Most probate professionals work hard to ensure estates are administered correctly and beneficiaries receive what they’re entitled to. But the system is attractive to fraudsters: estates are time-sensitive, heirs are often unaware, and once assets move, recovery can be slow, expensive, and uncertain.
That’s why Fraser & Fraser takes a firm stance: we want legitimate beneficiaries protected, and we want weaknesses in the system identified and addressed — properly.
The GLD announcement: “no evidence” — but less transparency
When the Government Legal Department (GLD) reinstated the Bona Vacantia (BV) unclaimed estates list in January 2026, the accompanying announcement struck an inherently contradictory note: it said a review found “no evidence” that the BV list had been the source of fraud, while simultaneously restricting the data published.
In plain terms, it reads like an admission of vulnerability without acknowledging a breach of trust. If there is genuinely “no evidence”, why remove detail that has historically helped families — and the public — verify whether they might be entitled?
The list has now reverted to a minimal format (name, date of death, area of death, and a reference number). For legitimate probate genealogists, that reduction is inconvenient but not fatal. For the public, however, it makes self-verification far harder and increases the risk of confusion, duplication, and delay. In practice, it creates more obscurity for honest users, while doing little to deter organised fraudsters who already know how to exploit other parts of the process.
The Hungarian fake-will frauds and why the list went offline
The BV list was taken offline in July 2025, after allegations and reporting connected probate fraud to estates appearing on the list. This followed high-profile reporting around forged wills and suspicious applications — including cases widely described as involving Hungarian criminal networks targeting “vacant” estates.
The GLD reinstated the list on 12 January 2026, after a review.
A key point often missed: during the GOV.UK suspension, estates administered as bona vacantia continued to be published via The Gazette. So the question isn’t simply whether information existed somewhere — it’s whether the government’s response actually reduced risk, or mainly reduced visibility for legitimate users.
A sticking plaster — because the deeper loopholes remain
From our perspective, trimming a spreadsheet doesn’t close the core gaps that fraudsters exploit.
The probate application process still leans heavily on declarations and paperwork, rather than robust up-front verification, particularly where applications are made without professional oversight. Even basic public guidance focuses on submitting documents and signing a statement of truth — not on meaningful identity assurance as a protective control.
Overseas elements also aren’t unusual in probate, and cross-border applications are feasible in many circumstances — which is entirely legitimate, but also something bad actors can take advantage of if checks are weak.
The BV list was offline for over six months. The total number of estates on the list at the time of removal was 5,770. We’ll be watching closely as publication normalises to understand whether the suspension and data reduction produced any measurable improvement — or simply made it harder for families to spot and verify connections early.
Why this matters: misconduct and fraud aren’t hypothetical
Below are examples of estate-related wrongdoing and bad practice reported publicly over the years. They illustrate the range of behaviours families and professionals need to guard against — from forged wills to manipulation of beneficiaries.
- Francis Fallon & Richard Carr (2009) — jailed in connection with a major forged-will “heir hunter” scandal.
- Yvette Adams (2010) — NHS bereavement adviser involved in serious fraud connected to deceased patients’ estates.
- Deborah Cook (2012) — convicted for misconduct/fraud offences after exploiting access to death information.
- Daniel Morgan-Bates / Morgan Bates Services Ltd (2017) — sentenced to two years after admitting cheating multiple victims out of almost £100,000.
Our position: collaborate, don’t conceal
We remain willing to collaborate with the GLD, HMCTS, and other relevant authorities to strengthen protections around vulnerable estates. The shared goal should be a system that is:
- transparent enough for legitimate heirs to identify and verify entitlements, and
- robust enough to prevent opportunistic and organised fraud — before assets are moved.
Because public confidence in probate isn’t protected by publishing less. It’s protected by checking more — in the right places.
EXPLORE