About these examples: names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed to protect confidentiality. The situations reflect the type of work Xwills has dealt with in practice. They are educational examples, not promises that the same structure or outcome will be suitable for someone else.
Jump to an example Anonymised client example
£780,000 family estate — Property Protection Trust Wills, guardianship and LPAs “James” and “Claire”, both in their early forties, owned a home worth about £575,000, had roughly £55,000 in savings and investments, and life cover that could add around £150,000 for the family. They had two young children. They initially thought they simply needed basic Wills and asked whether a lifetime trust for the house was necessary.
Exact Xwills planning used: Complete Estate Protection — Property Protection Trust Wills for both partners, severance where required, and all four LPAs
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £1,395 professional fee, plus OPG registration fees
What they wanted Keep the survivor secure, protect the first person’s share of the home for the children, appoint guardians if both parents died, stop the children inheriting substantial sums too young, and make sure both spouses had attorneys in place if either lost capacity.
What we chose We chose the Complete Estate Protection package. Their Wills contained Property Protection Trust provisions for the home, together with guardianship and age-contingent inheritance provisions for the children. The property ownership was reviewed and severance of the joint tenancy included where required. We also prepared both types of LPA for each of them.
Why we chose it Because they owned property and had children, the first-death position mattered. Straight Mirror Wills could have left the first person’s share outright to the survivor, exposing that share to later remarriage, a changed Will or other sideways-disinheritance risks. The PPT structure preserved the first person’s defined share for the chosen beneficiaries while giving the survivor appropriate occupation rights. It can also have a protective effect on the deceased owner’s trust share if the survivor later needs care, although no care-fee outcome is guaranteed.
Important technical point The Property Protection Trust and the children’s age-contingent trust provisions perform different jobs. The PPT deals with the deceased owner’s share of the home; the children’s provisions govern when and how minors or younger beneficiaries receive inheritance. Life-policy and pension nominations also need reviewing because not every asset necessarily passes under the Will.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
£600,000 family position — a ‘simple Will’ request that was really a blended-family protection problem “Martin” had a £510,000 share of a jointly owned home, around £90,000 of savings and two adult children from his first marriage. His wife had one adult daughter. They initially asked for inexpensive Mirror Wills leaving everything to each other.
Exact Xwills planning used: Property Protection Trust Wills — Couple
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £695 professional fee
What they wanted Keep the survivor secure while making sure each person’s own children were not accidentally disinherited if the survivor later changed their Will, remarried or redirected the estate.
What we chose We chose Property Protection Trust Wills for the couple , with the ownership position reviewed and severance included where required. Each person’s defined share of the home could pass into the Will trust rather than being given outright to the survivor, while the survivor retained appropriate rights under the trust.
Why we chose it A standard Mirror Will would have been cheaper but did not match the real objective. The key risk was sideways disinheritance: once the first person’s share passed outright, that person could no longer control where it ultimately went. The PPT structure balanced survivor security with preservation of each side of the family’s intended inheritance.
Important technical point The exact percentages, occupation rights, rights to move home and ultimate beneficiary provisions must be drafted around the couple’s ownership and family circumstances.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
Rented home, modest savings — they thought they needed a trust for their son “Tom” and “Rachel” rented their home, had modest savings, no investment property and one adult son. They had been told by friends that putting his inheritance “in trust” would automatically make their estate safer, so they came to us expecting to buy a trust-based Will.
Exact Xwills planning used: Mirror Wills
Fee charged: £199 professional fee
What they wanted Make sure the survivor inherited first and their son inherited after the second death, with straightforward executor and substitute-beneficiary provisions. They did not have a property-protection problem, a vulnerable beneficiary, a blended-family issue or assets that needed ongoing trustee control.
What we chose We recommended Mirror Wills , not a lifetime trust or a specialist Trust Will. The Wills recorded the couple’s inheritance wishes, executor appointments and what should happen if their son died before them.
Why we chose it A trust would have added cost and administration without solving a real problem in their circumstances. Good estate planning is not about inserting a trust whenever someone has a child; it is about using a trust only where there is an identifiable reason for trustee control, protection or staged inheritance.
Important technical point If their circumstances later changed — for example they bought a home, remarried, had a vulnerable beneficiary or wanted to protect a property share — the Will structure would need to be reviewed.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
£900,000 home — second marriage and three children from earlier relationships “John” and “Mary” were both on their second marriage. Their home was worth about £900,000. John had two children from his first marriage and Mary had one daughter from hers. They wanted the survivor to stay in the property for life, but each wanted their own share ultimately to reach their own children.
Exact Xwills planning used: Property Protection Trust Wills — Couple
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £695 professional fee
What they wanted Protect the survivor’s right to remain in the home while preserving each person’s share for their own children rather than leaving the first person’s inheritance exposed to a later remarriage or change of Will.
What we chose We chose Property Protection Trust Wills for the couple and tenants-in-common ownership. Each Will contained the trust provisions needed for that person’s defined share of the property, with the survivor given appropriate occupation rights.
Why we chose it Standard Mirror Wills leaving the whole property outright to the survivor would have removed the first person’s control over the ultimate destination of their share. A lifetime transfer of the house was unnecessary. The Will-based PPT gave the survivor security while preserving the first person’s share for their chosen beneficiaries.
Important technical point The exact ownership percentages, rights to sell or move, responsibility for costs and the events that end an occupation right all need to be expressly drafted.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
£650,000 home — care-fee concerns without giving the house away during lifetime “Alan” and “Patricia” owned a mortgage-free home worth about £650,000 and had around £110,000 in savings. They had seen advertising suggesting they should transfer the house into a lifetime trust so that it could never be taken into account for care fees.
Exact Xwills planning used: Property Protection Trust Wills — Couple
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £695 professional fee
What they wanted Preserve as much family inheritance as reasonably possible while keeping ownership, control and security during their lifetimes.
What we chose We chose Property Protection Trust Wills for the couple , with the ownership position reviewed and severance of the joint tenancy included where required. The planning only needed to operate on the first death rather than transferring their home away while they were both alive.
Why we chose it Their real objective was to protect the deceased owner’s share for the children while keeping the survivor in the home. A lifetime transfer created additional tax, control and deprivation-of-assets questions that were not needed for that objective. In the right circumstances, the deceased owner’s trust share may remain outside the survivor’s outright ownership if the survivor later needs care, but the position is always fact-specific.
Important technical point No PPT should be sold as a guarantee that exactly 50% of a home will always be ignored in a future care-fee assessment. The trust changes ownership of the deceased person’s share; any later local-authority assessment depends on the actual facts, trust terms and law at the time.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
£720,000 household finances — Wills were in place but neither spouse could simply act for the other “Graham” and “Janet” had a £540,000 home, around £95,000 in savings and investments and the balance in pensions and other assets. Their Wills were up to date, so they assumed the survivor could deal with everything if one of them became ill.
Exact Xwills planning used: Four LPAs for a Couple — Property & Financial Affairs and Health & Welfare for both partners
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £795 professional fee, plus OPG registration fees
What they wanted Make sure each spouse had a practical legal route for dealing with the other’s finances and welfare if capacity was lost.
What we chose We prepared four LPAs for the couple : a Property & Financial Affairs LPA and a Health & Welfare LPA for Graham, and the same two LPAs for Janet.
Why we chose it Their Wills only operated on death. Marriage did not automatically give either spouse authority to operate the other’s sole accounts, manage investments or make all welfare decisions during lifetime. The LPAs filled the incapacity gap that their Wills could not address.
Important technical point OPG registration fees are additional. The authority available to an attorney depends on the registered LPA, any instructions or preferences included in it, and the particular decision being made.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
Healthy 54-year-old business owner — why we put both LPAs in place before they were needed “Richard”, 54, was fit and working full-time. He owned a small company, had personal investments of about £230,000 and managed most of the household finances. He said he would arrange LPAs later because there was currently “nothing wrong” with him.
Exact Xwills planning used: Both LPAs for one person — Property & Financial Affairs plus Health & Welfare
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £495 professional fee, plus OPG registration fees
What they wanted Keep the household and personal finances manageable if illness or an accident affected his ability to make decisions, and make sure trusted people could deal with welfare decisions if necessary.
What we chose We prepared both types of LPA for Richard while he clearly had capacity: Property & Financial Affairs and Health & Welfare.
Why we chose it An LPA is preventative planning. Waiting until a serious diagnosis or loss of capacity can remove the straightforward option of making one and may leave the family considering a Court of Protection route instead. His business involvement also made continuity of financial decision-making particularly important.
Important technical point A personal Property & Financial Affairs LPA does not automatically solve every company-law or business-authority issue. Business roles, shareholder arrangements and company documents can need separate review.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
£1.4m estate — £325,000 transferred to an Estate Allocation Trust instead of gifting outright “David” and “Karen” had combined assets of around £1.4 million, including property, savings and investments. They wanted to start moving value down to the next generation for Inheritance Tax planning. Their first instinct was to gift property value directly to their adult children, but one child was in an unstable marriage and the other was self-employed and exposed to business risk.
Exact Xwills planning used: Estate Allocation Trust (EAT)
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £2,995 fixed professional fee
What they wanted Begin lifetime succession and Inheritance Tax planning while avoiding an outright transfer that would immediately place a substantial asset in the children’s personal ownership and expose it directly to their future decisions and circumstances.
What we chose We used an Estate Allocation Trust and limited the initial chargeable transfer to £325,000 of property value , subject to confirming that the available Inheritance Tax nil-rate band had not already been used by earlier chargeable lifetime transfers. The transfer was also reviewed for Capital Gains Tax hold-over relief , so that, where the statutory conditions were met and the relief was claimed, the gain could be deferred rather than crystallising immediately.
Why we chose it An outright gift to the children could have been simpler, and a qualifying outright gift may become outside the donor’s estate after the relevant seven-year period. But David and Karen’s concern was not tax alone: they wanted trustee control because of divorce, debt and the risk of the asset being sold or redirected. The EAT allowed the trustees to control when and how beneficiaries could benefit instead of handing the asset over outright.
Important technical point Keeping the initial chargeable transfer within an available £325,000 nil-rate band can mean no immediate lifetime IHT charge, but that does not make the trust tax-free. A lifetime trust transfer is not treated in the same way as an outright potentially exempt transfer. Relevant-property charges, retained-benefit rules, previous transfers and future trustee disposals must all be considered. CGT hold-over relief defers a qualifying gain; it does not erase it.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
Anonymised client example
£2.3m estate — combining outright gifts with an Estate Allocation Trust “Michael” and “Anne” had assets of roughly £2.3 million, including their home, cash and an investment portfolio. They could afford to make substantial lifetime gifts, but one child was buying a first home and another was only two years into a new relationship.
Exact Xwills planning used: Estate Allocation Trust (EAT) for the controlled element, alongside direct lifetime gifts
Current equivalent Xwills fee: £2,995 fixed professional fee for the Estate Allocation Trust
What they wanted Move wealth down a generation and begin reducing future estate exposure without giving every asset outright before they were comfortable with the children’s circumstances.
What we chose We split the planning. Cash they were completely comfortable giving away was gifted outright. For the value where they wanted continuing trustee control over timing and access, we used an Estate Allocation Trust . The trust deed, trustee appointments, beneficiary provisions and Letter of Wishes were coordinated with their wider estate plan.
Why we chose it There was no reason to force every asset through the same structure. Outright gifts were appropriate where Michael and Anne were happy to lose ownership and control permanently. The EAT was used only for the part of the plan where control, relationship risk and beneficiary protection mattered enough to justify the additional trust administration and tax regime.
Important technical point Outright gifts to individuals and transfers into a lifetime trust have different IHT treatment. The familiar seven-year rule does not apply to every trust transfer in the same way. Previous chargeable transfers, retained benefit, CGT and relevant-property charges all need to be reviewed before implementation.
Names, figures and non-material identifying details have been changed. The example reflects the type of planning situation Xwills has dealt with; outcomes depend on the client’s actual circumstances and the law and tax rules applying at the time. Unless a case expressly says “Fee charged at the time”, the fee shown is the current equivalent Xwills fixed fee under our published pricing and may differ from the historic fee charged when the original matter was completed.
No-obligation first conversation
Tell us what you want to achieve You do not need to know the name of the legal document or trust before speaking to us. Explain the family, property or planning issue and we can discuss the relevant options.
