A recent case has emphasised the illegality of making a will under undue pressure as a Chinese speaking mother, lacking capacity, was forced to disinherit her married daughters by her traditionalist husband.
Traditionalist, George Chin, had long lived to the ancient rhetoric that married daughters now belong to the husband’s family and should not inherit as a result. It was this belief that he passed on to his only son, Winston, and tried to instil into his wife, Ho Chin.
However, in 2009, Ho Chin created a will which suggested she was happy for her only son, Winston, to inherit the majority of the estate but also wished to leave a gift to her five daughters. The accompanying letter to her will insisted, “I have always been very fair to all my children as they all came from my womb. I am very happy that my only son, Winston, is the main beneficiary of the Chin estate. I also want to bless my five daughters with my share in the property.”
Following a stroke in 2009, Ho Chin was coerced and pressured into creating a new will that would extricate her daughters from inheriting her £97,500 share in the family restaurant and bequeath the entirety to her only son. In 2011, a new will was made in English, despite the fact that her preferred communication choice was Chinese. The will was also amended without the knowledge of the five daughters.
After the passing of their mother in 2015, the family has fragmented and been at war over the new will.
Feeling as though the new will was made against the express wishes of their mother, the case was taken to court by three of the five daughters, Ivy, Rose and Ruby. The judge has agreed with three of the sisters, allowing them to claim their slice of the estimated £3 million estate that was built on successful Southend restaurants and property investments.
The presiding judge was clear that Ho Chin had made the will after being worn down by her husband and son. Judge Milwyn Jarmin QC claimed that the will resembled the wishes of their father and not of their mother who was so determined to leave her daughters something upon her death.
Judge Milwyn Jarman QC, presiding judge in the case, said: “It is not in dispute that their father made it clear to the family that, in accordance with tradition, as each daughter married they would leave the family and become part of their husband’s family.
“Conversely however, when Winston married, he as the only son would remain part of the Chin family and carry on the family name. It was also made clear that he was expected to carry on the business and would inherit family assets.
“It is likely that her desire to avoid family squabbles and enjoy a peaceful life played a large part in her succumbing to those wishes rather than to continue to choose her own.
“It is clear in my judgment…that from a time shortly after his wife’s stroke, [George] Chin began to put pressure on his wife to leave her share of Southchurch Road to the male line, and that Winston was aware of his parents’ argument on the issue.
“What is not permissible is for the pressure to be such that Mrs Chin succumbed to it for the sake of a quiet life to the extent that it overbore her wishes. It is one of the sad aspects of this case that her wish to avoid family squabbles over assets after her death has not come to pass.”
Whilst the daughters may have won their battle in court, the family remains one divided by a mother whose final wishes to ‘live a quiet life’ have left loud reverberations causing huge cracks within the family.
Is this a common occurrence amongst large families? Should the wishes of the amended will have been carried out?
