The Government Legal Department (GLD) has confirmed the reinstatement of the Bona Vacantia list with restricted access to data, following the allegations of its use by criminals to claim the estates of those with no heirs.
In a press release published on gov.uk, GLD said a review had found “no evidence the Bona Vacantia unclaimed estates list has been the source of fraud” – but concluded it would be “prudent” to restrict access to the data to “protect the list’s integrity”.
The Bona Vacantia list, a list of all unclaimed estates, was suspended in July last year after allegations it was being used for criminal purposes. A little known fraud in which criminals were suspected of using the list to identify vacant and unclaimed estates, producing fraudulent wills and submitting them to be awarded grant of probate, was the subject of investigative reporter Sue Mitchell’s Shadow World BBC podcast series.
In the episode ‘Grave Robbers’, with the help of probate research firms Anglia Research and Fraser and Fraser, Mitchell told the stories of several individuals whose details first appeared on the Bona Vacantia list, only for their assets to be claimed in unusual circumstances shortly after.
The fraud was initially uncovered in the aftermath of the move to online applications after the COVID-19 pandemic and following the closure of probate offices across the country. Both Peter Turvey of Anglia Research and Neil Fraser of Fraser and Fraser have been raising concerns since 2024.
Moving applications online removed a “key safeguard” in the verification process, Neil Fraser, partner at Fraser and Fraser said at the time, as the registrar in local probate offices would previously inspect the original will, verify identity and ask probing questions that often exposed forged signatures or implausible stories. When this step was removed, fraudsters could exploit the postal route, submitting photocopied ID from anywhere in the world without meeting a registrar.
“There’s a slackness in the online system which the fraudsters have manipulated to their benefit,” Turvey said. “This has been a new type of scam that we haven’t seen before.”
Although the GLD has said its review identified no fraud, it is understood this relates specifically to the Unclaimed Estates list rather than the wider probate system, where Fraser believes there are still sizeable flaws. “This feels like a sticking plaster on a much deeper wound,” he said.
“Fraser and Fraser, alongside the BBC and others, identified more than a dozen estates where fraudulent wills were used to claim properties; every one of those cases appeared on the BV list. As I have always said, the real issue isn’t the list itself; it’s the lack of rigorous checks within the HMCTS probate system.
“The current application process for a Grant of Letters of Administration still has no requirement for the applicant to show ID, no restrictions on overseas applications, and no obligation to file estate accounts.
“These loopholes remain wide open. Fraudsters know this. Trimming a spreadsheet on GOV.UK won’t close those gaps.”
The cutting back of the detail on the list reverts to a similar format seen some 15 years ago, which Fraser doesn’t believe will present a problem for probate research businesses. However, he warned it will limit the ability of members of the public to properly review the list and conduct verifications or family checks, ultimately impacting legitimate beneficiaries.
Luke Jones of Blanchard’s Inheritance shares Fraser’s concerns. He said:
“The list is restricted, in as much as the details being shared with the general public has been reduced to the bare minimum, with a real lack of information it is going to make handling claims a little more challenging, but we are relieved that it has returned in any capacity.”
Fraser is calling for government to strengthen the systems and processes within estate administration and create a transparent, verifiable and fraud-resistant system that protects both beneficiaries and public confidence in the rule of law.
He concluded:
“The core vulnerability isn’t the publication of data; it’s the absence of checks within the probate process itself.
