header-logo header-logo

The ticking time bomb

14 February 2008 / Paul Sharpe
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Regulatory , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Paul Sharpe bemoans the lack of regulation in willwriting

To regulate, or not to regulate, that is the question—or at least it should be. Willwriting is a huge responsibility, the level of accuracy and clarity of a will making the difference between a deceased person’s last wishes being enacted, or their loved ones being caught up in years of expensive legal wrangling.

Unfortunately, however, in a world where even the sale of a £10.99 travel insurance policy has to be regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA), a will, potentially dictating what happens to six figure sums of money, can be drawn up by anyone. If a consumer approaches the milkman, or the student who flunked all their exams and needs some fast cash, they will find someone able to draw up a will for them without any fear of the law hitting them hard. This is the sorry state of affairs existing in willwriting. Fundamentally, those professionals who wish to distance themselves from the incompetent, fraudulent and fly-by-night operators only have
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll