Will & Testament

[EssDeeAitch]

DAK if it is common/best practice to appoint two executors or one plus an alternate (in case of the nominated being unwilling or unable to perform such duties for any reason)?

Comments appreciated

[Dod101]

I have always been advised to appoint two but I think it depends how complicated the estate is going to be. Probably better to have too many than too few as it will avoid too much squabbling at the time.

Dod

[dealtn]

I have always been advised to appoint two but I think it depends how complicated the estate is going to be. Probably better to have too many than too few as it will avoid too much squabbling at the time.

Dod

Surely the more there are the more likely to have disagreements than the other way round?

[Dod101]

Well m

I have always been advised to appoint two but I think it depends how complicated the estate is going to be. Probably better to have too many than too few as it will avoid too much squabbling at the time.

Dod

Surely the more there are the more likely to have disagreements than the other way round?

You may be right and maybe CK will be along to give us his view, but certainly I would certainly advocate at least two as one may for some reason be unable or unwilling to act.

[Lootman]

Well m

I have always been advised to appoint two but I think it depends how complicated the estate is going to be. Probably better to have too many than too few as it will avoid too much squabbling at the time.

Surely the more there are the more likely to have disagreements than the other way round?

You may be right and maybe CK will be along to give us his view, but certainly I would certainly advocate at least two as one may for some reason be unable or unwilling to act.

I've been an Executor three times and greatly prefer not having to share the duties with anyone else. I tend to take over the process anyway and like to do things my way. Having to involve another person slows me down, especially if they don't live close to me. Having to coordinate with someone else actually increases the work involved. I encourage any other Executor to stand down.

I think you need more than one Executor to allow for the fact that the appointed person might die, renounce or not be otherwise available. But if there is a structure to do this then I'd prefer the idea of one Executor and then a backup just in case.

That said it all depends. I have two children who are co-beneficiaries after my wife. It makes more sense to have them both as Executors in my situation.

[PinkDalek]

I think you need more than one Executor to allow for the fact that the appointed person might die, renounce or not be otherwise available. But if there is a structure to do this then I'd prefer the idea of one Executor and then a backup just in case.

There are options, as briefly described below, under the If you do not want to or cannot be an executor section:

https://www.gov.uk/applying-for-probate ... n-executor

One option would be 'power reserved'.