Animal Charities Dispute £340,000 Estate with Grieving Dog Owner

A number of animal charities, Dogs Trust, World Animal Protection, Friends Of The Animals and Heart Research UK are disputing a grieving partner’s claim to the £340,000 estate of Tracey Leaning, who passed aged 54 in 2015.

According to reports, Leaning decided to change her Will to leave her £340,000 estate to her partner, Richard Guest, provided that he cared for her three dogs, scotties Tilly and Eva and Cavalier King Charles spaniel Ben. In the previous Will, eight years before (2007), her estate was left in full to the charities. The validity of the later Will is now being challenged by the charities.

Guest has already spent over £10,000 in legal fees against the charities. According to the Daily Mail he said: “They have put me through hell. I’ve had to relive my loss and face financial hardship to defend the wishes of someone I loved. I almost lost the will to live.

“It was only the realisation there would be nobody to care for Tracey’s dogs and the fact that she was relying upon me to do so which kept me going.

“Thinking they may end up alone in an animal shelter, or separated, would have broken her heart. It’s ironic that three animal charities are pushing this case when all I want to do is fulfil Tracey’s heartfelt desire that the dogs stay together in a familiar place.

“They are trying to say the second will is invalid because the paper with the signature on it wasn’t stapled to the other part, but it was in the same sealed envelope and was only opened by her solicitor.”

Chris Gambs, Associate Solicitor at law firm, Coffin Mew, said this to Lawyer Monthly: “A number of animal charities are disputing a Will which saw them cut them out of the previous version.

“According to reports, Ms Leaning decided to change her Will to leave her £340,000 estate to her partner, provided that he cared for her three dogs. In the previous Will, eight years before, her estate was left in full to the charities. The validity of the later Will is now being challenged by the charities.

“On the face of it, this is a “winner takes all” case, which the deceased would no doubt have been saddened to see, when the welfare of her animals was at the heart of her intentions.

“This case demonstrates the tensions that can arise between often wealthy charities with specialist lawyers to protect their interests and the potential beneficiaries of an estate who face receiving no inheritance or a much smaller interest than the charity.

“The recent case of Illot in relation to the Inheritance Act, rightly highlighted that charities depend heavily on testamentary bequests for their work and as such do not have to justify need in Inheritance claims. However, it might now seem that the balance is too far in favour of the charities.

“There is no doubt that giving to charity should be encouraged, but disputes such as this demonstrate the benefit of Wills being professionally prepared and regularly reviewed, particularly where the value of estates is swelled by house values.

“The death of a loved one is distressing enough without also having to endure a challenge to their Will.”

Who would you have the estate be passed to?