Professional and industry update
A significant Court of Protection judgment sits at the centre of this week’s briefing.
On 30 September, the court ordered the cancellation of six registered Lasting Powers of Attorney.
It found that the professional certificate provider was not competent to act, had not properly satisfied himself of the matters he was certifying and had followed a signing process that did not comply with the legal requirements.
The judgment does not create new LPA rules. Its importance lies in what it tells us about the existing ones.
A certificate provider is not simply another witness. The certificate is a substantive safeguard. The person providing it must be competent, must undertake a genuine assessment and must be able to form the opinions the certificate records.
Separate research and police figures have also drawn attention to financial abuse involving powers of attorney. New research concerning the appointment of guardians and further developments in the online Will market raise different questions about client understanding and service delivery.
These developments do not all carry the same legal weight. The common thread is professional responsibility.
A document is only part of the planning. The people, explanations, decisions and procedures behind it matter just as much.
Confirmed judicial decision
Six registered LPAs are cancelled
On 30 September 2026, the Court of Protection handed down its judgment in AR & Ors, Re [2026] EWCOP 47 (T2).
The proceedings concerned three donors. Each had made both a Property and Financial Affairs LPA and a Health and Welfare LPA.
All six documents had been registered by the Office of the Public Guardian.
The same individual, Robert Cornford, had acted as the professional certificate provider in each case.
The Public Guardian asked the court to determine whether the LPAs had been validly created.
Three concerns were raised:
- whether the certificate provider was competent to act in that professional capacity;
- whether he had genuinely satisfied himself of the matters a certificate provider is required to consider; and
- whether the documents had been signed in the order required by law.
The court found that all three concerns were well-founded.
It directed the Public Guardian to cancel the registration of all six LPAs.
The three cases were described as test cases, with a further 24 matters being held pending the outcome.
Why this matters
The donors intended to make LPAs and the documents had been registered. Those facts could not cure a failure to comply with the legal requirements for creating the instruments.
A substantive safeguard
What does a certificate provider certify?
A certificate provider is not merely confirming that the donor signed the form.
They must certify that, in their opinion, when the donor executed the LPA:
- the donor understood the purpose of the document;
- the donor understood the scope of the authority being given;
- nobody was using fraud or undue pressure to induce the donor to create the LPA; and
- there was nothing else that would prevent the LPA from being created.
The role therefore involves judgment.
The certificate provider must do enough to form a proper opinion about the donor’s understanding and freedom to make the decision.
A person may qualify because they have known the donor personally for at least two years.
Alternatively, they may be chosen because their professional skills and expertise make them competent to undertake the necessary assessment.
What does professional competence mean?
The regulations provide examples of professionals who may be able to act as certificate providers, including:
- registered healthcare professionals;
- barristers and solicitors;
- registered social workers; and
- independent mental capacity advocates.
The list is not exhaustive.
Other professionals may be competent to act, but they must reasonably consider themselves capable of making the judgments required by the certificate because of their professional skills and expertise.
That is more than holding a particular title or belonging to an organisation connected with legal or estate-planning services.
The court found that the certificate provider in this case could not reasonably have regarded himself as competent. Its conclusion took account of his conviction for fraud, his disqualification from acting as a company director and the evidence concerning the way he approached the certificate-provider assessment.
The judgment also criticised a gap in the membership-vetting process through which he had become a member of the Society of Will Writers.
An important distinction
The judgment does not establish that membership of the Society of Will Writers is generally inadequate or that its members cannot act as professional certificate providers. The criticism concerned this individual and the process through which his application had been accepted.
The wider professional point is that membership, training or a job title does not replace the need for individual competence.
The donor is entitled to rely upon the professional’s assessment of their own suitability. It should not fall to the donor to investigate whether the person offering the service has the necessary expertise.
What should the assessment involve?
There is no single interview script that will be appropriate for every donor.
The assessment should be proportionate to the person, the decisions being made and any concerns that arise.
A professional certificate provider may need to establish that the donor understands:
- the difference between the two types of LPA;
- the identity of the attorneys and replacement attorneys;
- the decisions those people may be able to make;
- when the authority can be used;
- the effect of appointing attorneys jointly or jointly and severally;
- any instructions or preferences included within the document;
- the ability to revoke the LPA while the donor retains the necessary capacity;
- the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed arrangement; and
- what may happen if no LPA is made.
This is not simply a test of whether the donor can repeat particular terminology.
The relevant question is whether they understand the practical nature and effect of the arrangement they are choosing.
Be alert to possible pressure or conflict
Another person answering for the donor, controlling access, creating unexplained urgency or resisting a private conversation may justify further discussion, additional evidence or referral for a specialist assessment.
Execution requirements
The signing order is mandatory
The judgment provides a clear reminder about the order in which an LPA must be signed.
The donor signs first
The donor signs the relevant section in the presence of their witness and enters the date on which the signature was actually made.
The certificate provider signs second
The certificate provider signs only after the donor has signed, confirming the conclusions reached through their assessment.
The attorneys sign afterwards
The attorneys and replacement attorneys sign after the certificate provider, with each signature witnessed and dated correctly.
The people involved do not all need to sign on the same day or in the same place.
They must sign in the correct order.
Each person should also enter the date on which they actually signed.
The use of “Do Not Date” stickers
In the cases considered by the court, the certificate provider had used “Do Not Date” stickers. Dates were added after the signatures had been collected.
The dates eventually shown on the documents were not the dates on which the relevant people had signed.
The court concluded that the practice preserved the possibility of collecting signatures in a convenient order rather than the order required by the regulations.
It could not be satisfied that any of the six LPAs had been executed correctly.
Why the dates matter
The dates help demonstrate whether the required sequence was followed. An invented, reconstructed or administratively convenient date may conceal the order in which the document was actually executed.
A document that has not been validly created cannot confer the intended authority merely because the donor wanted it, the attorneys believed it was valid or the Office of the Public Guardian had registered it.
Professional practice
What should practitioners take from the judgment?
The immediate response should not be to rewrite standard LPA wording. It should be to review the process supporting the document.
A reliable professional file should make it possible to establish why the certificate provider was eligible to act, how the assessment was conducted and whether the document was executed correctly.
Record eligibility and competence
The file should show whether the certificate provider was acting as somebody who had known the donor personally or because of their professional skills and expertise.
Record the assessment
A proportionate attendance note should show how the donor’s understanding and freedom from fraud or undue pressure were considered.
Provide an opportunity to speak privately
Where appropriate, the donor should be able to discuss their choices without a proposed attorney or other interested person controlling the conversation.
Control the signing process
The actual signature dates, witnesses and statutory sequence should be recorded and checked before the application is submitted.
Preserve the evidence
The file should identify which completed version was submitted and retain the records needed to explain the process if the LPA is later questioned.
A straightforward appointment involving a donor who clearly understands the proposed arrangement may not require an elaborate written assessment.
That does not mean that no record should be made.
A proportionate, contemporaneous attendance note may later provide important evidence that the certificate resulted from an actual professional assessment rather than a routine signature.
The certificate should record a genuine conclusion
The certificate provider should not sign because the form has reached the appropriate page. They should sign because they have reached a properly considered professional opinion.
Clients and attorneys may live in different places. Documents may need to be posted between several people. Signatures may be collected over a number of weeks.
Those practical issues can be managed.
What cannot safely be done is to omit or reconstruct dates so that the paperwork appears to satisfy a sequence that may not have been followed.
If an error is discovered, the correct response is to identify it and decide how it should be remedied—not to alter the apparent history of the document.
Attorney responsibilities
Financial abuse and misunderstanding of the role
The judgment concerns the creation of an LPA. Separate research and police figures show why safeguards remain important after an attorney begins acting.
Research from the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners suggests that family members may sometimes cross the line into financial abuse without fully recognising what they are doing.
The reported findings indicate that 87% of UK practitioners surveyed identified adult children as the most common perpetrators of financial abuse against older or vulnerable family members.
That does not mean that adult children were responsible for 87% of recorded cases. It represents the proportion of practitioners who identified adult children as the most common category of perpetrator in their experience.
City of London Police figures show that 3,812 reports of fraud by abuse of position were recorded during 2025–26, with total reported losses of £93.8 million.
People aged 70 and over accounted for more than £51 million of those losses.
The figures concern reported allegations and losses. They should not be treated as proof that every person reported committed an offence.
When might an attorney cross the line?
Not every inappropriate financial decision begins with a deliberate intention to steal.
A family attorney may believe that:
- providing substantial care entitles them to use some of the donor’s money;
- the donor would have wanted to help with the attorney’s household bills;
- a gift is acceptable because similar gifts were made previously;
- small withdrawals do not need to be recorded;
- shared family money does not need to be kept separate;
- the donor’s Will permits assets to be distributed during the donor’s lifetime; or
- they can reimburse themselves without retaining evidence.
Those assumptions can create serious difficulties.
A Property and Financial Affairs attorney must act in the donor’s best interests and remain within the authority provided by the LPA and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
The attorney should keep the donor’s finances separate from their own unless an existing joint arrangement makes that impossible.
They should retain accounts, statements, invoices and receipts showing how the donor’s money has been used. Their authority to make gifts is also restricted.
Education is part of the safeguard
Most family attorneys are trying to support somebody they care about. Clear information about records, gifts, reimbursement and conflicts protects both the donor and the attorney.
My view on attorney guidance
The profession understandably devotes considerable attention to helping donors choose their attorneys.
Less attention is sometimes given to preparing those attorneys for the role.
The LPA form contains legal declarations, but signing a declaration does not necessarily mean that the person has absorbed its practical consequences.
A useful service should help prospective attorneys recognise the questions that may arise in ordinary life and understand when a decision requires further advice.
An attorney guide will not prevent every misuse of authority. It may, however, reduce the risk that a well-intentioned person crosses a legal boundary they did not understand.
Wills and children
Nine in ten parents have not appointed a guardian
New research released as part of Will Aid’s 2026 campaign has identified a separate gap in Will planning.
The reported findings suggest that only 11% of parents surveyed had appointed a guardian in their Will.
The research also found that 62% of parents either did not have a Will or believed that their existing Will was out of date.
Parents nevertheless expressed clear views about who they would not want to care for their children.
Their concerns included:
- somebody the children did not know well;
- somebody who was not emotionally prepared for the responsibility;
- an elderly relative who might struggle physically;
- somebody who was not financially stable; and
- somebody whose values or beliefs differed substantially from their own.
Research qualification
These findings were commissioned for the Will Aid campaign. They are not official national statistics, but they provide a useful indication of the gap between parents’ concerns and the arrangements recorded in their Wills.
What does appointing a guardian achieve?
A parent with the appropriate parental responsibility may use a Will to appoint somebody as a testamentary guardian.
That appointment can form an important part of planning for a child’s care.
It allows the parent to record who they want to assume parental responsibility if the legal conditions for the appointment to take effect are met.
It does not necessarily mean that the chosen guardian will immediately replace every surviving parent.
The effect can depend upon:
- who has parental responsibility;
- whether another parent survives;
- whether a child arrangements order is in force;
- whether a special guardian has been appointed;
- whether each parent has made a separate guardian appointment; and
- whether a dispute eventually requires a court decision.
What should parents consider?
The conversation should go beyond inserting a name into a Will.
Parents may need to consider:
- the child’s relationship with the proposed guardian;
- whether the guardian is willing to accept the role;
- where the guardian lives;
- whether the child might need to move home or school;
- the guardian’s own family and caring responsibilities;
- whether siblings should remain together;
- the financial provision available for the child;
- how the guardians and trustees would work together;
- what should happen if the first-choice guardian cannot act; and
- whether a Letter of Wishes would help explain the parent’s priorities.
The person best suited to care for a child may not be the best person to manage a substantial inheritance.
Appointing different guardians and trustees can be entirely appropriate, provided their roles are understood and they are able to work together.
What this means for our industry
The opportunity is to provide accurate education about parental responsibility and testamentary guardianship—not to frighten parents with oversimplified claims about what automatically happens if they die without a Will.
Service-model developments
Online Will providers continue to expand
Octopus Legacy has expanded its online Will-writing service into Scotland, providing another example of the changing estate-planning market.
The company says that a simple Scottish Will can be prepared online in approximately 15 to 20 minutes.
Each document is reviewed by its legal team before being sent for signing. People whose circumstances require more than a simple Will are directed towards an offline service.
The expansion also allows charity partners, including Macmillan Cancer Support and Sarcoma UK, to offer free online Wills to supporters in Scotland.
The launch does not change Will law or service delivery in England and Wales.
It does illustrate a developing model combining:
- automated information gathering;
- rapid document preparation;
- professional review;
- complexity triage;
- an alternative offline service; and
- charity-led customer acquisition.
October brings seasonal price competition
Free Wills Month began on 1 October.
The scheme allows people aged 55 and over to obtain or update a simple Will without paying the participating solicitor’s usual fee, subject to availability and participating locations.
People are invited to consider leaving a charitable legacy, although they are not required to do so.
Where the client’s requirements are more complex, an additional charge may be requested.
What should independent providers take from this?
The appropriate response is not to dismiss online or charitable services.
They provide a route into Will-making for people who might otherwise continue without any effective arrangement. They also shape expectations around convenience, accessibility and price.
Independent practitioners therefore need to explain their own value clearly.
- time to understand the client’s family and priorities;
- personal explanation of the available options;
- careful identification of complexity;
- help connecting the Will with LPAs and property ownership;
- home, online or flexible appointments;
- access to an identifiable local practitioner;
- clear referral routes where specialist advice is required; and
- an ongoing review relationship.
The distinction should be based on service
A provider describing its work as guided and personal must ensure that the actual client experience justifies that description. The comparison should not depend upon criticising online or charitable routes.
Status check
What has not changed this week?
No standard change is required to Will or LPA wording as a result of this week’s developments.
LPA registration
The Office of the Public Guardian continues to advise that LPA registration takes approximately 8 to 10 weeks, including the statutory four-week waiting period.
Communications should continue to explain that registration is not immediate.
Digital LPAs
No operational commencement date has been announced for the new digital LPA system.
Existing preparation, signing and registration procedures remain in place.
Reform of Wills law
The Law Commission’s proposed modern Wills Act remains under government consideration.
Existing signing and witnessing requirements continue to apply.
Inheritance Tax and pensions
Most unused pension funds and pension death benefits are due to enter estates for Inheritance Tax purposes from 6 April 2027.
No further HMRC technical information has been published this week.
Cohabitation and intestacy
No legislation has been introduced giving cohabiting partners the same automatic inheritance rights as spouses or civil partners.
Unmarried partners should not assume that the intestacy rules provide equivalent protection.
Probate applications
The probate application fee remains £526 for estates valued above £5,000.
Copies ordered with the application continue to cost £2 each.
Further reading
Principal sources
This briefing draws on the published Court of Protection judgment, official guidance, legislation and clearly identified industry reporting.
My view this week
The process gives the document its value
The Court of Protection judgment demonstrates that an LPA can reflect the donor’s genuine wishes, pass through registration and still fail because the safeguards required for its creation were not properly observed.
The donor may believe that they have made effective arrangements. The attorneys may believe that they hold valid authority. Years later, the documents may be cancelled at the point when dependable authority is most important.
The certificate-provider role therefore deserves more attention than a signature at the end of a meeting.
The person providing the certificate must be competent, must undertake the necessary assessment and must be able to show that their conclusion was properly reached.
The financial-abuse findings demonstrate why the quality of the process remains important after registration. Choosing a trusted family member is not, by itself, enough. Attorneys need to understand that trust is accompanied by legal responsibility, limits, record-keeping and accountability.
The guardianship research makes a similar point in a different context. Naming a guardian can be an important part of a Will. Inserting a name without understanding parental responsibility, the wider family structure and the child’s practical needs is not complete planning.
Good estate planning is not defined by whether the document was produced online or in person.
It is defined by whether the client understood the arrangement, whether the legal process was followed, whether the people appointed understand their responsibilities and whether reliable evidence exists of how the decisions were made.
The document matters. The process that gives it legal and practical value matters just as much.