Morning:
8°c
A rioter who terrorised diners with an axe at McDonald's has been jailed for five years and three months - one of the toughest sentences for last summer's disturbances
More...
Millionaire's widow sues her own children - aged three and one - after husband dies without leaving a will
Last updated at 12:26pm on 02.07.08
Taryn Dielle is set to sue her children for her husband's millions
The widow of a millionaire businessman is suing her own children - aged one and three - over her husband's fortune.
Actress Taryn Dielle, 42, has launched the action because she claims the law does not let her have enough of the money to look after daughter Molly, three, and son Maximillian.
Her husband, Mark Butler, died last year from cancer aged 45 leaving an estate worth £2,231,201.
However, he failed to leave a will, meaning his wife is entitled to just £125,000.
The rest of his assets will go to the children while Miss Dielle is entitled to just £50,000 in interest a year.
Named as Mrs Butler in the High Court papers, she claims the law concerning those who die intestate does not provide enough money for her or her family.
As such she has launched the legal action against her own children.
They will be represented by another relative at the hearing in London's High Court.
However, Miss Dielle is also suing her cousin Nicola Pritchard who is listed on the court papers as co-administrator of Mr Butler's estate.
It is understood that Miss Pritchard applied to become an administrator as she stands to benefit from the will financially.
Yesterday Miss Dielle would not comment on the case.
However, a friend claimed that the sometime television and radio actress was 'forced' into taking the action by 'outside influences'.
The friend said: 'Taryn is trying to protect her children's interest and the estate from someone close to her who is meddling in her affairs.
'The term "suing the children" makes it sound like she is fighting against them for the estate.
'This could not be further from the truth. She is trying to protect them and their interests.
'I can't believe she is having to go through this and I don't understand why the law is tilted this way.'
Mr Butler was one of three children to former High Court judge Sir Gerald Butler QC, who chaired the inquiry into the King's Cross underground fire.
He married Miss Dielle five years ago and the couple lived with their children at a £1.5million, three-storey townhouse in the Notting Hill area of London.
His wife was born Taryn Donnette Loraine Boxall, but adopted the stage surname Dielle by combining her second and third initials.
She has acted in numerous small theatre productions and appeared on television and radio.
In 1992 she played a 'tart' in the series 'Allo 'Allo and four years ago appeared in a TV advertisement for Robinsons drinks.
In recent years, she has dedicated herself to looking after her two children.
When approached at her detached, five-bedroomed home in Norbiton, Surrey, last night Miss Pritchard refused to comment.
Reader views (4)
This kind of case is the result of the outdated provision made for a widow under the intestacy laws if she has children. She gets only £125,000 outright (plus personal belongings) and a life interest in half the remainder. The children get half the capital outright (at 18) which will have a very adverse effect on the family for inheritance tax - they will pay about £295,200 of unnecessary tax! In effect the bulk of the family capital will be tied up till the children reach the age of 18. That's also a problem, as experience shows that 18 is too young an age for the children to receive substantial sums outright.
The course she is taking of making a claim under the Family Provision Act 1975 is the right legal step for her to take. She has a right to reasonable provision out of his estate which is comparable to what she would have got on a divorce, if not more. The problem arises when interfering family members decide to make a fight "on behalf of" the infant children, for whatever reason. There will be lots of unnecessary costs. Why didn't he make a Will? It's not a case where he made a Will and cut her out. It's just neglect. The law of intestacy needs radical overhaul. My sympathy is entirely with this unfortunate woman who will be enmeshed in the legal system for months if not years.
- Robert Craig, London, England, 26/08/2008 03:19
Report abuse
I agree it was very irresponsible not to have made a will nor to have made proper provision for the maintenance of his children during their infancy. Cancer normally involves a period of illness and treatment before the patient dies. During that period he should have been advised to make a will and the consequences of his not doing so.
However, £50,000 interest p.a. does not actually go very far if it is (1) reduced by 40% income tax, (2) possibly needed to cover mortgage repayments (these may have been covered by a mortgage protection life policy) and (3) to enable his widow to continue to maintain the two children in the lifestyle and standard of living to which they were accustomed. Probably that would have involved paying for 13 years of private education until they were 18 and that does not come cheap these days.
I therefore support his widow's efforts to release capital from his estate before the children attain the age of 18 so that it can be used for their education and maintenance. That is only right and necessary and perhaps the law of intestacy needs to be reviewed in this respect.
It is unfortunate that so much IHT will be payable on the estate passing to the children rather than their stepmother, but that was a matter of choice for the deceased to decide in a will.
What I do not understand is in what conceivable circumstances a cousin can claim to benefit from or to administer an estate which has a surviving widow and 2 surviving children?
- Philip, La Massana, Andorra, 14/07/2008 11:24
Report abuse
Emma, you sound very narrow minded. She is raising two children (his children) and if he were alive there is no doubt that she would have access to much more money.
I don't understand why people (especially people with money) don't make wills. The guy knew there was a chance he'd die so its quite stupid of him not to have made a will to protect his family. Even if he had wanted the wife to have no share he could have stated that in a will instead of leaving an estate to pay thousands in tax to the Government because he didn't make a will.
- Louise, Essex, 02/07/2008 11:58
Report abuse
£50k in interest! I think she will survive. Maybe it is because she is a money grabbing so and so that the husband didn't leave her everything.
- Emma, Nunhead, London, 02/07/2008 10:28
Report abuse
