Is It Easy to Challenge a Will Based On Forgery?

5 October, 2021 4 minutes reading time

Challenging a Will because you believe it’s a forgery isn’t easy. You may think you have solid evidence, but putting your argument together isn’t always straightforward. The recent case of Rainey v Weller tells us why.

Rainey v Weller [2021] EWHC 2206 (CH)

Claims over the validity of any Will invariably raise issues over capacity, undue influence and coercion. Notoriously tricky to prove. But you might think that forgery cases (which are increasingly common) would be less nebulous and more clear-cut.

In Rainey v Weller, the case focussed on establishing the validity of two Wills, purportedly made within a few weeks of each other.

The Background

Dated 9 February 2018, the first Will (the February Will) appointed Anne Rainey, the niece of the deceased widow Brenda Weller, as co-executor and the estate’s sole beneficiary. The second Will, allegedly executed on 5 March 2018 (the March Will), was a homemade Will prepared by Paul, Brenda’s son.

Austin Ryder Solicitors prepared the February Will following a meeting Mrs Weller attended at their offices alone on 2 February 2018.

Brenda attended a meeting at Austin Ryder Solicitors on 2 February 2018, returning to execute the February Will on 9 February 2018. Whilst there, she signed a Lasting Power of Attorney appointing Ann to manage her property and affairs (the LPA). The LPA was completed on 23 February 2018 after Ann and Brenda’s daughter, Paula (the replacement Attorney), also signed. The LPA was registered with the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) in May 2018.

Brenda’s son Paul claimed that his mother had asked him to make the March Will, leaving her entire estate to her ‘favourite grandchildren’ in equal shares. This Will named Paul as Executor, and he claimed that the March Will was correctly witnessed.

After Brenda died, as Executor of the February Will (and witnessed by family members), Ann opened a suitcase left by her Aunt Brenda (the Suitcase). This Suitcase contained sealed envelopes addressed to Toni, Paul’s wife, and Brenda’s grandchildren, each containing £1,000 in cash. The Suitcase also contained some jewellery for the grandchildren and a copy of the February Will. Unfortunately, neither Ann nor Paul knew the Suitcase’s contents until it was opened.

A little later, without telling anyone, Paul applied for a Grant of Probate based on the March Will. A move that prompted Ann to challenge the Will, alleging forgery.

The Challenge

Experts examined the February and March wills, comparing Brenda and Paul’s signatures. Ann’s expert concluded Brenda signed the February will but likely not the March one. Paul’s expert found only “moderate” evidence supporting Brenda’s signature on either will. After reviewing this conflicting expert testimony, hearing from 13 witnesses, and examining Brenda’s solicitor’s will and LPA file, Deputy Master Linwood declared the March will a forgery but validated the February will.

He noted Brenda’s trust in Ann, her niece (appointed Attorney and Executor), further supporting the February will’s legitimacy. Paul lacked solid evidence, such as proof of where he obtained the March will template. The legitimacy of a photo of the March will (allegedly taken on the signing day) was questioned. Texts and witness testimony revealed a lack of trust and estrangement between Paul and Brenda. The court found Paul’s explanation for Brenda’s supposed change of mind so soon after the February will “improbable” and “verging on impossible.”

Conclusion

The deception, conspiracy and family intrigue make this case fascinating. But, from a legal perspective, the forgery claim was not pivotal in the outcome of this case.

The expert evidence was undoubtedly an essential factor in how Deputy Master Linwood reached his decision. Still, his final judgment underlines how factual and documentary evidence plays a central role in determining whether a forgery occurred.

Having a solicitor draft your Will creates a clear, documented record. A lawyer is also responsible for ensuring no undue influence or coercion, confirming your mental capacity, and using clear, unambiguous language.

Our Advice

If you need further information or advice about making a Will or LPA, 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