VIC Contract to not revoke a will

[mayaneclipse]

Hi, An elder person ( family friend) made an agreement with me wherein I pay half of all of her property related bills like water , Body corp and rates and in exchange she would make a will where she would leave her entire estate to me.
The contract clearly specifies that she cannot revoke the will and for her to vary her will, the variation is to occur in a codicil to the will, with me being present and affixing your signature to the codicil as an
additional witness.
Throughout the period of contract, I would help her in any way whatsoever. i was at her beck and call. she would call me everyday for 3 hours and i would spend 6 hours per week physically with her. Mind you, she is an angry person. she would shout and scream at me for every little thing.

she abused, bullied and harassed and blackmailed me to the point I had a mental breakdown and hence i withdrew from her. since she had lost her slave, she decided to revoke the contract. But i have upheld my end of the bargain and have paid all the bills on time.

is this type of contract enforceable?

Thanks for your time

 

[Rod]

It is likely enforceable, but many details need checking, including length of contract. By enforceable, it may mean damages are payable, rather than continuation of the contract.

If the contract turns out to be unenforceable, then you may have an alternative way of pleading a case.

If you need help I have access to lawyers who can likely assist you. My email address is on www.vichelp.com.au

 

[James Mahoney]

Tricky. I doubt that a contract where one party agrees to bequeath an entire estate would be enforceable. In my view, you would only be entitled to recover your loss, which would be the amounts you have paid in favour of the other party.

 

[Scruff]

I agree with James. Depending on the size of the estate, a contract of this type is likely to be extremely lopsided in regard to you gaining a lot more than the other party does if it goes full term. I can't see a court upholding something like this, especially if it were to be challenged by a relative or some other potential beneficiary.

I therefore also agree with Rod, in that you may be entitled to damages for losses and possibly also compensation for the care provided as it was unpaid for. But I think you can forget about the estate - I doubt you'll get any of it and I think the chance that you ever would have, was probably remote at best if she has relatives.

An important thing to consider now though, is who's idea was this? One of you came up with this idea and it is very clear that either party can be taken advantage of in a big way. Any court or tribunal will see this, therefore the instigator of the contract is probably going to be behind the 8 ball from the start if a dispute is put before any tribunal or court.

 

[mayaneclipse]

I agree with James. Depending on the size of the estate, a contract of this type is likely to be extremely lopsided in regard to you gaining a lot more than the other party does if it goes full term. I can't see a court upholding something like this, especially if it were to be challenged by a relative or some other potential beneficiary.

I therefore also agree with Rod, in that you may be entitled to damages for losses and possibly also compensation for the care provided as it was unpaid for. But I think you can forget about the estate - I doubt you'll get any of it and I think the chance that you ever would have, was probably remote at best if she has relatives.

An important thing to consider now though, is who's idea was this? One of you came up with this idea and it is very clear that either party can be taken advantage of in a big way. Any court or tribunal will see this, therefore the instigator of the contract is probably going to be behind the 8 ball from the start if a dispute is put before any tribunal or court.

Hi she wanted this and she contacted my dad and chose me and she set out the terms and conditions of the contract. So I had no part in designing the contract at all. She was the client of the lawyer.
She has no relative here in Australia only a distant cousin in Europe who she despises.

 

[Scruff]

This sounds good for you, because as it turns out, she is both the instigator and the one who has ultimately gained an advantage while you now receive nothing out of the agreement. Considering the circumstances that you have now explained as to how this arrangement came about, particularly that she chose you and a lawyer was involved in drawing up the contract, I would think it's very possible that the contract could be upheld.

The problem now is that for whatever the reason, you withdrew your services and therefore haven't fulfilled your end of the deal. I recommend you engage a lawyer to have a serious look at everything.

Also, despite the fact that she despises the distant relative, they can still contest the will.

 

[Rod]

... they can still contest the will.

Anyone can contest any Will. The issue is whether there is any prospect of success. An overseas distant relative not receiving any financial benefits while the testator is alive would have about as much chance as me of contesting her Will and being successful.

 

[mayaneclipse]

Thanks for your input. The contract only asks me to pay half of the bills and nothing else. It does not ask me to go and spend time with her.

Also, when she decided that she wanted cancel this contract, she asked me not to send any more money for the bills. However, I have been sending her the money for the bills ( money order so I have proof) and she has always accepted them despite saying otherwise. she wanted to pay me some money to annul the agreement which i agreed but i have not heard from her for more than a month but she keeps accepting the money i send for the bills. so the contract is still valid.

She could also have drawn the same contract wills with other people and could be collecting money from 3 or 5 people which I am not aware of. This could be a possibility.

I have engaged a lawyer in Melbourne and they have said the contract is binding and enforceable as long as I have upheld my end of the bargain which is paying the bills. They said it is akin to paying mortgage and I am a stakeholder as the testatrix was the instigator of the agreement. the lawyer asked me to revoke the acceptance of annulment as it is invalid because the testatrix keeps accepting the money. the lawyer said the testatrix needs to pay me out if she wants this contract abolished.

 

[Rod]

ta for the update, and good to see you got advice.

 

[Scruff]

Sorry, I thought you stopped the payments. My bad.

If it is only the vists that were stopped and they weren't part of the contract anyway, then I think you're looking pretty good.

Good move to get a lawyer and their advice sounds solid. Best of luck.