Contesting a will

[Orangeis]

I am absolutely not considering this but a relative is, and I think it's a terrible idea, but if anyone has any experience or advice I'd be grateful.

The will wasn't properly witnessed, the person was housebound so the solicitor attended the home and wrote the will, then posted it. The person signed the will, then when her daughter visited said "take this next door to Janet and John will you and get them to witness it?". The neighbours "witnessed" the signature and the will was returned.

A relative now wants to contest the will based on this, but she was complicit in the false witnessing, and has also begun executing the will (lady died over a year ago), but now wants to contest.

I think it's berserk and if it ever reached court the judge would be bloody furious, but what do you think / know / understand of this situation?

Thanks in advance!

It can be very costly to contest a will and ultimately if the content is what the deceased dictated to the solicitor then that's the part that matters surely.

@TheArtfulScreamer1 I'd completely agree with you, but I don't know how the law would regard the dodgy witnessing. I want to help my relative not go down a very expensive rabbit hole with this.

I know someone who did it. It took years, caused them stress and depression and at the end of it the solicitors had all the money. Their only satisfaction seemed to be that they'd made sure the other party got nothing Seemed a hollow victory to me.

Oh dear. This is a "mad people be mad" kind of situation.
You can gently say what @ancientgran said and suggest they look for previous cases on www.bailii.org or similar to get an idea of what's important. Hopefully that and the first solicitor's consultation will put them off.
But otherwise you've got to stand back and let them fail.
Persuading people is hugely difficult and rarely worth the effort; your words will be taken much more seriously if you just say, "Look Mary, I think this isn't in your interest because .... but you must do what you think is right" and then drop it.

A Will doesn't need the signature to be witnessed in person IF the testator tells the witnesses its her signature.

Proving differently may be impossible, as the main witness is dead.

But if it is proved, distributing an a estate knowing the Will is invalid, would be fraud and i guess probate has been granted.

the costs for contesting a Will is at least 100k (each) if it goes to the High Court

You relative would be an idiot.

The key questions are (a) how different is the provision of the dodgy Will from what will happen if it is deemed invalid - is there an alternative previous Will, or would intestacy rules apply? (b) how much evidence is there that this Will is the genuine wishes of the deceased? It's possible that the deceased was not fully resolved to sign the new Will, and that the solicitor left the document with her in a blank state - it could be that no one alive can prove whether it is truly that the lady signed, and then asked the daughter to take it next-door for signing, or whether the daughter found the document, faked the signature and then took it next door and lied to the neighbours about it, deceiving them into signing. They were very wrong to sign as witnesses to something they did not witness, but did they have any conversation with the deceased to confirm that the new document was actually her own wishes?

to me (not a lawyer) it sounds like the new document could be proven invalid only if the neighbour witnesses admit in court that their signatures were applied incorrectly and they did not see the testatrix sign. Will they confess to that?

She will probably have to step down as executor if she wishes to contest the will.

The poster who said the will doesn't need the signature to be witnessed in person is wrong. The law (Wills Act 1837) requires that witnesses must be present when the will is signed and must have a clear view of the testator signing. The testator must also be present when each witness signs and have a clear view of the witness signing. It is currently also possible to sign and witness a will by video conferencing, but that clearly isn't what happened here.

Taking the will next door to get it witnessed some time after it was signed by people who weren't present is not the correct process. The will is therefore invalid. If the deceased made a previous will, that replaces the invalid will. If there was no previous will, the rules of intestacy apply. In either case, the beneficiaries can, if they wish, enter into a Deed of Variation to effectively replace the provisions of the previous will or the rules of intestacy with the provisions of the invalid will.

The solicitor witnessed it. It's fine and legal

Read the OP. The solicitor did not witness it. Even if they had witnessed it, it is not enough. A will must have two witnesses.

@prh47bridge Yes got that completely wrong, apologises to the OP too.

I misread and thought that the solicitor git it witnessed.

How would they prove the neighbours didnt come to the house to witness it?

If it was drawn up by a solicitor the presumption would be it's been done legally

You can also have errors in wills such as misspelt names and it's the "essence" of the will that matters.

this is the position under English Law.

it might be useful for OP to know that it is different in Scotland. The Wills Act of 1963 applies, with the Requirements of Writing (S) Act 1995 for execution.

while not recommended, it is possible for a testator to sign the will and later declare to the witness that this is their signature, whereupon the witness signs.

Oh, and it is a single witness in Scotland.