IPFDA MCQs Flashcards
Question 1
A woman died last week. In her valid will, she gave her entire estate to a charity. She left
her husband 18 months ago and went to live with her same- sex partner (‘her partner’) with
whom she has cohabited ever since. The partner paid the rent for their accommodation
and most of their household expenses. The woman is survived by her husband, her partner
and a step- son, who is her husband’s child by a former marriage.
Which of the following best describes potential applicants under the Inheritance
(Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975?
A The partner could claim in the cohabitant category.
B The partner could claim on the basis that the woman maintained her.
C The step- son could claim as the woman’s child.
D The step- son might be able to claim as a child of the woman’s family.
E The husband could claim as a former spouse who has not remarried.
Answer
Option D is correct. The step- son might be able to bring a claim as a person (not being
a child of the deceased) who was treated by the deceased as a child of the family. It will
depend on whether the woman acted as a parent towards him.
Option A is wrong because the partner had not lived with the woman for two years
immediately before her death.
Option B is wrong because the woman did not make a substantial contribution towards the
partner’s reasonable needs. Rather, the partner was maintaining the woman.
Option C is wrong because step- children are not regarded as a person’s ‘children’.
Option E is wrong because the woman and her husband were not divorced. (He could claim
as a spouse in the first category.)
Question 2
A man died seven months ago. He died intestate. No grant has been obtained yet. The
man and his wife were beneficial joint tenants of a house and bank account. He also
owned a car and some clothes in his sole name. The man and his daughter quarrelled
seven years ago and have not seen each other since. The daughter, who is a teacher,
intends to claim family provision.
Which of the following best explains whether her claim is likely to be successful?
A The daughter will be unsuccessful because the only assets which she can claim against
are the car and the clothes and the courts discourage applications in small estates.
B The daughter will be unsuccessful because she is out of time.
C The daughter will be unsuccessful unless she can show some special circumstance, such
as a moral obligation owed by the deceased, and that she needs financial help with
her day- to- day living expenses.
D The daughter will be unsuccessful because she cannot show that she was maintained
by the deceased immediately before his death.
E The daughter is likely to succeed because the deceased should have made reasonable
provision for her whether or not needed for her maintenance.
Answer
Option C is correct. The courts have rejected claims by adult children who cannot show some
special circumstance. The standard of reasonable financial provision under the Act would be
the ordinary standard of reasonable provision for maintenance. Thus, any provision would be
to meet daily living expenses and the court will reject her claim if she has the resources to
meet these expenses herself.
Option A is wrong. The court could order that the net estate, against which orders can be
made, should include the man’s interest in a joint tenancy of the house and bank account.
Option B is wrong because the time limit is six months from the grant and a grant has not
been obtained in the man’s estate. In any event, the court can extend the time limit.
Option D is wrong. The daughter can bring her claim as a child of the deceased and would
not have to use the maintenance category.
Option E is wrong. The standard for an applicant who is not a spouse is the ordinary standard
of reasonable provision for maintenance
Question 3
A woman died six months ago, having used all of her nil rate band in her lifetime. She left
her holiday cottage to her sister and the rest of her £1 million estate to her brother. The
sister wants to pass the cottage to her daughter.
Which of the following is the best way for the sister to achieve her wishes?
A The sister should make a lifetime gift of the cottage to her daughter.
B The sister should disclaim her right to the cottage.
C The sister should make a variation passing the cottage to her daughter and elect to
have the variation read back to the woman’s death for IHT purposes.
D The sister should make a variation passing the cottage to her daughter but she should
not elect to have the variation read back to the woman’s death for IHT purposes
because it would result in more IHT becoming payable on the woman’s estate.
E The sister should make a variation passing the cottage to her daughter. It should be
made in writing, within two years of the woman’s death and it must be signed by the
sister, the brother and the woman’s PRs.
Answer
Option C is correct. A variation read back to the woman’s death is the best option for IHT
purposes. No additional IHT will be payable on the woman’s estate (a non- exempt beneficiary
is replaced by another non- exempt beneficiary). The election would mean that the sister would
not be regarded as making a PET which could become chargeable if she were to die within
seven years.
Option A is wrong. The lifetime gift would be regarded as a PET and would become
chargeable if the sister were to die within seven years. This is not desirable especially
because the cottage has already incurred IHT on the woman’s death.
Option B is wrong. A disclaimer would not pass the cottage to the sister’s daughter. The
cottage would pass as though the sister had predeceased and the brother would inherit it as
part of residue.
Option D is wrong. As explained above, an election to have the variation read back would not
result in more IHT becoming payable on the woman’s estate.
Option E is wrong because only the original beneficiary (the sister) needs to sign the variation.
The signature of the brother is unnecessary as are the signatures of the PRs (in the latter case
because no additional IHT would be payable on the woman’s estate). The other conditions
stated in Option E are correct.
A man died ten months ago domiciled in England and Wales. A grant of representation to his estate was issued seven months ago. By his will, the man left all of his estate to his favourite charity. The man’s widow is considering whether to bring a claim against his estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 (‘the Act’). There are no circumstances in which a court would give permission for a late application to be made under the Act.
Which of the following statements best explains whether the widow is able to bring a claim under the Act?
A. The widow is able to bring a claim because the grant of representation was issued less than two years ago.
B. The widow is able to bring a claim because the grant of representation was issued less than six months after the date of death.
C. The widow is able to bring a claim because the man died less than two years ago.
D. The widow is not able to bring a claim because the man died more than six months ago.
E. The widow is not able to bring a claim because the grant of representation was issued more than six months ago.
E - The widow is not able to bring a claim because the grant of representation was issued more than six months ago.
