header-logo header-logo

20 February 2013
Issue: 7549 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Stamp of authority for will-writers

But estate administration excluded from statutory regulation

Moves to make will-writing a reserved activity do not go far enough to protect the public from fraud and incompetence, say will-writers.

Consumers often suffer problems such as high pressure sales tactics and poorly drafted wills, and problems usually only come to light after someone has died. By then, it is very difficult to put matters right.

The Legal Services Board (LSB) recommended to the Lord Chancellor last week that will-writing should become a reserved (or regulated) activity. However, the recommendation does not extend to estate administration.

The Society of Will Writers said it was “disappointed” as it had “long identified and reported the fact that many of the cases identified as poor wills was due more to poor or fraudulent estate administration than to the actual quality of the will”. It called on the LSB to “look again” at estate administration.

The Institute of Professional Willwriters (IPW), which has campaigned for more than 20 years for will-writing to be regulated, launched a voluntary code of practice for will-writers in 2010, but only a minority of practitioners joined the scheme.

It warned in a statement that omitting estate administration, which involved handling a deceased person’s money and assets, posed a “huge risk” to consumers since sums often amounting to hundreds of thousands of pounds were “susceptible to loss due to fraud or theft” during the process.

Alan Kershaw, chair of ILEX professional standards, says: “It is likely that public and consumer protection will be compromised if the result is that less competent and professional providers shift to estate administration—the part of the process which is most profitable, and where the need for client protection measures is greatest.” 

In its announcement, the LSB said it had “considered carefully the reported risk of fraud in estate administration” but concluded that “statutory regulation would not be effective in preventing what amounts to criminal behaviour”.

Writing for this week’s NLJ, Paul Sharpe, the Chairman of IPW says: “I know many, many
will-writing professionals who are desperate for the services that they provide to become regulated. Not only will that see off the cowboys and the incompetent but it will enable them to stand out in the market with the credibility that they deserve.”

Issue: 7549 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll