A recent case has brought into sharp focus the serious consequences that can arise for anyone who undertakes the management and administration of an Estate. It also raises the question about whether to choose a regulated or non-regulated company.
Administration of an Estate carries hefty responsibilities not to be taken lightly. When duties are breached because of abuse or fraud then litigation and even criminal litigation may ensue.
It is not uncommon for a first time Executor or Executrix to instruct a professional administrator who is well acquainted with the tasks required to be undertaken. The professional chosen may be from a regulated or unregulated firm.
In a very recent case of John William Mason & Anor v Probate Specialist Ltd & Anor [2026] EWCC 10, the director of an unregulated probate company was sentenced to one year in prison for contempt of court after failing to account for £432,000 of estate funds. The judgment is a stark warning to executors, beneficiaries, and anyone involved in estate administration about the risks of engaging unregulated providers.
What Happened: The Facts of the Case
The deceased passed away in 2021. His executors appointed Probate Specialist Ltd (PSL), an unregulated probate business, to manage the administration of the estate. PSL obtained the grant of probate in January 2022, and in the months that followed, £505,000 of estate funds were transferred to PSL to manage as part of the administration.
Of that sum, PSL paid out £73,000 for what the court described as “legitimate purposes”. In October 2023, the director, Stephen Jameson, showed the executors a bank statement indicating PSL held £391,000 of estate funds. The shortfall — already unexplained at that stage — left only £432,000 unaccounted for.
By March 2025, the executors became aware that PSL was facing a Companies House strike-off application. When they instructed solicitors and requested the transfer of funds to a client account, Mr Jameson confirmed he still held the estate monies but failed to act. The police were subsequently informed of a potential fraud.
In December 2025, a proprietary asset freezing order was granted by the court, requiring Mr Jameson to serve an affidavit within 14 days disclosing the whereabouts of the assets. He did not comply within the required timeframe. When an affidavit was eventually served in February 2026, it contained no documentary evidence and offered no meaningful account of what had happened to the funds. Mr Recorder Adrian Jack found that Mr Jameson had made no serious attempt to investigate or disclose the fate of the money, and that his failure to comply with the court order was intentional.
The court imposed a sentence of one year’s imprisonment. A further disclosure order was made, requiring Mr Jameson to provide details of the missing funds by 1 May 2026, with the prospect of further contempt proceedings and a longer sentence if he fails to comply.
Executors and Administrators: Understanding the Roles
It is worth clarifying a distinction that often causes confusion. When a person dies leaving a valid will, the individuals appointed to deal with the estate are known as executors. When a person dies without a will (intestate), or where there was a will but no executor able or willing to act, an administrator may be appointed instead.
In this case, the deceased left a will and appointed executors. Those executors then engaged a company PSL to carry out the practical administration of the estate on their behalf. The obligations and duties of executors under English law are considerable: they must collect the assets of the estate, pay debts and liabilities, and distribute the remainder to beneficiaries in accordance with the will — all within a reasonable timeframe and with proper accounting throughout.
Engaging a third party to assist with administration does not remove those underlying duties. Executors remain responsible for overseeing the process and ensuring that estate funds are properly managed and accounted for.
The Risks of Using an Unregulated Probate Company
Generally, when deciding what type of firm to instruct at the outset it is a must to consider whether the firm is regulated or not and the implications of not using a regulated firm. In broad terms, everything is okay until its not and the value of peace of mind comes to the fore once things go wrong.
Probate services in England and Wales can be provided by a range of organisations. Solicitors are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). However, unregulated businesses — like PSL in this case — operate outside that framework, meaning they are not subject to the same professional obligations, financial controls, or consumer protections.
When you instruct an unregulated probate company, you may face a significantly higher risk in a number of key areas:
No professional indemnity insurance requirement
Regulated solicitors are obliged to hold professional indemnity insurance. This provides a financial safety net if something goes wrong. Unregulated providers have no such obligation.
No client account protections
Solicitors must comply with strict rules about holding client money in separate, protected accounts. Unregulated firms face no equivalent requirements.
No professional conduct code
Solicitors are bound by the SRA Code of Conduct, which imposes obligations around honesty, competence, and client care. Breach can result in disciplinary action, fines, or being struck off.
Limited redress
If a regulated solicitor acts improperly, clients can complain to the Legal Ombudsman or the SRA. With unregulated providers, the route to redress is primarily through the civil courts — which, as this case demonstrates, can be a long, costly, and uncertain process.
No SRA Compensation Fund
The SRA operates a compensation fund for clients who suffer loss as a result of a solicitor’s dishonesty or failure. This protection does not apply to unregulated providers.
When Litigation Becomes Necessary
Litigation is always a last resort, but as this case shows, it may sometimes be the only effective means of holding those responsible to account.
Where estate funds have been misappropriated or an administrator or executor has failed to fulfil their duties, a range of legal remedies may be available:
- Freezing injunctions: Where there is a risk that assets will be dissipated or hidden, the court can grant a freezing order preventing the respondent from dealing with assets. This was the mechanism used in the Mason case to seek to preserve the estate funds.
- Contempt proceedings: Where a person fails to comply with a court order, they may be held in contempt of court. As this case illustrates, contempt can result in a custodial sentence.
- Proprietary claims: Where estate assets have been wrongly transferred, beneficiaries or executors may bring a proprietary claim to recover those assets or their proceeds.
- Personal claims against executors or directors: Where loss is caused by breach of duty or fraud, personal claims for compensation may be brought against those responsible.
Pursuing litigation of this kind requires specialist legal expertise. Acting promptly is important: delay can affect the availability of remedies and the ability to trace assets.
Choosing a Regulated Solicitor: The Importance of Peace of Mind
The Mason case is a powerful reminder that engaging a regulated firm of solicitors for estate administration is not simply a matter of professional preference — it is a meaningful protection for executors, beneficiaries, and the estate as a whole.
At Prosperity Law LLP, our solicitors are regulated by the SRA, maintain full professional indemnity insurance, and are bound by strict professional conduct obligations. We provide transparent, accountable estate administration with proper accounting throughout, ensuring that executors fulfil their duties and beneficiaries receive what they are entitled to.
If you have already appointed an unregulated provider and have concerns about how the estate is being handled, or if funds appear to be missing or unaccounted for, it is important to take legal advice as a matter of urgency.
Speak to Our Contentious Probate Team
If you are concerned about the administration of an estate, believe estate funds have been mishandled, or need advice about bringing a claim against an executor, administrator, or probate provider, Prosperity Law LLP can help.
Paul Magee and his team offer specialist advice in probate disputes and contentious estate matters. Contact us today for a no-obligation initial conversation.
Paul is a member of ACTAPS.
If what is required is help with the administration of an Estate then we also have a Private Client team that can help.
You can call us on 0161 667 3686 or fill out the form below.
About the Author
Paul Magee is a Partner and Head of Property Litigation at Prosperity Law LLP (SRA ID: 176479). With over 35 years’ experience as a litigation solicitor, Paul specialises in contentious probate, property disputes, and will challenges, and has successfully represented clients in a wide range of complex litigation matters. He is recognised for his pragmatic approach to resolving disputes efficiently and cost-effectively.
