It would seem natural for this to happen.
Neville & June would want to ensure some money is left to a spouse.
Neville wanting June to be able to continue living a comfortable life. Either still inside WHF, or ensure she had the resources to buy somewhere smaller without it harming the family business.
June would want the same for Neville and ensure he has the finances to continue managing WHF.
The second spouse to die, would then leave everything they had left to Jeremy, Sheila and the twins. Unless they chose otherwise, which according to Mary Mugford is quite possible. June considering giving the twins a greater share of her will.
Jeremy certainly would not take over the running of WHF upon June's death. He testified in court that he would have to continue working on the farm until Neville's death in order to do this.
If Neville died first, he may have given control of WHF to June. Knowing that June would find a suitable farm manager to manage everything. Neville said Jeremy had no business sense.
Both Neville and June were 61. So quite possible one or both of them would live for several more years. Jeremy, Sheila and the twins would not have benefited fully until both parents died. Although Sheila and the twins were already benefiting greatly with thousands being spent on them every week.
In Sheila's case, both parents may have considered it better that she was not given a lump sum. And that she was managed as before. The same with Jeremy, who would have abandoned farm life if he received a lump sum after the first relative died.
Do people agree that Jeremy may not have seen any light at the end of the tunnel. Even after the natural death of both parents ?
