BENEFICIARIES of the Will of Monica Hamel-Smith will not get a single cent unless newspaper coverage ceases.

This threat was issued last month by the person responsible for carrying out the wishes of Monica Hamel-Smith when reportedly approached by one of the beneficiaries.

The coverage is said to be “smearing the name” of the devout Roman Catholic family.

Sunday Mirror has been keeping up-to-date with the abject refusal of those entrusted, to execute the Will of first Doris and now Monica Hamel-Smith.

The Will guaranteed her 24 nieces and nephews sums of money and shares within a company upon her death.

The eight children of Raymond Hamel-Smith, however, were denied of receiving any benefits and from sending a representative to sit on the Board of Directors of Flood Limited.

Flood Limited is parent company to six smaller ones in the dynasty: Taud Limited, Fern Limited, Kenjo Limited, COB Limited, Moto Limited and Hamray Limited which was founded by matriarch Doris Hamel-Smith.

Six years have passed since the Will has been read and no settlement can be made to any of the beneficiaries, including children of Raymond Hamel-Smith that had been previously left out from the Trust Fund of their grandmother.

Information reaching this newspaper was on April 6, 2006 a telephone conversation took place between the person responsible for executing the Will and one of Raymond’s daughters who, incidentally, was not one of the original sources of information reaching Mirror.

The daughter, who did not disclose her name, wrote the Mirror.

The daughter was told after inquiring into the status of the Will “until the newspaper articles have stopped I am neither prepared to wind up the estate nor discuss anything to do with it.”

In response, the daughter wrote a terse reminder on April 24 that carrying out the wishes of Doris Hamel-Smith (that is, winding up the Will) was a duty for which the individual is being paid $10,000.

“It is your responsibility to answer my questions.

“Remember you cannot expect to be paid $10,000 and not do anything,” stated the letter.

According to her, there had been many previous letters in which the individual claimed that the distribution of the estate was ready, except for the Flood shares and the accounts.

The letter goes on to say: “You are now telling me that unless the newspaper articles are stopped, no money will be distributed -- Who do you think you are?

“You are not allowed to hold up the distribution of somebody’s estate because of some newspaper articles!

“The Will is a legal document.

“It is not ‘some Hamel-Smith fad that should be torn up and thrown away’.

“You must understand the importance of a legal document, especially those that contain other people’s wishes which must be carried out.”

It further accused the caretaker of the Will of using the estate as “something to do in all your spare time.”

The letter imposed a 14-day time limit within which the person responsible for the Will must reply or legal action will be taken for failure to answer two questions, which the daughter had initially asked namely:

“When and where I can come to collect the rest of my money owing to me from the Estate and my Share Certificate with respect to Flood Limited.”