Daft question number 5

[Alan Crowder]

OK i know you can create your own will and it should be fine in law, as
one who simply has a house with a wife and we want to leave everything
we have to in the first instance each other, but if we both perish in
one go our daughter gets the lot whats the easiest way to create such a
will and it be correct?

No shares, no other rubbish at all to cloud the issue.

Thanks
Alan

--

[Nightjar]

It is probably advisable to put in a provision that if your wife
survives you by 30 days, then she inherits, otherwise your daughter
inherits. Otherwise, you could end up with a legal wrangle over exactly
which of you died first in, say, a car accident and, therefore, in which
order your wills take effect. However, if you really want to be sure
that the will is correct, get it done professionally.

Colin Bignell

[Big Les Wade]

Alan Crowder <Alan.C...@pharm.ox.ac.uk> posted

Use the model will given in the Consumer Society's book "Wills &
probate". Essentially it says, I give my wife everything if she survives
me by at least 30 days, but otherwise I give it all to my daughter.

It's actually more important to get the attestation clause right than
the main text of the will. The probate registry (who are the usual
source of nuisance) don't really care about the text of it, and if your
wife's the sole executor and sole beneficiary then there aren't going to
be any disputes about the text either.

--
Les

[The Todal]

If the two of you die in the same accident, the older is deemed to
pre-decease the younger. So if your wife is younger than you, all your
goods go to your wife and then go according to her own will.

I think anyone can write their own will, provided it is a simple matter
of leaving all your estate to your spouse and in default of that, your
children in equal shares. A precedent can be purchased from a stationers
or from Amazon. It is vital to have your signature witnessed by two
witnesses present at the same time.

If it is more complicated than that, I'd be inclined to go to a
solicitor. Unless, of course, I figure that when I'm dead it won't much
matter to me and it might be fun to watch from the afterlife while my
greedy family squabble over the spoils. Dickens jokes in one of his
books about how lawyers never (or rarely) make wills. It's probably
true. They resent paying another lawyer and keep procrastinating till
it's too late.

[Peter Crosland]

On 07/05/2013 14:45, Alan Crowder wrote:

Get a solicitor, not a will writer, to do it for you. It should cost
less than £100 and is good insurance that it will be done correctly.
Also the solicitor will store the will securely for you without extra
charge.

--
Peter Crosland g6...@yahoo.co.uk

[steve robinson]

Plus if it goes pearshaped you have redress, anyone can set up as a
will writer

[Stuart Bronstein]

August West <aug...@kororaa.com> wrote:

> The law presumes that the younger survices the elder in such a
> circumstance.
>
> The reason older wills had the 30 day survival clause was
> because of inheritance tax issues, not survivorship.

But if spouses don't have the same ultimate disposition provisions in
their wills (e.g. if the other spouse doesn't survive [and they have
no children, or have children from prior marriages] his will says
property goes to his heirs and her will says property goes to her
heirs) a survivorship provision can be helpful.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Stuart Bronstein]

The Todal <deadm...@beeb.net> wrote:

> Dickens jokes in one of his
> books about how lawyers never (or rarely) make wills. It's
> probably true. They resent paying another lawyer and keep
> procrastinating till it's too late.

When I was in law school, one of my professors kept a roll of butcher
paper on his desk. Since holographic wills are valid in California,
from time to time he'd rip off another piece of paper and write a new
will or codicile for himself. He had a drawer full of them.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[polygonum]

Quite how would you achieve that redress? Most pear-shaped wills are
surely only found out not to be apple-shaped when someone reads and
attempts to execute them? Mostly that occurs when you are no longer in a
position to ...

--
Rod

[steve robinson]

For a start your estate can sue the solicitors who will carry
proffesional indemnity insurance , you have the law society
too

Will writers are not legally trained do not have to carry liability or
professional indemnity cover and do not have the backing of the law
society

Wills can be extremely complicated documents written incorrectly they
can have a devestating effect upon the estate value after tax

[Stuart Bronstein]

"steve robinson" <st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote

> Wills can be extremely complicated documents written incorrectly
> they can have a devestating effect upon the estate value after
> tax

Wills seem so easy but are potentially much more complicated than it
seems. I've even seen lawyers who drafted wills as a one-off really
screw them up.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Paul Rudin]

polygonum <rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> writes:


> Quite how would you achieve that redress?

Maybe: you let the beneficiaries know what your intentions are. Then if
a solicitor is negligent in preparing the will appropriately the
beneficiaries might have claim against the solicitor.

See e.g. White v Jones and Ross v Caunters.

[steve robinson]

Thats the problem with will writing services, a little knowledge is a
dangerous thing

[polygonum]

I recently had my own will done by a solicitor in order, hopefully, to
avoid any issues. I appreciate the points you raise.

I thought we had a thread recently where the existence of the estate as
a legal entity was debated. Is it indeed the case that the estate can
itself sue solicitors?

--
Rod

[Stuart Bronstein]

August West <aug...@kororaa.com> wrote:

> Stuart Bronstein wrote:
>>
>> When I was in law school, one of my professors kept a roll of
>> butcher paper on his desk. Since holographic wills are valid
>> in California, from time to time he'd rip off another piece of
>> paper and write a new will or codicile for himself. He had a
>> drawer full of them.
>

> Scotland is similar. Any writing clearly expressing a
> testamentary instruction can be considered as valid testementary
> writing, even without formal writing or even witnesses. In one
> case, a holograph letter, simply signed "mum", was held to be a
> valid will, as that was -was the testatrix's usual signature in
> the circmstance (Rhodes v Peterson 1971 SC 56).

I once had a California holographic will admitted to probate in
England, on the grounds that it was valid where it was created. I
imagine that means that anyone in England who visits Scotland can
create a holographic will for himself on that trip, and it will be
valid when and where it is needed.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Nightjar]

On 07/05/2013 17:05, August West wrote:

>
> The entity calling itself Nightjar wrote:
>>
>> On 07/05/2013 14:45, Alan Crowder wrote:
>>> OK i know you can create your own will and it should be fine in law, as
>>> one who simply has a house with a wife and we want to leave everything
>>> we have to in the first instance each other, but if we both perish in
>>> one go our daughter gets the lot whats the easiest way to create such a
>>> will and it be correct?
>>>
>>> No shares, no other rubbish at all to cloud the issue.
>>
>> It is probably advisable to put in a provision that if your wife
>> survives you by 30 days, then she inherits, otherwise your daughter
>> inherits. Otherwise, you could end up with a legal wrangle over
>> exactly which of you died first in, say, a car accident and,
>> therefore, in which order your wills take effect.
>

> The law presumes that the younger survices the elder in such a
> circumstance.

Which could have been interesting had I married the girl next door. We
were both born on the same day and I think only our mothers knew, or
cared, which of us was a few hours older.

Colin Bignell

[Stuart Bronstein]

Nightjar <c...@insert.my.surname.here.me.uk> wrote:

>> The law presumes that the younger survices the elder in such a
>> circumstance.
>
> Which could have been interesting had I married the girl next
> door. We were both born on the same day and I think only our
> mothers knew, or cared, which of us was a few hours older.

Your birth certificate doesn't give the time of birth?

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Nightjar]

I thought that was only in Scotland.

Colin Bignell

[Man at B&Q]

In such a simple case, why?

MBQ

[Peter Crosland]

Because it may appear on the face of it that may not be the case. Using
a properly qualified solicitor should ensure that the many potential
pitfalls are avoided. The solicitor will ask the client a number of
detailed questions to de sure the client is properly advised. It really
is cheap insurance to be sure your heirs will not end up with a
complicated legal wrangle on their hands. At the most basic level it
would be wise to allow for the possibility of all three people being
killed simultaneously and the consequences of that. Provision should be
made for the estate to go to a charity in such circumstances otherwise
it could all end up in the Treasury's hands.


--
Peter Crosland g6...@yahoo.co.uk

[Janet]

In article <9f86d831-861c-4101-b071-f4cfa4258f06
@qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, manat...@hotmail.com says...

Because lives often change in ways that might not occur to a layman at
the time of writing his own will.

Provision should be made in case the daughter predeceases her parents.
The grandparents might decide what and when they want any
grandchildren to inherit.In case the daughter predeceases with no
issue,the parents wills need to name some other beneficiary, such as a
favourite charity or dear friend.

Janet.

[Man at B&Q]

On May 8, 1:25 pm, Janet <h...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> In article <9f86d831-861c-4101-b071-f4cfa4258f06

> @qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, manatba...@hotmail.com says...

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 7, 4:55 pm, Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On 07/05/2013 14:45, Alan Crowder wrote:
>
> > > > OK i know you can create your own will and it should be fine in law, as
> > > > one who simply has a house with a wife and we want to leave everything
> > > > we have to in the first instance each other, but if we both perish in
> > > > one go our daughter gets the lot whats the easiest way to create such a
> > > > will and it be correct?
>
> > > > No shares, no other rubbish at all to cloud the issue.
>
> > > Get a solicitor, not a will writer, to do it for you. It should cost
> > > less than £100 and is good insurance that it will be done correctly.
> > > Also the solicitor will store the will securely for you without extra
> > > charge.
>
> > In such a simple case, why?
>
>   Because lives often change in ways that might not occur to a layman at
> the time of writing his own will.

In which case you should make a new will.

>  Provision should be made in case the daughter predeceases her parents.

In which case you should make a new will.

>   The grandparents might decide what and when they want any
> grandchildren to inherit.In case the daughter predeceases with no
> issue,the parents wills need to name some other beneficiary, such as a
> favourite charity or dear friend.

There was no mention of grandchildren.

MBQ

[RobertL]

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 1:25:01 PM UTC+1, Janet wrote:

> The grandparents might decide what and when they want any
> grandchildren to inherit.In case the daughter predeceases with no
> issue,the parents wills need to name some other beneficiary, such as a
> favourite charity or dear friend.

Does the Duchy Lancaster get the money if all the named beneficiaries predecease the testator?

Robert

[RobertL]

not yet perhaps, but the will should be written in case some arrive later or indeed in case some exist at the time of death 'en ventre sa mere'.

Robert

[Francis Davey]

Le mercredi 8 mai 2013 14:45:03 UTC+1, RobertL a écrit :
> Does the Duchy Lancaster get the money if all the named beneficiaries predecease the testator?
>

No, there'd be a partial intestacy and the normal rules of intestate succession would apply. Of course it might well be there's no-one around to take under those rules and then the estate would fall into bona vacantia. The Duchy of Lancaster being one of 3 possible places that might end up.

In England of course....

Francis

[Chris R]

>
>
> "Man at B&Q" wrote in message
> news:6b37e6ed-1f11-4558...@oy9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...

>
> On May 8, 1:25 pm, Janet <h...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > In article <9f86d831-861c-4101-b071-f4cfa4258f06
> > @qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, manatba...@hotmail.com says...
> > > On May 7, 4:55 pm, Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > On 07/05/2013 14:45, Alan Crowder wrote:

> > > > Get a solicitor, not a will writer, to do it for you. It should cost
> > > > less than £100 and is good insurance that it will be done correctly.
> > > > Also the solicitor will store the will securely for you without
> > > > extra
> > > > charge.
> >
> > > In such a simple case, why?
> >
> > Because lives often change in ways that might not occur to a layman at
> > the time of writing his own will.
>
> In which case you should make a new will.
>
> > Provision should be made in case the daughter predeceases her parents.
>
> In which case you should make a new will.
>

It's better to anticipate contingencies as far as you reasonably can. First,
events may follow each other quite quickly and not give the chance to make
an new will - particularly with people feeling a good deal of inertia when
it comes to making wills, so "quite quickly" soon turns into years. Second,
the testator may have lost capacity by the time things change. We have that
situation in my family, where we know the person would want to change his
will, but there is nothing that can be done about it because he does not
have mental capacity to make a will, so we are stuck with the one he made in
the 1970's.
--
Chris R

[Janet]

In article <6b37e6ed-1f11-4558-a885-a96895846038
@oy9g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, manat...@hotmail.com says...

>
> On May 8, 1:25 pm, Janet <h...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > In article <9f86d831-861c-4101-b071-f4cfa4258f06
> > @qc10g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, manatba...@hotmail.com says...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On May 7, 4:55 pm, Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > On 07/05/2013 14:45, Alan Crowder wrote:
> >
> > > > > OK i know you can create your own will and it should be fine in law, as
> > > > > one who simply has a house with a wife and we want to leave everything
> > > > > we have to in the first instance each other, but if we both perish in
> > > > > one go our daughter gets the lot whats the easiest way to create such a
> > > > > will and it be correct?
> >
> > > > > No shares, no other rubbish at all to cloud the issue.
> >
> > > > Get a solicitor, not a will writer, to do it for you. It should cost
> > > > less than £100 and is good insurance that it will be done correctly.
> > > > Also the solicitor will store the will securely for you without extra
> > > > charge.
> >
> > > In such a simple case, why?
> >
> >   Because lives often change in ways that might not occur to a layman at
> > the time of writing his own will.
>
> In which case you should make a new will.
>
> >  Provision should be made in case the daughter predeceases her parents.
>
> In which case you should make a new will.

Ideally; but only possible if the elderly parent still has mental
capacity and competence to do that. And someone hesitant about paying to
make a first will doesn't want to keep paying more for later alterations
and codicils.

> >   The grandparents might decide what and when they want any
> > grandchildren to inherit.In case the daughter predeceases with no
> > issue,the parents wills need to name some other beneficiary, such as a
> > favourite charity or dear friend.
>
> There was no mention of grandchildren.

That's the point. Maybe there are none, YET. Or none the older parents
know of :-) But any parent making a will, should consider the
possibility that their sole-inheritor child's life may still change in
ways no one anticipated... a late baby, marriage/civil partner,
stepchildren...

Janet

[AnthonyL]

On Tue, 07 May 2013 20:00:02 +0100, "steve robinson"
<st...@colevalleyinteriors.co.uk> wrote:

>polygonum wrote:
>
>> On 07/05/2013 19:35, steve robinson wrote:
>> > Peter Crosland wrote:

>> >=20

>> >> On 07/05/2013 14:45, Alan Crowder wrote:
>> >>> OK i know you can create your own will and it should be fine in
>> >>> law, as one who simply has a house with a wife and we want to
>> leave >>> everything we have to in the first instance each other, but
>> if we >>> both perish in one go our daughter gets the lot whats the
>> easiest >>> way to create such a will and it be correct?

>> > > >=20

>> >>> No shares, no other rubbish at all to cloud the issue.

>> > >=20

>> >> Get a solicitor, not a will writer, to do it for you. It should

>> cost >> less than =A3100 and is good insurance that it will be done

>> correctly. >> Also the solicitor will store the will securely for
>> you without extra >> charge.

>> >=20

>> > Plus if it goes pearshaped you have redress, anyone can set up as a
>> > will writer

>> >=20
>> Quite how would you achieve that redress? Most pear-shaped wills are=20
>> surely only found out not to be apple-shaped when someone reads and=20

>> attempts to execute them? Mostly that occurs when you are no longer
>> in a position to ...
>
>For a start your estate can sue the solicitors who will carry
>proffesional indemnity insurance ,

You have to be prepared to fight the professionals from the insurance
company and to pay their costs if you lose

>you have the law society
>too

If you are not the paying client you may have a problem with the Legal
Ombudsman who is the only one that I am aware of that can look at a
whole range of issues.


--
AnthonyL

[Janet]

In article <XnsA1B994177D0ACs...@130.133.4.11>,
spam...@lexregia.com says...

Any parent/step parent/ spouse from England might regret making a
Will in Scotland where Inheritance rights are significantly different.

Janet

[Big Les Wade]

Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> posted

>Because it may appear on the face of it that may not be the case. Using
>a properly qualified solicitor should ensure that the many potential
>pitfalls are avoided. The solicitor will ask the client a number of
>detailed questions to de sure the client is properly advised. It really
>is cheap insurance to be sure your heirs will not end up with a
>complicated legal wrangle on their hands.

But it isn't. Many wills prepared by solicitors end up being the focus
of complicated legal wrangles.

Often this is due to the solicitor's incompetence. But it also happens
where the solicitor has done a decent job, because there is nothing to
stop anyone contesting probate of a perfectly good will.

--
Les

[Peter Crosland]

The Treasury gets anything if there are no remaining beneficiaries. That
alone is a good reason for making sure that it can't happen.

--
Peter Crosland g6...@yahoo.co.uk

[Chris R]

>
>
> "Peter Crosland" wrote in message
> news:AfKdnZ_YA5vAxxfM...@brightview.co.uk...

No, it doesn't. If all the beneficiaries under the will and their issue are
dead, you go through the intestacy rules. If there are no beneficiaries
there, the estate goes to the Crown, the Duchy of Lancaster or the Duchy of
Cornwall.

I have been thinking about why hardly anyone leaves their estate to the
Treasury. i believe it was once common, as a way of leaving it for the
public good. Now everyone would think you daft if you let your estate for
the reduction of the national debt, yet that could well be the best way of
benefiting the nation as a whole.

On a bit of a tangent, whenever the state sets a minimum standard, it
becomes the maximum as well, or at least the norm. If the state tells the
rich how much tax to pay, they stop paying for hospitals and churches and
subscribing to build bridges and memorials. I remember when most big
companies were far more generous with redundancy payments or pensions than
the minimum required by law. Though the USA does seem to have retained more
of a spirit of public contribution than we have - perhaps because the US
never imposed 98% tax and still sets very low standards of minimum
contribution to the public good.

Chris R

[Stuart Bronstein]

Janet <h...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> Any parent/step parent/ spouse from England might regret
> making a Will in Scotland where Inheritance rights are
> significantly different.

With respect to property located in England, English law would apply
to inheritance rights, even with a will drafted in Scotland.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Chris R]

>
>
> "Stuart Bronstein" wrote in message
> news:XnsA1BAC581A8BF7s...@130.133.4.11...

>
> Janet <h...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> > Any parent/step parent/ spouse from England might regret
> > making a Will in Scotland where Inheritance rights are
> > significantly different.
>
> With respect to property located in England, English law would apply
> to inheritance rights, even with a will drafted in Scotland.
>

If an English-domiciled person made a will in Scotland, English law would
apply to the entire devolution of the estate, although the Scottish will
would be recognised so long as it met the formal requirements of Scottish
law.
--
Chris R

[Percy Picacity]

Why? They're supposed to be on our side aren't they? I marginally
prefer the money to be used for the good of the country than being paid
to rich charity executives.

--

Percy Picacity

[Stuart Bronstein]

"Chris R" <inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk> wrote:

> Though the USA does seem to have retained more
> of a spirit of public contribution than we have - perhaps
> because the US never imposed 98% tax and still sets very low
> standards of minimum contribution to the public good.

I'm not so sure. In the 1950's the highest marginal rate of income
tax was 92%. The country collected more taxes, spent much of that
money on the public good (e.g. infrastructure) and the economy
worked much better. These days with taxing and spending
historically low, the economy is not working, the infrastructure is
falling apart, average health and average education are on a par
with third-world countries.

Many companies do contribute to the public good - they create their
own non-profit (i.e. pay no taxes) foundations, so they can control
the money they contribute. They then use that money in ways that
gives them the maximum public relations boost as an adjunct to their
advertising campaigns. There is little if anything actually
charitable about it.

--
Stu
http://DownToEarthLawyer.com

[Janet]

In article <8761ysm...@news2.kororaa.com>, aug...@kororaa.com
says...

>
> The entity calling itself Stuart Bronstein wrote:
> >
> > Janet <h...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Any parent/step parent/ spouse from England might regret
> >> making a Will in Scotland where Inheritance rights are
> >> significantly different.
> >
> > With respect to property located in England, English law would apply
> > to inheritance rights, even with a will drafted in Scotland.
>

> Only real property; moveables go with the jurisdiction of domicile.

and Scottish inheritance rights to the moveable estate, are different
from England.

Janet

[S]

The highest federal income tax rate in the US was 92%. If you lived in
state with income tax, you overall marginal tax rate would have been a
little bit even higher. The 92% tax rate in the US applied to all
income above a certain threshold, whereas in the UK only investment
income was subject to 98% tax, ordinary income was taxed at only
83%. :)

If wikipedia is to be believed, the highest ever tax rate in the UK
was 99.25% at the end of WWII.

[polygonum]

Is this special to Scotland or would equivalent validity apply to a will
made by an English-domiciled person in another country? Say, France or USA.

--
Rod

[Chris R]

>
>
> "polygonum" wrote in message news:av2apc...@mid.individual.net...

The same principles apply, though i was talking there principally about
property in England, in relation someone going briefly to Scotland and
signing a will there. English law applies the law of a person's domicile to
the devolution of a person's estate, although succession to land is always
governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the land is situated. In
practice is it usually better to make a local law will to deal with assets
in each country where you have material assets, especially land, if only
because it will be much easier to get it processed in that country for
practical reasons. English law will recognise the validity of a will
executed in accordance with the law of the place where it is signed, or off
the person's domicile, habitual residence or nationality 9in accordance with
the Hague wills Convention IX).
--
Chris R

========legalstuff========
I post to be helpful but not claiming any expertise nor intending
anyone to rely on what I say. Nothing I post here will create a
professional relationship or duty of care. I do not provide legal
services to the public. My posts here refer only to English law except
where specified and are subject to the terms (including limitations of
liability) at http://www.clarityincorporatelaw.co.uk/legalstuff.html
======end legalstuff======

[Peter Crosland]

There may be nothing to stop someone contesting a valid will but the
chances of overturning it are much reduced. The reality is that as a
percentage of wills admitted to probate the number contested is very
small indeed but the chances of that happening are much higher where
the will has been drafted by an amateur. Even more important is the fact
that anyone can set themselves up as a will writer and they don't need
to carry professional indemnity insurance. Solicitors are not perfect
but statistically wills drafted by them are much less likely to be
challenged.


--
Peter Crosland g6...@yahoo.co.uk

[Janet]

In article <4rSdnYt-ZMcPrxHM...@brightview.co.uk>,
inv...@invalid.munge.co.uk says...

So, what would happen if widower Mr Homecounties, who lives in England
and has three adult independent offspring, against their advice, elopes
to Gretna and marries Miss Digger. During the honeymoon the groom's new
will is written, signed and witnessed in Scotland. It leaves "All my
stocks, shares, moneys, furniture, cars and my first wife's diamonds, to
my second wife Goldie Digger Homecounty". Two months later, still in
Scotland, he dies.

In Scotland, offspring cannot be excluded from inheriting a fixed
share of a parents moveable assets.

So, should his children challenge their stepmother's inheritance on
the grounds the terms are invalid in the place where it was signed? Or
on the grounds that it is valid and therefore they claim their share of
their fathers moveable assets.

Janet.

[Chris R]

>
>
> "Janet" wrote in message
> news:MPG.2bf6dcfea...@News.Individual.NET...

You omit the crucial fact of where he is domiciled. If he started out
domiciled in England, it's unlikely that a two-month holiday in Scotland
would be sufficient to acquire a domicile of choice in Scotland, so English
law applies, and English law would recognise the validity of the will made
in Scotland, so the new wife would inherit, subject to any Inheritance Act
claims. Only the formalities of execution of the will are governed by
Scottish law, and then only in so far as they did not satisfy the English
law requirements.

[polygonum]

Thank you.

I do have a particular interest (though unlikely that it would ever come
to anything).

Had been wondering, if somehow a will signed in Scotland were treated
specially because of some special status, would that status change in
the case of Scottish independence? Seems not.

--
Rod

[Big Les Wade]

Peter Crosland <g6...@yahoo.co.uk> posted

>There may be nothing to stop someone contesting a valid will but the
>chances of overturning it are much reduced. The reality is that as a
>percentage of wills admitted to probate the number contested is very
>small indeed but the chances of that happening are much higher where
>the will has been drafted by an amateur. Even more important is the
>fact that anyone can set themselves up as a will writer and they don't
>need to carry professional indemnity insurance. Solicitors are not
>perfect but statistically wills drafted by them are much less likely to
>be challenged.

Could you cite the data you are relying on for this claim, with a
pointer to the source?

--
Les

[GB]

Whilst it may be difficult to substantiate with data, I strongly suspect
that Peter is right.