade them to fix their computer so I can buy more stuff. I've even spoken to actual humans on the electric telephone. TL/DR; it thinks it needs to send me the dvd which I have in my hand already.

Rymans, headed by top BBC Dragon Theo, last week phoned to remind me to collect an order I'd collected the week before.

The idea that the private sector is magically better than the public sector has taken root but is demonstrably false. The common factor is running on a shoestring works most of the time, perhaps nearly all of the time, but, as you say, lacks the capacity and knowledge to deal with edge cases.

We have been warned:


Zia Yusuf

@ZiaYusufUK
·
7h
Reform will transform the civil service from a bloated, failed organisation hostile to the interests of the British people into a lean, performant machine that makes our country proud. 🇬🇧

On the face of it, this doesn't sound like anything to be worried about. What do you see as problematic with it?

The risk is the criteria will involve a politicisation of the civil service

Honestly it can't be worse than what we have today.

For example, my dad is executor for his best friend's will, he died a year or so ago. The estate value was barely over the IHT limit, the tax is all paid and yet a year later the probate office is still in jobsworth mode asking for the original will, even though multiple copies have been provided, they had the original previously and have sent it back but for whatever reason they need it again.

This is a tiny, tiny bit of officialdom needed for a nothing size estate where the tax has already all been paid and yet the probate office, the state, is making nonsense paperwork and hassle for my dad as executor and the beneficiaries who still can't close the book on the death of their father.

In what world is this a good job? How have the civil servants in the probate office helped anyone with their nonsense bureaucracy in this instance? Who benefits from them not just getting it done, there isn't going to be some mad revelation which means the estate will suddenly be worth 10x more and loads of tax will be payable. It's this kind of shit that's causing the nation to slow down, these useless bureaucrats sticking their noses in to justify their jobs and pensions and making life miserable for ordinary people.

Get rid of them all I say, 50% cuts in the bureaucracy and stop interfering in people's lives.

As I mentioned a couple of weeks back I'm going through this as executor for my own father. I expect to encounter much state stupidity along the way, including I am told a wait of 16 weeks from submission to probate being granted.

Today I've had a letter from the DWP. It says "yes, we owe the estate some money, please tell us where to send it along with a probate letter".

Except nowhere in the letter does it state a how much they owe. A number which I need in order to obtain said probate.

So, I will have to ring them up, and ask them to send another letter. At which point they will no doubt demand several reams of paperwork to prove I am permitted to see said value. Why not just send everything needed the first time? Even Yorkshire Water, yes, Yorkshire Water managed that.

I can of course calculate it roughly myself - approximately 1 week of state pension, a trivial amount in the grand scheme of things - but HMRC will want the exact figure in writing so that they can claim their 40%.

Ho hum. At least I'm not paying for a solicitor to chase this up (yet).

Is it any wonder I'm thinking of giving enough away to stop the government getting a penny?

FPT but from my experience it is perfectly acceptable to use estimated figures for the probate if you are held up on stuff, especially chickenfeed stuff, like this. Thje figures have to be stated as explicitly estimated. This is a godsend with stuff that is dragging on, especially small stuff. But do check the instructions on your probate paperwork (different for Scotland IIRC).

Plus stuff crops up even months or years after probate. Some is completely unexpected. E.g. my late mother had bought shares in the RBS flotation that caused all the trouble, and was paid compo years after her demise; she had life assurance policies on my dad's life which didn't pay out till he died a decade later; and it turned out that one life assurance company had underpaid by 14K, and so on - I only found out when it occurred to me when doing the final wrap up that the rate of return was suspiciously low ... so I didn't finally settle her estate (I think!) for 10 years after probate.

The main thing, as I understand it, is that HMRC get a sufficiently detailed probate valuation up front to assess whether IHT is liable or not and, if so, to get their chunk before anyone else does.

If there is no IHT payable, it's up to the executor to tell them if enough dosh comes in later to change the figures upward enough to hit the magic IHT level.

If IHT turns out to have been overpaid - usually if a house sells for less than the probate valuation - then you can claim the overpaid IHT back.

Edit: I forget HMRC's wording when they accept the proibate, but they basically say"okay, you've signed this, and that's done, but you have to let us know if anything happens to change the levels of tax due"

Thanks, yes - I expect an estimate will suffice but it would be nice to get things right. It just leaves more things to tie up when you'd much rather just get it over with.

I don't understand why they would send such a letter though - it seems to be deliberately unhelpful.

Maybe there is some legal nicety that I am missing, but it just gives the impression that one department doesn't talk to another. Who and what are these processes for?

I know the feeling, but -

Also: as well as the previous PS which you may or many not have missed, I'd emphasise that there are inevitably loose ends anyway, so it's not as if you won't have to deal with HMRC after the grant of probate. You will usually need to get in touch with HMRC anyway, to deal with tax during the executry period, eg dividends or bank interest that accrued after demise until the accounts were closed. That isn't part of the IHT calculation for the probate valuation (made as if on the day of demise) but forms part of the estate to account to beneficiaries, of course. But in my experience that's usually very simple.

As for keeping the probate valuation updated, I just updated the Excel spreadsheet I used for the probate application with anything new, using red ink, so I could keep track of the pluses and minuses and whether it changed the IHT. It didn't, in my cases, but was ready to use if HMRC ever asked.

Well, the good news is I now have a figure, although they will not send it in writing.

I rang the phone number on the letter, and was told it was the wrong part of DWP (not the 'bereavement service') and was given a different phone number. I rang the new phone number and got through to someone who after a helpful 5 minute discussion gave me a figure.

So that was 2 unnecessary phone calls.

None of the DWP staff were slacking or not doing their allocated job, but a bit of investment or thought in the process and it could have saved 10 minutes of their time and at least that of mine. Multiply that enough times...


As has been pointed out, sacking everyone immediately won't actually help. For a while it actually needs excess so there can be a few lazy sods that go round asking why the hell they are having to do X and them having access to someone with the capacity to fix it. 100% busy people are a hindrance to change.

I’m sorry I’m at a loss as to where time could be saved.

You called a generic helpline number where after confirming what you wanted they gave you the appropriate number

After a 5 minute chat that you said was helpful while they worked out what you wanted and calculated the figure they gave you the number

Yet you say it was a waste of 10 minutes.

Trust me it wasn’t because no department is going to put everything on line because that requires way, way more and money l then someone checking what you actually need and giving you a quick estimated figure to use.

If you want to be scared I can tell you how much creating a gov.uk service costs and it’s £x00,000 minimum

Compare that to a phone call that cost probably £5 to process and then work out if that call occurs 10,000 a year because unless it does there are better uses for automation

Re. the discussion in the last thread, the Probate Officer will be employed by HM Courts and Tribunal Service i.e. the most well known under-funded part of public life in the last 20 years. It isn’t the “civil service” as is commonly understood.

Isn't it? That's how I understood the "civil service"!

I was puzzled on the last thread by a complaint that a government service was slow and therefore the solution proposed was to cut staff. How is that going to make the service better?

Coz they will be terrified they’ll be the next to go in the next round of cuts. Put the fear of god in them

Give them hard targets to meet and if they don’t meet them - gone

This is the new £350m for the NHS delusion.

It’s really not. We are all going to experience the “fear of god” in the next few years, in regards to our careers and crafts - the civil service will and should be no exception. We should utilise the moment to make them WORK

As a Civil Servant myself, go to hell. I work my arse off in a background of rising abuse from the public due in no small part to the lazy pontificating of people like you.

Why the feck are you posting on here? At 09:50 on a working day? I can do it because I’m self employed - and I employ you with my taxes. I am your boss

Get back to the office you lazy scrounger

I'm using an annual leave day to care for my sick husband if you want to know. I can't use them to actually go and travel because he's too ill so I might as well use them to provide a bit of extra care than I can provide in between the hours I spend at work trying to ensure that the public get a say in their government. I've already been threatened with a law suit this week. Why don't you go back to writing subsidised puff pieces and try to have a bit more empathy for people who work extremely hard.

Sympathies on your husband. Life is tough

Nonetheless we have to get a grip on the malingering workshy muppets who mainly staff government offices. This attitude of mine might be coloured by the fact I am now waiting ANOTHER YEAR for foreign tax documents to be stamped by HMRC. All they have to do is stamp them. It’s taking a year. And my agent has just told me this is now costing me £££

We need to sack 30% of government staff - literally a third - and halve the incomes and pensions of the rest, and tell them if they don’t like it they too will be sacked

Sorry to be that guy, but 30% isn't 'literally' a third.
Thank goodness you don't have a palsied hand on the running of a civil service department.

That Leon can't do numbers isn't news on here!

And the size of the civil service has ballooned since, and to a significant extent due to, Brexit - which Leon voted for - intended get us out from under all those EU "bureaucrats" (who were roughly equivalent in number to the "bureaucrats" employed by Surrey County Council).