Siblings Fight Over Fabricated Copy Will | Curtis Parkinson
Fabricated Copy Will

Siblings Fight Over Fabricated Copy Will

4 February, 2021 3 minutes reading time


Photocopied Will: Face v Cunningham & Anor [2020] EWHC 3119

A recent contentious probate claim brought by Rebeca Face against the Estate of her late father, Donald Face, was dismissed by High Court Judge David Hodge QC as ‘totally without merit’, based on a ‘fabricated document’. Rebeca’s siblings argued that the photocopied Will submitted by their sister was a forgery and that their father had died without leaving a Will.

Context

Mr Face, who died in October 2017, had three children: Rebeca, Rowena and Richard. An argument started when Rebeca claimed that the photocopy of Will she had found in their father’s things (dated 7th September 2017) left everything to her. It also named her as the sole Executor. She insisted that she could not find the original Will or any record of where it was stored.

Rowena (Cunningham) and Richard (Kaethner) rejected Rebeca’s claim, believing she had fabricated the 2017 copy of the Will, helped by her partner and the two so-called witnesses. Assuming their father had died without leaving a Will (intestate), the estate should be distributed in line with the Intestacy Rules and divided equally among his three children.

The Burden of Proof in Cases of Forgery

Besides establishing whether the photocopied Will was valid, one of the legal questions raised by this case centred on whose responsibility it was to prove the Will was a forgery. Was the Claimant’s job (Rebeca) to prove it was authentic? Or did the responsibility rest with her siblings, Rowena and Richard, who believed she had fabricated the copy?

The Outcome

Judge Hodge wholeheartedly rejected Rebeca’s claim, remarking that the evidence was ‘inherently incredible’ and a job of pure fiction. He recommended that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) consider bringing fraud charges against Rebeca, her partner and the attesting witnesses.

Importantly, contrary to accepted practice, the Judge ruled that when alleging forgery of a Will, the burden of proof rested with those applying to confirm the document’s validity. In this case, Rebeca. Her responsibility was to prove to the Court that the Will followed regulations set out under Section 9 of the Wills Act 1837.

Rebeca weakened her case further by her trial document’s chaotic organisation. To quote the Judge, the bundles, spanning 19 lever arch files, were “a complete nightmare”.

Our Advice

First, this case emphasises the importance of locating the original will. While copies can be valid in some situations, they must withstand scrutiny.

Also, this case demonstrates the risks of handling legal matters without professional help. Ms. Face’s actions led to significant costs, stress, and potential criminal charges. Specialist legal advice at the outset would likely have discouraged her from using such an unreliable document.

Finally, Donald Face could have saved everyone time and money by creating a Will. While professional Will preparation might cost more upfront, it ensures your wishes are properly documented and significantly reduces the risk of family disputes and litigation.

If you would like further information or advice, please contact us. We’re here to help.

Please note that all views, comments or opinions expressed are for information only and do not constitute and should not be interpreted as being comprehensive or as giving legal advice. No one should seek to rely or act upon, or refrain from acting upon, the views, comments or opinions expressed herein without first obtaining specialist, professional or independent advice. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, Curtis Parkinson cannot be held liable for any errors, omissions or inaccuracies.

Partnerships & Accreditations
Member of the World Association of Notaries Certified Cyber Essentials