Proving Your Case: The Essential Evidence for an Inheritance Act Claim

Contact Us

contact

For a free initial conversation call

0800 29 800 29

evidence

To succeed in a claim under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, the claimant must provide extensive evidence to demonstrate both their financial need and the deceased’s moral obligation to provide for their maintenance. Key evidence includes detailed financial disclosure (P60s, bank statements), documentation of the relationship and dependency (e.g., caregiving logs, correspondence), and witness statements. The court assesses all factors laid out in Section 3 of the Act, making the pre-action gathering of irrefutable, supporting evidence essential for securing a successful settlement.

The Support You Need

When a loved one passes away and their Will excludes you, a spouse, child, or financial dependent, you may feel certain that the Will is unfair and that you deserve a share of the estate. The legal mechanism to address this injustice is the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975.

However, believing you have a claim and proving it are two entirely different things.

Financial need alone is not enough. To succeed in an Inheritance Act claim, whether through a swift settlement or ultimately in court, you need irrefutable evidence. We reveal the key documents the court and the opposing party’s solicitors demand to prove your dependency and the deceased’s moral obligation.

A successful claim under the 1975 Act hinges on the meticulous gathering and presentation of evidence. Without a robust portfolio of documents, even the most justified claim can fail, be dismissed as speculative, or settle for a fraction of its true value. Because we understand the emotional toll of this process, we gathered all the information you are going to need in this journey, and we’re ready to guide you all the way through.

Read our guide and learn more on how to cope with the emotional toll of contesting a will: The Emotional Toll of Contesting a Will and How to Cope: Legal Grounds and When Not to Contest a Will

The Legal Test: Two Sides of the 1975 Act

The 1975 Act requires the court to determine whether the deceased’s Will or the rules of intestacy failed to make “reasonable financial provision” for you. This decision is not subjective; it is based on objective evidence relating to the factors listed in Section 3 of the Act.

While the specifics vary depending on your category (spouse, child, dependent), every claim revolves around proving two essential pillars:

Pillar 1: Demonstrating Financial Need

The court is primarily concerned with your immediate and future requirement for maintenance. You must clearly show that without provision from the estate, your ability to meet your necessary living expenses will be severely compromised.

Pillar 2: Proving the Deceased’s Moral Obligation

The court asks: Did the deceased have a moral duty to provide for you that they unreasonably ignored? This is crucial for adult children or non-spousal dependents. This is established by proving the depth of the relationship, the level of dependency, or the significant contributions you made to the deceased’s welfare.

The Essential Evidence Checklist

A specialist solicitor can guide you, but preparing the following documents before your first consultation will dramatically strengthen your position and speed up the process:

1. Financial Disclosure – Proving Your Need

This is the most time-consuming and sensitive part of the claim, but it is non-negotiable.

  • P60s and Tax Returns: The last three years of income statements to prove your current earning capacity and income history.
  • Bank Statements: The last 12-24 months of statements for all current and savings accounts.
  • Asset and Liability Summary: A detailed list of all your assets (property value, investments, car value) and all your debts (mortgage, credit cards, loans).
  • Budget/Schedule of Needs: A clear, itemised monthly budget outlining your necessary expenditure (rent, food, utilities, travel). This must be realistic and focused on maintenance, not enrichment.
  • Benefit Statements: Documentation of any state benefits or pensions you currently receive.

2. Deceased’s Intention and Estate Documents

Understanding the deceased’s final wishes and the estate’s size is essential for calculating the reasonable provision.

  • The Will (and previous Wills): The current Will is the document being challenged. Previous Wills are vital if they show a historical intention to provide for you, which was later inexplicably removed.
  • Grant of Probate/Letters of Administration: This document confirms the Executor’s authority and, critically, confirms the date from which the six-month claim deadline begins.
  • Estate Accounts: If available, documentation showing the total value of the estate, including properties, investments, and liabilities.

3. Relationship and Dependency Evidence – Proving Moral Obligation

This evidence links your financial need to the deceased’s duty.

  • Caregiving Records (If Applicable): Diaries, calendars, or third-party invoices demonstrating the extent and duration of the care, services, or support you provided to the deceased.
  • Financial Exchange Documentation: Bank transfers, receipts, or letters proving the deceased was financially contributing to your life (e.g., paying tuition, covering utility bills, providing rent-free accommodation).
  • Correspondence: Letters, emails, or texts that illustrate the closeness of the relationship, the deceased’s recognition of your needs, or their verbal promises to provide for you.

4. Third-Party Support – Independent Corroboration

A judge will give significant weight to impartial, independent evidence.

  • Witness Statements: Written statements from third parties (friends, neighbours, doctors, or former colleagues) who can attest to your financial dependency, the extent of your caregiving, or the relationship dynamics that demonstrate the deceased’s moral obligation toward you.

The Cost of Delay: Urgency and Loss

The time limit for issuing a claim under the Inheritance Act 1975 is six months from the date the Grant of Probate is issued.

Every week spent searching for documents after consulting a solicitor is a week lost to investigation, negotiation, and potential mediation. If the six-month deadline is missed, the court has discretion to allow a late claim, but this is rare and often successful only when there is no reasonable excuse for the delay.

Furthermore, if the estate is distributed before your claim is issued, you face the additional, costly hurdle of trying to recover assets from individual beneficiaries.

The Empathy Factor: Telling Your Full Story

Gathering and disclosing every detail of your financial life can feel intrusive and vulnerable. However, your solicitor needs to understand the human cost of the exclusion. We use this evidence to craft a narrative that resonates with the court’s requirement for “reasonableness.”

For example, a diary entry detailing a day spent cooking and assisting with medical appointments transforms a simple statement of “I cared for him” into powerful, quantifiable evidence of moral obligation and service provided.

Conclusion: Take Control of the Evidence

The successful outcome of an Inheritance Act claim is rarely a matter of luck; it is a direct result of comprehensive preparation, strategic legal representation, and, above all, irrefutable evidence.

By meticulously gathering the documents listed above, you are not just compiling paperwork; you are constructing the unshakeable foundation of your legal right to provision. You are empowering your solicitor to negotiate from a position of strength, significantly increasing the likelihood of a high-value settlement outside of court.

If you believe you have been unfairly excluded from a Will, don’t wait for the six-month deadline to pass. Start gathering your evidence today. Get your free, no-obligation case assessment. Call 08002980029 or visit contestawilltoday.com

FAQs

1. Do I need to disclose all my partner’s financial information if I make a claim?

Yes. If the claimant is married or in a civil partnership, the court will consider the financial resources and needs of the applicant’s spouse or civil partner. This is because the spouse’s resources are legally available to support the claimant. The solicitor will need your partner’s financial disclosure (income, assets, and liabilities) to present a full and honest picture of your joint financial position to the court.

2. Does the deceased’s reason for exclusion (if stated in the Will) matter?

Yes, it matters significantly. If the Will contains a clear statement explaining the deceased’s reasons for excluding you (e.g., “I already provided for my son by paying his mortgage”), the claimant must be prepared to address and counter that statement with evidence. For instance, you would need evidence that the mortgage payment was a loan that was repaid, or that the payment was made so long ago it no longer meets your current needs for maintenance.

3. If I was claiming against my sibling’s Will, what evidence of dependency would be key?

If you are claiming as a sibling or another relative who was maintained by the deceased (but not a spouse or child), the key evidence must irrefutably prove the dependency. This includes records showing a history of financial payments from the deceased to you, documentation of a shared household and shared expenses, and witness statements confirming that you relied on the deceased for essential needs (e.g., housing or recurring financial support) right up until their death.

contact

For a free initial conversation call

0800 29 800 29

Frequently asked questions.

Disputes over wills can arise in several circumstances, including:

  • Testamentary capacity: The person who made the will (known as the testator) must have had the mental capacity to understand what they were doing and the consequences of their actions. This means that they must have been able to understand the nature and extent of their property, the people they were giving their property to, and the people they were excluded from their will.

 

  • Valid execution: The will must have been executed correctly under the law. This means it must be in writing, signed by the testator, and witnessed by two independent witnesses.

 

  • Undue influence: The testator must have made the will freely and without any pressure from others. The will may be invalid if someone was unduly influenced to make a will. Undue influence can occur when someone takes advantage of a testator’s vulnerability, such as if the testator is elderly, ill, or has a mental disability.

 

  • Fraud or forgery: If the will was forged or if someone fraudulently induced the testator to make the will, the will may be invalid.

 

Claims against a will must usually be made within six months of the grant of probate being issued. This is the legal document that gives the executor the authority to administer the estate. If a claim is not made within this time, it may be too late to challenge the will.

As such, executors often wait until this six-month period has expired before distributing the estate. This is to avoid having to distribute the estate and then having to take it back if a successful claim is made against the will.

Here are some examples of how these disputes can arise:

  • A family member may dispute a will if they believe that the testator did not have the mental capacity to make a will. For example, if the testator was suffering from dementia or Alzheimer’s disease at the time the will was made.
  •  

A family member may dispute a will if they believe that it was not executed correctly. For example, if the will is not signed by the testator or if it is not witnessed by two independent witnesses.

 

  • A family member may dispute a will if they believe that they were unduly influenced to make the will. For example, if a caregiver or another family member pressured the testator to make the will in their favour.

 

  • A family member may dispute a will if they believe that it was forged or if someone fraudulently induced the testator to make the will. For example, if someone forged the testator’s signature on the will or if someone lied to the testator about the contents of the will.

If you are thinking about disputing a will, it is important to seek legal advice as soon as possible. We can assess your case and advise you on your legal options.



Types of Trusts

Many different types of trusts can be set up, depending on your specific needs and goals. Some of the most common types of trusts include:
Bare Trusts: A bare trust is a simple type of trust in which the trustee holds the assets for the benefit of the beneficiary. The beneficiary is entitled to the income and capital of the trust as soon as they are old enough to receive them.

Interest in Possession Trusts: An interest in possession trust is a type of trust in which the beneficiary is entitled to the income from the trust immediately, but not to the capital until a later date. This type of trust is often used for minor beneficiaries or for beneficiaries who are not yet responsible enough to manage their own money.

Discretionary Trusts: A discretionary trust is a type of trust in which the trustee has the discretion to decide how and when to distribute the income and capital of the trust to the beneficiaries. This type of trust is often used for families with multiple beneficiaries or beneficiaries with special needs.

Accumulation Trusts: An accumulation trust is a type of trust in which the income from the trust is accumulated and not distributed to the beneficiaries until a later date. This type of trust is often used to save for a specific purpose, such as a child’s education or a retirement fund.

Mixed Trusts: A mixed trust is a type of trust that combines elements of different types of trusts. For example, a trust may be a discretionary trust for one beneficiary and an interest in possession trust for another beneficiary.

Settlor-Interested Trusts: A settlor-interested trust is a type of trust in which the settlor (the person who creates the trust) retains some interest in the trust assets. For example, the settlor may retain the right to receive income from the trust or to appoint the trustee.

Non-Resident Trusts: A non-resident trust is a type of trust that is created and governed by the laws of a country other than the country where the settlor or beneficiaries reside.
Which type of trust is right for you will depend on your specific needs and goals. It is important to consult with an estate planning attorney to discuss your options and choose the type of trust that is best for you.
Here are some examples of how different types of trusts can be used:
A bare trust can be used to hold assets for a minor child until they reach the age of majority.

An interest in possession trust can be used to provide income to a beneficiary who is not yet responsible enough to manage their own money.

A discretionary trust can be used to manage assets for a family with multiple beneficiaries or for beneficiaries with special needs.

An accumulation trust can be used to save for a specific purpose, such as a child’s education or a retirement fund.

A mixed trust can be used to achieve a variety of different goals, such as providing income to one beneficiary and preserving capital for another beneficiary.

A settlor-interested trust can be used to retain some control over trust assets after the settlor has created the trust.

A non-resident trust can be used to reduce estate taxes or to protect assets from creditors.
It is important to note that this is just a brief overview of the different types of trusts. There are many other types of trusts available, and each type of trust has its own specific features and benefits. For more information please visit www.gov.uk/trusts-taxes/types-of-trust

Inheritance trust disputes can be complex and varied, but some common scenarios include:

  • Disputes over the validity of the trust: This can happen if the settlor (the person who created the trust) does not have the mental capacity to create a trust, or if the trust deed was not executed correctly.

 

  • Disputes over the interpretation of the trust deed: If the trust deed is poorly drafted or unclear, it can lead to disputes between the trustees and beneficiaries about how the trust should be administered.

 

  • Disputes over the appointment or removal of trustees: Trustees have a legal duty to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries. If a trustee is not acting in the best interests of the beneficiaries, the beneficiaries may apply to the court to have the trustee removed.

 

  • Disputes over the investment of trust assets: Trustees have a legal duty to invest trust assets prudently. If a trustee makes investments that are too risky or that lose money, the beneficiaries may sue the trustee for breach of duty.

 

  • Disputes over the distribution of trust assets: Trustees have a legal duty to distribute trust assets to the beneficiaries in accordance with the terms of the trust deed. If a trustee distributes trust assets incorrectly, the beneficiaries may sue the trustee for breach of duty.

 

Here are some specific examples of inheritance trust disputes that have occurred in the UK:

  • In one case, a beneficiary disputed the validity of a trust deed on the grounds that the settlor (the person who created the trust) did not have the mental capacity to create a trust at the time it was set up.

 

  • In another case, a beneficiary sued the trustees for breach of duty after the trustees made a number of risky investments that lost money.



  • In a third case, a beneficiary sued the trustees for breach of duty after the trustees distributed trust assets to the beneficiaries in a way that was not in accordance with the terms of the trust deed.

 

Other possible disputes include:

  • A beneficiary was expecting more than what is set out in the trust document. This may be because the beneficiary had a reasonable belief that they would receive more, or because the trust document is unclear about the beneficiary’s entitlement.

 

  • The individual who set up the trust was provided with negligent or misleading advice. If the settlor was not properly advised about the consequences of setting up a trust, or if they were given incorrect information, they may be able to challenge the trust.

 

  • The trust document is either incomplete or unclear about the wishes of the deceased. If the trust document is incomplete or unclear, it can lead to disputes between the trustees and beneficiaries about how the trust should be administered.

 

  • A trustee acts against the best interests of the beneficiary or doesn’t administer the trust correctly. Trustees have a legal duty to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries. If a trustee breaches their duty, the beneficiaries may sue the trustee.

If you are involved in an inheritance trust dispute, it is important to seek legal advice as soon as possible. We can assess your case and advise you on your legal options.

Contesting a will is challenging the validity of a will. This can be done on a number of grounds, including.

  • The testator (the person who made the will) did not have the mental capacity to make a will.
  • The will was not executed correctly, i.e., it was not signed by the testator or witnessed by two independent witnesses.
  • The testator was unduly influenced to make the will.
  • The will was forged or fraudulent.

 

Contentious probate is any dispute about the administration of a deceased person’s estate. This can include disputes about

  • The validity of the will.
  • The interpretation of the will.
  • The appointment or removal of executors.
  • The distribution of the estate assets.
  • The management of the estate.
  • In the UK, contentious probate is dealt with by the High Court.

 

The main difference between contesting a will and contentious probate is that contesting a will is specifically challenging the validity of the will, while contentious probate can include a wide range of disputes about the administration of an estate.

Here is an example:

Contesting a will: A beneficiary challenges the validity of a will on the grounds that the testator did not have the mental capacity to make a will.

Contentious probate: A beneficiary disputes the interpretation of a will and argues that they are entitled to a larger share of the estate than they have been given.

It is important to note that the two terms are often used interchangeably. For example, a lawyer might say that they are “dealing with a contentious probate matter” when they are actually challenging the validity of a will.

If you are thinking about contesting a will or pursuing a contentious probate claim, it is important to seek legal advice as soon as possible. We can assess your case and advise you on your legal options.

The time limit for making a contentious probate claim in the UK is six months from the grant of probate. This is the legal document that gives the executor the authority to administer the estate.

If you do not make your claim within this six-month time limit, you may need to apply to the court for permission to make a late claim. The court will only grant permission if you have a good reason for not making your claim on time.

There are a number of factors that the court will consider when deciding whether to grant permission for a late claim, including:

  • Why did you not make your claim on time?
  • The strength of your case.
  • Whether the other beneficiaries will be prejudiced if your claim is allowed to proceed.
  • If the court grants you permission to make a late claim, you will need to file your claim within 28 days.

 

It is important to note that there are some exceptions to the six-month time limit. For example, if the executor has committed fraud or concealed assets from the beneficiaries, the beneficiaries may be able to make a claim after the six-month time limit has expired.

If you are thinking about making a contentious probate claim, it is important to seek legal advice as soon as possible. A lawyer can assess your case and advise you on the time limits that apply and whether you have a good case.

Here are some examples of when you might be able to make a late contentious probate claim:

  • You were not aware of the death of the deceased until after the six-month time limit had expired.
  • You were unable to make your claim on time because you were ill or incapacitated.
  • The executor has deliberately concealed information from you about the estate.
  • The executor has committed fraud in the administration of the estate.

 

The 12-year limit for making a contentious probate claim in the UK applies to claims for reasonable financial provision under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act 1975. This means that if you are making a claim for financial provision from an estate, you must do so within 12 years of the date of the deceased’s death.

The reason for the 12-year limit is to encourage people to make their claims as soon as possible after the deceased’s death. This is because it can become more difficult to investigate and prove a claim after a long period of time has elapsed.

If you are unsure whether you are able to make a late contentious probate claim, you should seek legal advice.

Most disputes in the UK are resolved out of court through mediation and negotiation. This is because it is generally faster, cheaper, and less stressful for all involved.

If you are considering disputing a will, it is important to contact a contentious probate specialist before you involve any other relatives or beneficiaries of the estate. A specialist lawyer can advise you on your legal options and help you to resolve the dispute quickly and efficiently.

Here are some of the benefits of resolving a will dispute out of court:

  • It is faster and cheaper than going to court.
  • It is less stressful for all involved.
  • It allows you to maintain relationships with other family members and beneficiaries.
  • You have more control over the outcome of the dispute.

 

There are a number of steps that you can take to try to resolve a contentious probate dispute without going to court, including

  • Negotiation: You can try to negotiate a settlement with the other parties to the dispute. This may involve making concessions on your part, but it can be a good way to avoid the time and expense of court proceedings.
  • Mediation: Mediation is a process where an independent mediator helps the parties to reach a mutually agreeable settlement. Mediation can be a good way to resolve a dispute without going to court, but it is important to note that it is not binding on the parties.
  • Arbitration: Arbitration is a more formal process than mediation, and it is binding on the parties. However, it can still be a good way to resolve a dispute without going to court.

 

If you are unable to resolve the dispute amicably, you will need to file a claim with the High Court. The court will then hold a hearing to decide the case.

Contact our Team

For a free initial conversation call

0800 29 800 29

email Us

News and Insights