A simple witnessing error on a will has resulted in leading charities losing a £1 million inheritance, while a director of the will-writing service involved received half of the wealth, as reported by The Times.
Rosemary Hill, a retired doctor, used Legal Love Letters to draft a new will just days before her death, intending to leave the bulk of her estate to Médecins Sans Frontières, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI), Dogs Trust, and Battersea Dogs & Cats Home. However, due to an error in witnessing her signature, the charities were excluded, with half of the estate instead going to one of Hill’s goddaughters, who is a director at the will-writing company.
The affected charities have filed a professional liability claim against the company, which is officially registered as Will & Probate Company. The business, based in Carshalton, South London, is owned by Cheryl Penry and markets itself as “Britain’s best-loved will and probate company”.
Penry, 61, was a friend of Hill, who was unmarried and had no children. In 2014, Penry prepared a will in which the majority of Hill’s estate was left to two goddaughters, including Nicole McFie, who is now identified as a director of Legal Love Letters.
Four years later, Hill decided to revise her will, allocating £51,000 to various friends and godchildren – including McFie – and leaving the remainder to the four charities. Médecins Sans Frontières was to receive half of the amount, the RNLI a quarter, Dogs Trust 20%, and the remainder was to go to Battersea Dogs & Cats Home. McFie and another director of the will-writing company were named as executors and trustees.
However, a critical procedural error rendered the new will invalid. Penry visited Hill at her Sutton home and signed as a witness. Instead of having a second witness sign in Hill’s presence, Penry took the document back to her office, where a member of staff signed it—without Hill being present. This mistake meant the will was legally invalid.
Hill passed away in November 2018, just days after signing the will. Because of the improper witnessing, probate was granted on the previous 2014 will, meaning the charities received nothing. Instead, half of the estate was inherited by McFie under the old will.
The charities argue that Penry should have either been accompanied by a second witness during her visit to Hill’s home or should have asked a neighbour or nearby individual to sign the document in Hill’s presence.
Jessica Jamieson, a partner at the law firm Cripps, commented on the case, saying:
“Will writing may seem simple, but mistakes can be costly. A will that is unclear, outdated, or incorrectly executed can lead to disputes, unintended outcomes, or even be ruled invalid.”
She added that the case highlights the urgent need for stricter regulation of will-writing services in England and Wales. Unlike solicitors, will writers are not required to hold specific legal qualifications, raising concerns over the risk of errors that could have devastating consequences.
The charities’ legal claim against Legal Love Letters is ongoing, as they seek to recover the inheritance that was meant to support their causes.
2 responses
My view is that because of how charities aggressively litigate wills and argue about costs and refuse to mediate or resolve issues in a meaningful way that it’s better to make lifetime gifts to charity and execute a will to make provision for family and friends.
Not every charity is aggressive in terms of litigation, and suggesting mediation is usually very high on the list of approaches taken. If a will makes a bequest to a charity (and as they invariably have no government support) surely they owe it to their supporters to defend an interest in a will, even if it ultimately goes to court? The wishes of the deceased must also be defended, and a charity cannot simply step away if their interest is challenged or – in this case – where a probate firm gets it wrong, to their own benefit!