STEP is responding to the House of Commons’ Justice Committee’s inquiry into the probate service of England and Wales and the causes of delays. The consultation examines resource and capacity of the probate service to process applications, while considering long-lasting solutions to alleviate future case backlog.

Background

The quality of the probate service has declined over the past year, with waiting times for probate doubling between 2022 and 2023. The centralisation and digitalisation of the service contributed to many long serving staff members leaving, which has resulted in shortage of staff and experience.

During a parliamentary debate on 8 January, the UK’s Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice said that a new management team has been installed in the probate registry as part of a recovery plan to address persistent delays in issuing grants.

Survey

STEP surveyed its members to hear their experiences of working with the probate service and the effects on clients. Evidence from members suggests that the service currently does not have adequate resources and capacity to process applications. Straightforward cases have taken several months. The centralisation and digitisation of the service led to an exodus in senior staff which created an imbalance of experience. Recruitment remains a major issue in returning the probate service to its pre-pandemic levels.

Practitioners who responded to our survey observed multiple impacts, including cancelled house sales (100%) and financial hardship for beneficiaries (67%). The difficulty of junior registry staff dealing with complex cases was generally thought to be the cause of delays.

Many STEP members have also observed instances where if practitioners contact the service regarding a stopped case, it is moved to the back of the queue.

Proposals

STEP supports the secondment of probate staff to private practice law firms, in appropriate regional centres, to gain experience quickly and better understand the types of issues.

Furthermore, STEP proposes outsourcing complex cases to a limited number of experienced law firms who have the practical understanding and ability to tackle the backlog of cases in a desirable timeframe. STEP would work with the Law Society and other stakeholder organisations to identify the most appropriate firms to participate in this scheme.

The consultation also covered experiences of using the probate online portal and whether this improved the quality of the service. Currently, the probate portal has been insufficiently tested and developed when it was launched for lay personal representatives and probate practitioners.

STEP’s view is that the probate portal does not provide value for money (63%) or improved access to justice (56%). While the probate portal could be improved, STEP suggests that technology should only be introduced after being thoroughly tested with its users in the legal community. Thought needs to be given to those for whom the service is being provided.

Consequently, STEP notes that the digitisation of the probate process has had a particular negative effect on those who struggle with technology, which would therefore disproportionately affect older and disabled people. These groups are not sufficiently protected by rogue traders either. The delays in grants have given space to rogue traders to give misleading promises and turnarounds when competing with reputable practitioners. STEP members are also aware of market schemes that advertise as being able to avoid the need for a grant entirely. These schemes can deter people from making wills and increase risks of inheritance tax being underreported.

We hope that the government will respond quickly to the feedback that it receives from the inquiry and we will keep members apprised of any developments in this area.

Matt Stephenson, Government Affairs Executive at STEP