Co- executor thingy

The solicitor can accept instructions from one Executor. However if he is supposed to be acting for all three Executors then he should verify the instructions with all three and obtain identificatiobn documents for all three.

He should also inspect the sealed Grant of Probate if this is necessary in relation to his instructions.

It was a while ago and relates to a HIP in regard to the estates only assett but they asked for ID in the customer care letter even quoting the money laundering rules for a reason to ask for them AND the grant of probate

It would have been fine had they not them sent a bill on the word of the introductory agent (Estate agent)without referring to me - they hadn't received any docs.  When I complained they said it was entirely proper for them to send the bill out without asking me what I was planning after the estate agent got fed up of them harassing him for the info as well and basically lied and I wasn't marketing it any more.

Also the initial letter did not mention the fact that there was an introduction invovled. which I am unsure of as surely an introduction is the same as distacne selling as they have never met me in person and I had never heard of them until they sent their first letter arrived

What is your question?

This what I am really trying to sort out - they knew teh property wasn't mine and that I was executor the probably knew I was co-executor but I can't say 100% that the estate agent told them that

If a solicitor asks for ID then the expectation is that the work won't commence until it is provided.  I was happy to go along with them until they failed to refer back to me, at that point as they sent a bill on an instruction via an introduction that included a six month deferral as well. The bill arrived after six weeks so to me they broke any trust and breached my expectations of what was supposed to happen.  Plus the terms for the six month deferral were six months or when the house is sold whichever is sooner.  As I hadn't taken the house off the market they acted on false information by the estate agent (although how they worded that changed) - I don't beleive the bill was valid or should have been sent.  As the contract to my mind was conditional on receiving confirmation of who I was and my authority to make the instruction - which seemed all fair and good.  The estate agent refused to enter into any contract with me until the co-executor also signed so why would a solicitor

I'm sorry I'm afraid I still don't understand your question.

If you are asking whether you had a valid contract with the solicitor then it is difficult to establish on the facts that you have presented.

The failure on your part to provide ID does not mean that you didn't have a contract with the solicitor.

Did you ever speak to the solicitor, did you at any point consent to the solicitor carrying out any work i.e. initially compiling the HIP - if so you are likely to have a contract with the solicitor.

If on the other hand you had no communication with the solicitor and did not instruct them to do anything on your behalf you may not have had a contract. Certainly a referral by an estate agent without any involvement from you would not bind you to a contract with the solicitor unless it was contained within the agency contract.

I did have communication with them but every time apart form the EPC bit which was subcontracted and I offered to pay for it was always about getting the ID nothing else.  The understanding at that point was that things would progress but I also understood taht they needed the ID first or why ask for it and keep chasing for it

The terms of care etc cleary state the money laundering regulations as a reason for asking for this so I am bemused as to why that wouldn't be an issue when it suits a solicitor, surely some consideration has to be given to the expectation of both sides.  For example I would expect some consideration to be given to my wishes which were completely disregarded in favour of what the estate agent had falsly told them.  At that point I wanted no part of the situation anymore understandable because that was unprofessional behaviour from the solicitor - its all very one sided and if there was a contract with me why would they then ignore my statements and wishes and issue a bill 5 month before the end of the deferrement perriod which was also stated in their terms and conditions.  And why harass the estate agent which is the primary reason why he lied and indeed they continued to harass him afterwards as I got a distressed phone call several week after his false statement to them stating that they had made threats against him if I didn't play along despite the fact that they had clearly surely destroyed any contractual obligation by ignoring me and my instructions

Again if an estate agent would not accept instruction without referring to the co-executor why would a solicitor

Why would a solicitor accept and instruction in a situation such as this without confirming that their alleged client had the authority to act

What is your actually question. Are you trying to dispute the bill that the solicitor has sent to you?