Another communication from lawyer Torjussen

Another communication from lawyer Torjussen

John Bjarne Grover

The first communication(s) is reproduced in this file ('Communication 2025 with lawyer Torjusen at Centrum Advokatkontor') under this page ('Historic documents'). The gift - said to be from Ragna Grøver - of 1.690.354,50 NOK went into my bank account on 11 february 2026 and was returned to the sender on 23 april 2026 - after I five times had asked the bank to return the money. I discovered the sum on my account in the afternoon 20 february 2026 and spent 90 minutes on the phone trying to get through to the bank (their answerer machine said 'expected waiting time 15 minutes') untill I gave up. The next morning 21 february 2026 I succeeded in getting in contact with them on the phone and I asked them to return the money to the sender, which they agreed to do. And yet more than 2 months elapsed before the money were sent. (I do not want to receive interests on those money for that 2 months interval). I contacted the norwegian financial inspectorate 'Finanstilsynet' on 21 april 2026 and the money were returned on 23 april 2026. It seems that the money were returned to (or via?) lawyer Torjus Torjusen. The gift had been given under the classification 'advance inheritance' (forskudd på arv). Yesterday 30 april 2026 at 9:57 AM (I am born in 1957) the following email from lawyer Torjusen went into my email account, according to the data there:

Det vises til tidligere kontakt. Jeg har registrert at du har tilbakeført arveforskuddet. Jeg legger da til grunn at du rettslig og faktisk har avslått arveforskuddet noe du selvsagt har full rett til.
Basert på sakens historikk antar jeg at du ikke ønsker å motta arv, verken nå eller i fremtiden. Jeg har derfor tillatt meg å lage en ugjenkallelig erklæring om avkall på arv. Ved å signere denne erklæringen, vil du ikke lenger bli kontaktet av familien om arv. Dersom du ikke ønsker å signere, vil familien ved mors bortgang, måtte kontakte deg for å overføre den arven du har krav på. Det er altså kun ved å signere avkallserklæringen, du kan unngå dette. Erklæringen følger vedlagt for elektronisk signering. Du trenger ikke BankID for å signere.
Ta gjerne kontakt hvis noe er uklart, eller du har spørsmål i saken.
Mvh

Advokat Torjus Torjusen

Translation with translate.google.com:

Please refer to previous contact. I have registered that you have returned the inheritance advance. I assume that you have legally and actually refused the inheritance advance, which you are of course fully entitled to.
Based on the history of the case, I assume that you do not wish to receive an inheritance, either now or in the future. I have therefore taken the liberty of making an irrevocable declaration of renunciation of inheritance. By signing this declaration, you will no longer be contacted by the family about the inheritance. If you do not wish to sign, the family will, upon your mother's death, have to contact you to transfer the inheritance to which you are entitled. Therefore, you can only avoid this by signing the renunciation declaration. The declaration is attached for electronic signing. You do not need BankID to sign.
Please contact us if anything is unclear, or if you have any questions about the case.
Yours sincerely

The letter contains even this time some potential grammatical errors:

1) "Ved å signere denne erklæringen" - most norwegians would probably prefer "Ved å signere på denne erklæringen"

2) "...signere, vil familien ved mors bortgang, måtte..." - many would perhaps have preferred "...signere vil familien ved mors bortgang måtte...".

3) "Det er altså kun ved å signere avkallserklæringen, du kan unngå dette" - this would normally be classified as an error and then it should expectedly have been "Det er altså kun ved å signere (på) avkallserklæringen[,] at du kan unngå dette".

I notice the 'at' (= 'that') and the 'advance' inheritance. See also the form 'attpåklatt', also in bokmål, which in swedish is 'sladdbarn', while 'sladd' in norwegian is used about deleted or covered parts of a document (or, say, a film) subjected to censorship. I notice 'finans-til-synet' in rewrite form 'non-swede-til-synet', like 'minstepensjon' (= 'minimum pensjon') vs. 'instep-mention' etc. My pension (which I think is rather close to what in Norway is 'minimum pension' by 'full opptjeningstid') has through many years been paid through Nordea Bank and forwarded from there to my bank in Austria - cp. the 'Nord Stream disruption'?

Advance inheritance is a gift which is subtracted from a future inheritance. It is not an inheritance - it is a normal gift. I cannot on the historic background accept a gift from Ragna Grøver.

What Ragna Grøver does with her money is of course none of my business.

Any orientation about potential future inheritance can go via lawyer.

'Mvh' (at the end of the lawyer's letter) is probably an abbreviation for 'Med vennlig hilsen' = 'with friendly greeting[s]'.
'E[r] de[t] en[d]eli[g] [g]ilsen'? = 'is it finally [g]ilsen'?

Joshua Robison died on 22 february 2026
Michael Tilson Thomas died on 22 april 2026

I take the communication from Torjusen as a chance to not answer and then things fall back onto how it was before the transference.