Connect with us

News

Why next of kin can’t access funds after account owners’ death – Lawyer gives reasons

Published

on

Muhammed Adam

Lagos-based legal practitioner and Principal/Founder, Muhammed Adam & Associates, Muhammed Adam, speaks to VICTORIA EDEME on issues associated with writing a will

Can you explain the importance of having a will?

There are so many advantages to having a will. It is important for everyone, particularly those with assets in different parts of the country or worldwide. It becomes important for the person to take inventory of all their assets. Experience has shown that many people acquire property without a will, their family members do not know what they own while they are alive. So, a will helps the testator, the maker of the will, take proper inventory of their assets.

Under native law and custom, you can’t give your property to people who are not related to you. However, when you desire to give your property to non-relatives, a will can help you do so. Due to the nature of conflicts that have arisen in the past over the distribution of assets, the making of the will can easily resolve such disputes because it (a will) states who is to get what and what should be given to whom. In Nigeria, there are some native laws and customs that apply to inheritance. With the making of the will, there is a limit to which these native laws can apply to the distribution of assets. In some parts of Nigeria, women do not inherit property, or the first child is limited to certain properties. However, the making of the will reduces the impact of customary law on some of these assets.

What are the key components that should be included in a will?

There are four key components in a will. Firstly, a will must identify the testator i.e. the maker of the will and owner of the assets. The will must contain the full name, address, and age of the testator. Secondly, a will must clearly show who the executors are. Executors are people who will administer the will when the testator is no longer alive. Their names and addresses must be stated. Another important component of the will is the details of the beneficiaries. The beneficiaries are people who will inherit the properties of the testator after death. Also, the details of the property belonging to the testator must be stated in the will.

The testator must also state properties that do not belong to them. For example, you may entrust your property to my care as a lawyer. So when I’m writing my will, I need to state who such property belongs to. There is a saying that ‘you cannot give what you don’t have’. If a property does not belong to the testator, he cannot will it out. Also, the signature of the testator is very important because it validates the making of the will. A will without the testator’s signature is as good as a worthless piece of paper. The law requires that the signature must be in the presence of witnesses. If the witnesses are not present when the testator is signing the will, that will is not valid. These are the important components of a proper will.

Are there any legal requirements or formalities that must be met when drafting a will?

Advertisement

One of the requirements of a will is that it must be in writing. A will cannot be in oral form. The age of the testator is also a legal requirement. Under the law, you cannot make a will when you’re less than 18 because you’d be considered a minor. Even though a minor can acquire a property, a minor cannot give out a property. Signatures of the testator and witnesses are legal requirements. The date is also a legal requirement because a will is ambulatory, as it takes effect after the death of the testator. It is valid when the date of the will precedes the date of death. But if the date of death precedes the date of the will, it is invalid.

SEE ALSO:  BREAKING: N80.2bn fraud: Court insists Yahaya Bello must appear in person

What happens if someone dies without a will?

When someone dies without a will, the person is said to have died intestate. But when someone dies with a will, the person is said to have died testate. If someone dies without a will, their property is subject to the estate law of their state of residence. The will subdues the effect of customary law and Islamic law. For example, if the person who dies without a will is a Muslim, the Islamic personal law will be fully activated. If the person is subject to native laws and customs, the customary law of that person will be fully activated.

Does this mean that the will supersedes customary and religious laws?

It supersedes them to the extent that it allows the testator to decide on how to distribute their properties and to also give people who are not related to them. Under Islamic law and customary law, there is a list of people that you can only give your properties to. There is an order that you must follow. There is a percentage that you must give to your child, father, daughter, mother, or surviving spouse under native law and custom. For instance, when a man is subject to customary law, and the person dies, the first child is the only child entitled to live on the property that the man was living on when he was alive. If he dies intestate, the customary law will be fully activated.

If the person is neither a Muslim nor someone subject to customary law, what applies is the administration of the estate law of that state. If the person is married under the statute, i.e. when they did the marriage in a registry or a licensed place of worship, certain people would apply for a letter of administration. So, the person that is number one, for instance in Lagos State, under the administration of its estate law is the surviving spouse, followed by the children, mother of the deceased, father of the deceased, uncle of the deceased, brothers, and so on. But the point is that if someone dies without a will, you apply for letters of administration. The letter of administration is a document that allows a third party to administer the estate of a deceased person.

The letter of administration can only be given to at least two people. The people that can apply for it are the surviving spouse and the children. If the surviving spouse is not alive, then the children, at least two of them who are above 18 years, can apply. If there is nobody like that, then it goes down to the mother of the deceased and so on. To enable those survivors to transfer or acquire those properties, they must get a letter of administration. Otherwise, they will not be able to get it. And this includes having access to bank accounts, having access to the pension, cooperatives, shares in companies, and all of that. A letter of administration is an important document that must be obtained when someone dies without a will and they have properties in their name.

SEE ALSO:  Rivers youths fault ALGON, APC’s impeachment call on Fubara

How do the next of kin of account holders and pensionable workers get access to the accounts once the holder dies?

Advertisement

By law, a next of kin is someone who is required for information purposes only, i.e. someone who can be reached immediately if the account holders are unreachable. Being a next of kin, however, does not confer a legal right to acquire property or to have access to property or assets, money in an account, pension, and all of that. The obligation of the next of kin is to be able to bring the death of the account holder to the attention of the bank or to the attention of someone who holds the money so that they can recognise whoever comes forward as the owner of the letter of administration. I’ll give you an example. Let’s say you are my next of kin, and I have N20m in a bank. If I die today, your obligation by law is to only inform the bank that this person is no more. The bank will not transfer the money to you because you are just for information purposes.

In a real-life case that I was involved in, a woman was named as next of kin to a successful businessman, who was her husband. She wrote the bank to give her the money in her husband’s account because she’s the next of kin. The bank refused and she went to court. We argued before the court that the fact that she’s the next of kin does not mean that she’s automatically entitled to the money. By law, she still requires a letter of administration to be able to have access to the money. The advantage is that the next of kin may be someone who is disqualified by law from applying for a letter of administration. I’ll give you an example.

If a man now names his friend as next of kin, the friend does not have power, access, or rights to his money and he cannot apply for the letter of administration. But when there is a will, that will should automatically tell you who the money in the account is going to. The bank will work with what the will says concerning who will now have access to the account. But when there’s no will, it will work with the letter of administration. So to ensure that the transfer of wealth is moved to the next of kin, that account holder must have a will that states such.

Can you clarify the role of executors and how they are appointed in the will?

The role of the executor is the role of the administrator. He is the person who will assist the beneficiaries in getting the properties to them. For instance, if you name me as the beneficiary of your will, after death, the administrators need to transfer the property to me. There’s a document that the administrators must give to me as the beneficiary. That document is called assent. It’s only the executors who can issue that document. Before the administrators or the executors can issue assent to me, they must also apply to the probate registry of the High Court of the state to get probate. A document issued to executors or administrators to be able to administer a will is called probate. After the probate has been given by the probate registrar, it is their role again to now issue documents called assent so that the beneficiary can have access to the property. How executors are appointed is at the discretion of the testator. There is no special procedure to it.

SEE ALSO:  Enugu gov’t cautions water tanker drivers over failure to colour-coat tankers to reflect water type

Can an executor be a beneficiary too?

As a general rule, no. The reason behind that general rule is so that there is no conflict of interest between being a beneficiary and being an executor. If you are an executor and a beneficiary at the same time, you may want to favour yourself more than other beneficiaries, or you may want to administer the assent faster towards getting the property compared to when you are not an executor and a beneficiary. But the testator, maybe because of their relationship, may name an executor as a beneficiary. For instance, if you name your spouse an executor of your estate, ordinarily that person is supposed to benefit from your estate, even without being an executor. So such a person can be named beneficiary and executor at the same time.

In an instance where the executor is not a beneficiary, what are the benefits that the executor will get?

Advertisement

One of the provisions for executors is how they will be paid. The testator will make provision for how the executors will be paid. If I make a will, and I appoint you as my executor, I may say that the sum of N5m should be paid to you every month during the administration of the estate. That way, you are not benefiting as a beneficiary now. You are being paid for your professional engagement. A lawyer can be an executor. If you name me as an executor in your will, and I’m being paid my professional fee for being an executor, I can’t be said to be a beneficiary of the will.

What options are available for distributing assets if the beneficiary dies before the testator?

If the beneficiary dies before the testator, such assets can go back to the estate. There is something called residual estate, which constitutes undistributed property. In some instances, it can be re-willed to another person, or to the survivor of that beneficiary. If the testator is still alive, he can use his discretion to change whatever he or she wants to change. But normally what happens in this instance is that the property will be re-willed to another person or the survivor of the beneficiary.

How often should a will be updated or reviewed?

A will should be updated if there is any change in your financial situation. It can be when you have a new child, you get married, a beneficiary dies, an executor dies, or there is a change in personal relationship. For instance, I have a son and I’ve made my will. If tomorrow I have another child, I will update my will. A codicil is an amendment made to a will. So you can have an original will and as many wills as possible. But the wiser thing to do is that if there’s a change in financial situation or family relationship, you update your will. (PUNCH)

 

 

Advertisement
Advertisements
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Tinubu orders CBN to suspend implementation of cybersecurity levy

Published

on

2027: Arewa youths blast northern political elites plotting against Tinubu
President Bola Tinubu

President Bola Tinubu has asked the Central Bank of Nigeria to suspend the implementation of the controversial cybersecurity levy policy and ordered a review.

This followed the decision of the House of Representatives, which, last Thursday, asked the CBN to withdraw its circular directing all banks to commence charging a 0.5 per cent cybersecurity levy on all electronic transactions in the country.

The CBN on May 6, 2024, issued a circular mandating all banks, mobile money operators, and payment service providers to implement a new cybersecurity levy, following the provisions laid out in the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) (Amendment) Act 2024.

According to the Act, a levy amounting to 0.5 per cent of the value of all electronic transactions will be collected and remitted to the National Cybersecurity Fund, overseen by the Office of the National Security Adviser.

Financial institutions are required to apply the levy at the point of electronic transfer origination.

The deducted amount is to be explicitly noted in customer accounts under the descriptor “Cybersecurity Levy” and remitted by the financial institution. All financial institutions are required to start implementing the levy within two weeks from the issuance of the circular.

By implication, the deduction of the levy by financial institutions should commence on May 20, 2024.

However, financial institutions are to make their remittances in bulk to the NCF account domiciled at the CBN by the fifth business day of every subsequent month.

Advertisement

The circular also stipulates a timeframe for financial institutions to reconfigure their systems to ensure complete and timely submission of remittance files to the Nigeria Interbank Settlement Systems Plc as follows: “Commercial, Merchant, Non-Interest, and Payment Service Banks – Within four weeks of the issuance of the Circular.

“All other Financial Institutions (Microfinance Banks, Primary Mortgage Banks, Development Financial Institutions) – Within eight weeks of the issuance of the Circular,” the circular noted.

The CBN has emphasised strict adherence to this mandate, warning that any financial institution that fails to comply with the provisions will face severe penalties. As outlined in the Act, non-compliant entities are subject to a minimum fine of two per cent of their annual turnover upon conviction.

SEE ALSO:  Enugu Police arrest two ‘one chance’ robbery, kidnap, fraud suspects, rescue female Victim

The circular provides a list of transactions currently deemed eligible for exemption, to avoid multiple applications of the levy.

These are loan disbursements and repayments, salary payments, intra-account transfers within the same bank or between different banks for the same customer, and intra-bank transfers between customers of the same bank.

Exemptions include other financial institutions’ transfers to their correspondent banks, interbank placements, banks’ transfers to CBN and vice versa, inter-branch transfers within a bank, cheque clearing and settlements, letters of credit, and banks’ recapitalisation-related funding.

Others are bulk funds movement from collection accounts, savings, and deposits including transactions involving long-term investments such as treasury bills, bonds, and commercial papers, and government social welfare programmes transactions.

These may include pension payments, non-profit and charitable transactions including donations to registered non-profit organisations or charities, educational institutions transactions, including tuition payments and other transactions involving schools, universities, or other educational institutions, and transactions involving the bank’s internal accounts, inter-branch accounts, reserve accounts, nostro and vostro accounts, and escrow accounts.

Advertisement

The introduction of the new levy sparked varied reactions among stakeholders as it is expected to raise the cost of conducting business in Nigeria and could potentially hinder the growth of digital transaction adoption.

Members of the House of Representatives on Thursday asked the Central Bank of Nigeria to withdraw the circular directing financial institutions to commence implementation of the 0.5 per cent cybersecurity levy, describing it as “ambiguous”.

The development was in response to a motion on the urgent need to halt and modify the implementation of the cybersecurity levy, moved by Kingsley Chinda.

According to the House, the CBN is to withdraw the initial circular, and “issue a more understandable one”.

Chinda had drawn the attention of the House to multiple interpretations of the CBN directive against the specifications in the Cybersecurity Act.

SEE ALSO:  Enugu gov’t cautions water tanker drivers over failure to colour-coat tankers to reflect water type

The House then expressed worry, that the Act would be implemented in error if immediate steps were not taken, to address the concerns around the interpretation of the CBN directive and the Cybersecurity Act.

However, sources with knowledge of Tinubu’s position on the issue disclosed that the President was aware of the economic burden on Nigerians since his hardline economic reforms began last May, adding that he did not want to risk adding to the burden with more levies.

A senior presidency official who preferred not to be named told The Punch, “The President is sensitive to what Nigerians feel. And he will not want to proceed with implementing a policy that adds to the burden of the people.

Advertisement

“So, he has asked the CBN to hold off on that policy and ordered a review. I would have said he ordered the CBN, but that is not appropriate because the CBN is autonomous. But he has asked the CBN to hold off on it and review things again.”

Another presidency official who preferred to remain anonymous as he was not authorised to speak on the issue said these discrepancies prompted the President to order a review.

“If you look at it, the law predates the Tinubu administration. It was enacted in 2015 and signed by Goodluck Jonathan. It is only being implemented now.

“You know he (Tinubu) was not around when that directive was being circulated. And he does not want to present his government as being insensitive. As it is now, the CBN has held off the instruction to banks to start charging people. So, the President is sensitive. His goal is not to just tax Nigerians like that. That is not his intention. So, he has ordered a review of that law.”

Tax reforms not to frustrate Nigerians — Shettima

Meanwhile, the Vice President, Kashim Shettima, on Saturday, said the tax reforms undertaken by the Bola Tinubu administration were not aimed to frustrate Nigerians but to sustain the country’s investment friendliness.

SEE ALSO:  2027: Arewa youths blast northern political elites plotting against Tinubu

The VP, represented by his Special Adviser on General Duties Dr Aliyu Umar, spoke at the close-out retreat of the Presidential Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms Committee held at the Transcorp Hilton, Abuja. Shettima’s Spokesperson, Mr Stanley Nkwocha, revealed this in a statement titled, ‘Our tax reforms initiated for overall benefits of Nigerians – VP Shettima’.

He argued that contrary to speculations in some quarters, “we are not here to frustrate any sector of our economy but to create an administrative system that ensures the benefits of a thriving tax system for all our citizens”.

Advertisement

Levy suspension welcome development – PDP

Reacting to the decision of the President, the Peoples Democratic Party’s National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba, welcomed the suspension of the cybersecurity levy policy implementation, noting that the policy should not have been introduced at all.

He said, “It was an anti-people decision from the beginning. It was an insensitive decision from the beginning. It was an ambush on the people who had already been frustrated by the multiple layers of taxes from the beginning. So, it was a very cruel introduction because you do not need to tax us to have cybersecurity.

“You do not need to tax the villagers or the people in the rural areas for cybersecurity. People who do not even have light. They don’t even have access to an internet connection. Well, if that is a show that the president is listening, then that is good. Then, he must now continue to listen more and begin to look at where the problem started and that is the issue of removal of subsidy without any cushioning of its effect. What will happen is that the president should go back further so that Nigerians can breathe by ensuring a policy that will reduce the hardship of the sudden removal of the subsidy.”

Advertisements
Continue Reading

News

We are now in full control of Rivers — PDP

Published

on

•Rivers Governor Siminalayi Fubara

Governor Siminalayi Fubara and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) are now in full control of Rivers State, the PDP has claimed.

In a statement by PDP’s National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba in Abuja during the weekend, the PDP asserted that all the Rivers legislators who defected to All Progressives Congress (APC) have completely lost all claims to their seats while all legal considerations now favour the PDP.

According to Ologunagba, APC is only pursuing mere mirage by making unintelligent claims and trying to subvert Nigeria’s constitution in its recent statements on the vacation of seats by “former members of the Rivers State House of Assembly who lost their membership of that Legislative House upon defection from the PDP.”

Ologunagba further stated: “ It is indeed pathetic for the APC to think that the facts and true import of Section 109 (1) (g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) to the effect that the former lawmakers have since lost their seats can be muddled and lost in litigations and lengthy press statements.

“Interestingly, in the failed bid to subvert the Constitution to give the former members of the Rivers State House of Assembly a lifeline, the APC ended up admitting the clarity of the proviso of Section 109(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) in voiding their seats upon their defection.

“For the avoidance of doubt, Section 109 (1)(g) of the Constitution is clear in providing that “a member of a House of Assembly shall vacate his seat in the House if – being a person whose election to the House of Assembly was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before expiration of the period for which that House was elected:

SEE ALSO:  Why prices of bread are high — Bakers

“Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored.”

Emphasising that all House of Assembly members who defected to the APC are now effectively mere ‘former members’, Ologunagba urged the APC and the legislators to forget any possibility of ever seeing their party taking charge of Rivers State.

Advertisement

“The former members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, for reasons best known to them, wittingly vacated and summarily lost their seats as nothing in the proviso protects or allows them to retain their membership of the Rivers State House of Assembly after decamping from the political party upon which they were elected

“These former members of the Rivers State House of Assembly have only themselves to blame for Constitutionally vacating their seats; a course which cannot be reversed or remedied. They should admit their miscalculation and bear the inescapable consequences.

“This is especially so as the Supreme Court, in the case of Abegunde vs Ondo State House of Assembly and Others, has since clarified and affirmed the import of the proviso in Section 109(1)(g) in validating the automatic vacation of a seat by a member of a Legislative House who defected from the Party upon which he was elected into that House.

“For the umpteenth time the PDP cautions the APC to steer clear of Rivers State; it should perish the thoughts of forcefully taking over the State and stop exasperating the public space by seeking to reverse the irreversible.

SEE ALSO:  Yahaya Bello was reckless in speech, conduct, turned Kogi people to slaves – Former Minister Nweke Jnr

“The APC should come to terms that with the vacation of seats by the former lawmakers, the quorum of the Rivers State House of Assembly will be determined by the number of the remaining lawmakers as provided by law; until a bye-election is conducted to fill the vacancies now existing in the Rivers State House of Assembly as a result of the defection by the former members,” Ologunagba asserted. (The Nation)

Advertisements
Continue Reading

News

Army spits fire as soldiers detained over protest break guard room

Published

on

•Spokesman of Nigerian Army, Onyema Nwachukwu
Authorities of the Nigerian Army have launched a probe into how some soldiers kept in guard rooms (detention) for various offences broke the facility located at the 8 Division Garrison, Sokoto.

It also said it would go ahead to implement the directive of the Chief of Army Staff, Lt.-Gen. Taoreed Lagbaja, to look into the state of all Nigerian Army detention facilities, saying the detainees’ lives matter.

Daily Trust had reported how a soldier identified as Lance Corporal Charles Ekefure with 17NA/76/1660 was reportedly shot following complaints by some detained soldiers who broke out of their cells (guard rooms) in Sokoto State.

The incident, which occurred on Thursday led to the detention of about 100 soldiers, with 10 detained in each cell – the development that led them to clamour for better food and improved living conditions.

Reacting to the development on Saturday, the spokesman of Nigerian Army, Onyema Nwachukwu, said the service shall not shy away from appropriately sanctioning the soldiers involved in what he described as “unruly behaviour” in its Sokoto detention facility.

He said, “The Army Headquarters has taken note of a report and audiovisual recording circulating on social media produced by some of its personnel held in custody at the 8 Division Garrison detention facility.

“Undoubtedly, the Sokoto barracks detention facility incident is quite unfortunate and an embarrassment to the sound administration efforts of the Chief of Army Staff, to say the least, and in line with his leadership style, the COAS has instituted an appropriate investigation into the incident to determine whether it is an isolated or widespread situation in similar detention facilities.

SEE ALSO:  BREAKING: N80.2bn fraud: Court insists Yahaya Bello must appear in person

“While the service regrets and has gleaned some lessons from the incident, it will however not condone the manner the inmates expressed their purported grievance. Mutiny and conduct prejudicial to service order are grievous misconducts, and this very incident epitomises such.”

Nwachukwu, a Major-General, said they would be sanctioned for failing to exhaust all available options to channel their complaints to the appropriate authorities.

Advertisement

He added that if it was discovered they did and nothing was done, necessary administrative actions will be taken against anyone found to have failed to discharge his or her duties effectively.

Nwachukwu said, “As such, as Army, on the one side, goes ahead to implement the COAS directive to look into the state of all NA detention facilities, as detainees’ lives also matter, the Service shall not shy away from appropriately sanctioning the soldiers involved in the unruly behaviour in its Sokoto detention facility for failing to exhaust all available options to channel their complaints to the appropriate authorities and if it was discovered they did and nothing was done, necessary administrative actions will be taken against anyone found to have failed to discharge his/her duties effectively.

“While the Service is mindful of its subjective oversight engagements by statutory bodies, it remains primarily a responsible, self-regulating professional body.

“As such, the Service remains committed to ensuring that everyone, even those found guilty of aiding terrorists, kidnappers, and bandits, and are awaiting confirmation of their sentencing, as it has been discovered in the Sokoto case is accorded a relatively decent life until their judgment is confirmed and executed.

SEE ALSO:  Hon. David Ina Ogu: The Frontrunner for PDP State Chairman – A Beacon of Progress and Unity for Kogi State

“This commitment underscores the NA’s dedication to upholding professional standards and maintaining a just and fair system. The NA appreciates all Nigerians for their concern and support as well as pledge to remain focused on its drive to defeating security challenges facing the nation in conjunction with sister services and other security agencies.” (Daily Trust)

Advertisements
Continue Reading

Trending