header-logo header-logo

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

The ticking time bomb

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll