The future of will disputes part three: challenging validity based on forgery and fraud

When a loved one dies, the terms of their will can sometimes surprise surviving family members, with unexpected beneficiaries or unequal distribution of the estate. In England and Wales, individuals have the freedom to leave their estate to anyone, with no legal obligation to provide for specific family members. Even if the will seems unfair, the law generally upholds the testator's wishes, if the will has been validly made. However, certain family members and dependants may be able to bring a claim against the estate (under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975), if adequate provision has not been made for them under a will.
 

Concerns about a will's validity may arise if it is suspected to be forged or obtained through fraud. Such a will can be challenged and, if successful, declared invalid, with the estate distributed according to a previous valid will (if one exists) or under intestacy rules.

Forgery

The validity of a will can be contested on the basis of forgery, if for instance the signature alone or the entirety of the will were forged. While there is a presumption that a will which appears to be in regular form and properly executed is valid, if evidence of forgery is presented, that presumption can be rebutted

In 2024, Leigh Voysey was found guilty of fraud and forgery for creating a fake will to claim the £4 million estate of her former headmistress, Maureen Renny, in a case that attracted significant media attention. The forged will, which purported to leave the entire estate to Ms Voysey, was claimed to supersede Mrs Renny’s earlier will that included legacies to many well-known charities. The forged will was "witnessed" by two of Ms Voysey’s friends. Her conviction in the criminal trial enabled the beneficiaries of Mrs Renny’s genuine will to obtain summary judgment in the High Court, upholding the validity of the original will without a trial.

In this case, the beneficiaries were able to avoid the further expense and stress of a fully contested civil trial based on the criminal conviction. However, a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for challenging a will based on forgery or fraud, particularly where there is expert and other evidence which indicates that, more likely than not, it has happened. In our experience, the risk of the allegation being found proven in civil proceedings can be a deterrent to an alleged wrongdoer defending the claim, given the additional risk of criminal proceedings.

Fraud

If a will does not reflect the true and freely expressed wishes of the testator, it may be contested on the grounds of fraud. This could occur if a bequest was made based on misrepresentations, the content was amended without their knowledge before the will was signed, or if a subsequent will has been fraudulently suppressed or destroyed. Challenging a will solely on the grounds of fraud can be difficult, as the deceased, being the primary witness, cannot provide testimony.

Evidence

Allegations of fraud and forgery are serious and must be carefully considered with reasonable grounds supporting them, before being made. This is not only because such claims can cause hostility and potential for irretrievable damage to family relationships, but also because pursuit of such allegations without reasonable basis can have cost implications.

The importance of credible evidence before making a fraud or forgery claim is highlighted in the recent case of Packer v Packer [2025]. Stephen Packer’s widow, Debra, claimed he died intestate, while his sister, Lynn, asserted that he had executed valid wills in 2017 and 2022, appointing her as executrix. These documents were missing. Lynn argued for the validity of the 2022 will, while Debra initially alleged the wills were fraudulently created by Lynn. Metadata evidence provided in respect of the two wills lead Debra to retract her fraud claim, acknowledging there was no basis for it. She applied to the court to amend her pleading and sought costs for this application. HHJ Matthews ruled that Debra was not excused from the general rule of paying costs for the amendment, referencing the Chancery Guide at para 4.9: "A party should not make allegations of fraud or dishonesty unless there is credible material to support the contentions."

Red flags

While not conclusive evidence, some points to consider which in our experience may indicate that the validity of a will requires further investigation are as follows:

• Does the signature match the known signature of the testator?
• Are the beneficiaries unexpected, especially if they replace close family or long-standing beneficiaries?
• Are there no records with the deceased’s solicitor about this version of the will?
• Are the witnesses unknown to the deceased, hard to trace or reluctant to engage?
• Does the will conflict with the deceased’s known wishes or earlier wills?
• Was there no knowledge of the will until after the testator’s death?
• Was the testator vulnerable in some way, or were there concerns regarding other financial abuse during their lifetime?

Acting quickly is important in cases involving fraud and forgery, so that original documents can be preserved for forensic analysis, witnesses (if any) can be contacted while their memories are fresh, and the solicitor files or digital records can be reviewed promptly.

Law Commission consultation

The recent Law Commission consultation on modernising the law relating to wills included recommendations that, the court should have power to dispense with the formality requirements for a will to be valid, if they are satisfied that the deceased intended to make a will. In addition, they recommend that electronic wills should be capable of being formally valid on an equal basis to paper wills. It is likely that those intent on engaging in fraud will find new avenues to do so if the rules are changed. However, if an electronic system is sufficiently robust to provide conclusive proof of the identity of the testator, this could assist in reducing the uncertainty in some cases.

Conclusion

A suspicious will can cause confusion and distress. If there are genuine concerns about forgery or fraud, the law allows for such a will to be challenged, but sufficient evidence is crucial. Early preservation of documents, especially those with the testator’s handwriting and signatures, is vital. Contemporaneous evidence, along with expert and witness testimony, strengthens the case. With the right advice and evidence, a fraudulent will can be set aside, ensuring the deceased’s wishes are respected.

About the author

Lavanya is an Associate who specialises in trust, estate and Court of Protection disputes. Her experience in the field of estate disputes includes challenges to the validity of wills (including claims based on a lack of testamentary capacity, want of knowledge and approval, fraud, forgery and undue influence), and claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.