Estate Dispute Defense Strategy

Can you evaluate this please. Summary of Estate Claim and Dispute Background • Deceased: Harvey David Blackburn (referred to as "Dad"). • Claimant: Rose Rowell, Dad's ex-girlfriend. • Relationship History: Dad and Rose were in a relationship for approximately 20 years but separated around five and a half years ago. Although they remained friends and occasionally socialised (e.g., card games and group dinners), their personal relationship ended at the time of separation. • Jurisdiction: Tasmania, Australia. Current Situation • Estate Provision: Dad’s will includes a $*,* provision for Rose. However, Rose is now demanding $*,* from the estate, citing financial dependency and undue hardship. • Estate Size: The estate is substantial, which Rose’s lawyer argues could influence a court to award her a larger share. • Will Revision: Approximately a year before his death, Dad revised his will. In a previous will, Rose was to receive $*,*, but this was reduced to $*,* in the most recent version, reflecting his reconsideration of her entitlement. Claims Made by Rose's Lawyer Rose’s lawyer has asserted the following points in support of her claim: *. Large Size of the Estate: The substantial size of the estate could lead the court to award her a larger share. *. Lengthy Relationship: They emphasise the *-year relationship and Rose’s alleged contributions to Dad’s welfare, particularly as he aged. *. Financial Need: Rose claims a modest income with high household expenses, leaving her with little disposable income. *. Lifestyle Impact: Rose argues that she cannot maintain the lifestyle she had with Dad given her current financial position and the provision under the will. Our Position We believe Rose’s claim is opportunistic rather than grounded in legal entitlement: • Separation: Rose and Dad were separated for over five years before his passing, during which Dad provided minimal financial support, such as paying for her Netflix subscription and a house cleaner. • Limited Recent Relationship: Although they remained friends, their personal relationship had ended, undermining her argument for ongoing financial support. • Caregiving: Dad’s care was provided by his daughter, Honni. Rose was not involved in caregiving, weakening her claim of contributing to Dad’s welfare. • Elder Abuse: Rose’s mistreatment of Dad is a critical issue. She reportedly abused Dad, including kicking him out of her house and forcing him to sleep in a cold car on a winter’s night. He subsequently moved into his daughter’s house, where Honni and her husband Mark cared for him. These actions could be used to argue against her claim and support contesting the $*,* provision on grounds of undue influence or misconduct. • Reinforcement of Intent: The $*,* bequest to Rose reflects Dad’s clear intention to acknowledge their past relationship while significantly limiting her entitlement. The reduction from a previous $*,* to $*,* further underscores his intent to minimise her share. Evidence Gathered • Witness Statements: We are gathering statements from individuals who can attest to the separation, limited financial support, and Rose’s minimal involvement in Dad’s care. • Financial Records: We have evidence showing minimal financial contributions made to Rose during the separation. • Abuse Documentation: We are collecting details and potential evidence of the mistreatment Dad suffered at Rose’s hands, including the incident where she forced him to sleep in a cold car. Strategic Considerations • Potential Contest: We are considering contesting the $*,* provision based on undue influence and elder abuse. This strategy could pressure Rose to accept only what was left to her in the will. • Legal Advice Needed: Guidance is required on the strength of Rose’s claim, the feasibility of contesting the $*,* provision, and the best strategy for defending against her $*,* demand. Additional Note • Firm Stance: I am firmly opposed to giving Rose any part of the estate beyond what was explicitly mentioned in Dad’s will. Given her abusive behaviour toward Dad and her opportunistic intentions, I prefer to focus on defending the estate legally rather than negotiating or settling with her. Strategy to Defend Against Rose Rowell’s Estate Claim *. Emphasise the Will’s Recent Changes and Dad’s Clear Intentions • Highlight Deliberate Will Revision: Emphasise that approximately one year before his death, Dad revised his will to significantly reduce Rose’s bequest from $*,* to $*,*. This reduction reflects his clear, updated intentions and dissatisfaction with Rose’s role in his life. • Document Dad’s Intent: Use witness testimony, previous wills, and any communications from Dad to establish that his decision to reduce Rose’s provision was deliberate and thoughtful. Reinforce that the bequest of $*,* was made out of courtesy, not obligation, acknowledging their past relationship without implying financial dependency. *. Challenge Rose’s Claims of Financial Dependency • Demand Robust Evidence of Dependency: Require Rose to provide substantial proof of financial dependency during the last five years of her separation from Dad. Use financial records, employment documents, and statements from those close to Dad to demonstrate that he provided minimal financial support post-separation. • Expert Financial Analysis: Consider using a forensic accountant to assess Rose’s financial situation, demonstrating her ability to support herself independently. Highlight her income, assets, and financial decisions to counter her claim of dependency. *. Leverage Evidence of Elder Abuse to Undermine Rose’s Credibility • Document Abuse Incidents: Compile witness statements and any evidence of elder abuse, including the incident where Dad was forced to sleep in a cold car, to challenge Rose’s credibility and moral standing. Highlight how this mistreatment likely influenced Dad’s decision to minimize her bequest. • Present the Impact of Abuse on Dad’s Decisions: Use expert testimony, such as psychological evaluations, to demonstrate how Rose’s abusive behaviour could have affected Dad’s perception of her and led to the reduction in her entitlement. *. Focus on the Separation and Limited Relationship Post-Breakup • Emphasise the Prolonged Separation: Provide a detailed account of the five-year separation period, including witness statements that confirm Rose’s minimal involvement in Dad’s life and care. Highlight that their relationship was primarily social and did not involve significant financial support. • Contrast Rose’s Role with Actual Caregivers: Highlight the substantial caregiving provided by Dad’s daughter, Honni, son-in-law, Mark, and others, contrasting this with Rose’s absence in Dad’s care. This further undermines Rose’s argument that she contributed to Dad’s welfare. *. Counter Claims Based on the Estate’s Size and Rose’s Financial Need • Argue Against Awards Based on Estate Size: Assert that the size of the estate should not influence the amount awarded to Rose. Courts should prioritise Dad’s intentions as reflected in his will, not the estate’s value. • Address Sympathy and Financial Hardship Claims: Anticipate arguments that the court may sympathise with Rose’s financial needs. Emphasise that Dad’s estate plan already considered her circumstances, and any financial difficulties are not the estate’s responsibility, particularly given the separation and Rose’s abusive conduct. *. Prepare for Court with Strong Evidence and Expert Testimony • Expert Testimony on Dependency and Abuse: Consider engaging experts, such as forensic accountants and psychologists, to provide objective evidence on Rose’s financial independence and the impact of elder abuse on Dad’s decisions. This can bolster our legal arguments and provide the court with professional insight into the case. • Thorough Evidence Preparation: Ensure that all evidence - witness statements, financial records, and documentation of abuse - is meticulously organised and clearly presented. The quality and coherence of evidence will be crucial in defending against Rose’s claims in court. *. Consider a Cross-Claim or Offsetting Claim Against the $*,* Bequest • Challenge Rose’s Entitlement: Consider filing a cross-claim to contest the $*,* provision, arguing that Rose’s conduct disqualifies her from receiving any benefit. This can put additional pressure on Rose and force her to reconsider her demand. *. Be Prepared for Mediation, But Stay Focused on Legal Défense • Mediation Strategy: While my preference is to reject mediation, be prepared for the possibility that the court may encourage it. Use any mediation as a tactical opportunity to highlight the weaknesses in Rose’s case without compromising our firm stance. This approach maintains our commitment to defending Dad’s wishes while adapting to court procedures. Summary of Actions • Firmly Defend Dad’s Intentions: Reinforce Dad’s clear and deliberate intentions as expressed in his revised will. Emphasise the thoughtful reduction in Rose’s bequest as reflective of his final wishes. • Utilise All Available Evidence: Leverage documentation of elder abuse, financial independence, and the prolonged separation to undermine Rose’s claim and demonstrate that her demand is unsupported by the facts. • Prepare for Court with a Robust Legal Strategy: Work closely with our legal team to present a compelling defence, supported by evidence and expert testimony, that addresses each of Rose’s claims and strengthens our position.

I need a defence and want to know if my strategy is ok

No, I live in Saarland but my father's estate is in Tasmania, Australia

yes, I am contacting lawyers in Tasmania

yes, I have a copy of the will and probate has not yet been granted. We expect this to happen in * weeks