I'm the executor and I've received a letter claiming against the estate. What do I do?

May 29, 2026

Being named executor is an honour. It also carries real legal responsibility.


Margaret was named executor under her mother's will. The estate was substantial — a house in Nedlands worth approximately $2.8 million, a managed investment portfolio, and several term deposits — total value around $4.5 million. Her mother's instructions were clear: the estate was to pass to Margaret and her sister equally, with nothing left to her brother James, from whom her mother had been estranged for over a decade.


Three months after probate was granted, a letter arrived from a firm of solicitors. James was making a claim under the Family Provision Act 1972 (WA).


Margaret's first instinct was to ignore it. She was not going to let her brother take money that her mother had expressly directed away from him. But before making any decisions, she needed to understand what her obligations as executor actually were.


The executor's position in an FPA claim


An executor who receives notice of an FPA claim faces a genuine tension. On one hand, the executor's duty is to carry out the wishes of the deceased as expressed in the will. On the other, the executor has an obligation not to distribute assets in a way that prejudices a claim that may ultimately succeed.


Practically, this means that on receiving notice of a claim, an executor should not proceed to distribute the estate — particularly not to residuary beneficiaries — until the matter is resolved. Distributing prematurely, and then having the court make an order for provision, can expose the executor to personal liability.


Does the executor have to oppose the claim?


Not necessarily. The executor's role in FPA proceedings is primarily to represent the estate and put relevant information before the court — not to act as a champion of the beneficiaries named in the will. In practice, the named beneficiaries (here, Margaret and her sister) will usually wish to actively defend the claim, and they will either be joined as parties or take a position through the executor.


Where the claim has genuine merit, settlement may be in the interests of all parties — including the beneficiaries. A prolonged legal dispute depletes the estate. An early, reasonable resolution often leaves everyone better off than a full hearing.


What does Margaret need to do now?


  • Engage a solicitor promptly — an FPA claim has procedural steps and timeframes that must be managed
  • Do not distribute any estate assets until the matter is resolved
  • Gather the documentation that will be relevant — the will, the estate inventory, evidence of the relationship between the deceased and the claimant, any relevant correspondence
  • Consider whether the claim has any merit and what a reasonable settlement might look like
  • Keep the beneficiaries informed, while understanding that the executor's duties are to the estate, not exclusively to any individual beneficiary


What about the estrangement?


Estrangement is relevant, but it is not determinative. Courts look at the cause and nature of the estrangement, and whether the deceased's decision to exclude a family member was a considered response to conduct that justified exclusion, or whether it reflected other factors — animosity, undue influence, a failure to understand the extent of the estate.


In James's case, the court would examine the history of the relationship, the reasons for the breakdown, and whether James bears any responsibility for it. If the estrangement was primarily the result of James's own conduct — particularly serious conduct — that will weigh against him. But estrangement alone, without more, rarely justifies total exclusion from a large estate.


Getting the right advice



Executors in contested estate matters need advice from a solicitor who understands both the procedural obligations and the substantive law. Getting it wrong — whether by distributing prematurely, failing to engage with the claim properly, or agreeing to an unreasonable settlement — can have serious consequences.


Biddulph & Turley acts for both claimants and estates in FPA matters. If you have received a notice of claim, or if you are anticipating one, call 08 9398 5533 for an obligation-free consultation.

Close-up of a probate sign on a stack of papers and a wooden gavel.

How Long Do Probates in Perth Take and What Can Delay Them?

July 21, 2026
How long do probates in Perth take? Learn the WA Supreme Court timeline, common delays, and capped-fee help from Biddulph & Turley. Call now on 08 9398 5533.
Gavel on a judge’s bench with a Supreme Court sign in the background

When a Will Is Drafted but Not Signed: What a Recent WA Supreme Court Decision Means for Grieving Families

June 4, 2026
Loved one died before signing their will? A WA Supreme Court decision shows an unsigned draft can still go to probate. Call Biddulph & Turley.
Gavel resting on a “Living Will” document in dim light

Mum changed her will three months before she died. We think she was pressured. What can we do?

May 29, 2026
Will changed late in life under pressure? Learn the grounds to challenge a will in WA and why you must act before probate. Call Biddulph & Turley.
Will Contest book beside a gavel, scales, and gold pen on a desk

My brother says he's going to contest the will. What are our rights as beneficiaries?

May 29, 2026
Brother contesting the will? Learn your rights as a beneficiary under the Family Provision Act in WA and how to respond. Call Biddulph & Turley.
Man standing by a window in a light checkered shirt, looking out with his reflection visible in the glass

My father left everything to his new partner. Can I challenge the will?

May 29, 2026
Father left everything to a new partner? Learn how Family Provision Act claims work in WA and the six month time limit. Call Biddulph & Turley today.

The Perils of Informal Wills: Why a Note May Not Be Enough

September 22, 2025
Case Summary: When a Note Isn’t a Will Imagine this scenario: After a loved one passes away, a note is discovered—perhaps on their phone, in a drawer, or scribbled on a piece of paper. The note sets out some wishes about who should inherit their assets. Family members hope this note will be accepted as the person’s will. But when the matter goes to court, the judge decides the note is not a valid will. This situation is more common than many realize. In a recent case, a note titled “Last Will” was found on the deceased’s phone. While it expressed some intentions about distributing the estate, the court refused to accept it as an “informal will.” Why? In the case of Gallotti v Galotti-Brown [2025] WASC 384 a handwritten ‘amendment’ was written on a duly executed will. Was this amendment part of the will? Why the Note Was Not Accepted Australian law (and the law in many other places) allows courts to accept a document as an “informal will” even if it doesn’t meet all the usual requirements (like being signed and witnessed). But the court must be convinced of three things: There is a document. The document sets out the person’s testamentary intentions (what they want to happen to their property after death). Most importantly: The person intended the document to operate as their will. In the case above, the court found that the note was more of a draft or a statement of wishes—not a final, operative will. There was no evidence the deceased intended the note to be their last will and testament. The absence of a signature, witnesses, or any indication that the note was meant to be final all counted against it. The Dangers of Informal Wills Relying on informal documents—like notes, emails, or unsent text messages—to express your final wishes is risky. Here’s why: Uncertainty: Courts may not accept the document, leaving your estate to be distributed according to the law, not your wishes. Family Disputes: Ambiguous or informal documents can lead to costly and stressful legal battles among loved ones. Delay and Expense: Proving an informal will is often more complicated, time-consuming, and expensive than preparing a formal will. How to Protect Your Wishes Make a Formal Will: The safest way to ensure your wishes are followed is to make a formal will, properly signed and witnessed. Review Regularly: Update your will as your circumstances change. Seek Legal Advice: A qualified lawyer can help you avoid pitfalls and ensure your will is valid. Don’t leave your legacy to chance. A simple note may not be enough—take the time to make a proper will and give your loved ones certainty and peace of mind.
Close-up of a hand holding a pen.

Why Updating Wills in Perth Should Be a Priority

August 21, 2025
For expert advice on updating wills in Perth, contact Biddulph and Turley today. Visit our website to learn more.
Smiling female lawyer and senior couple going through will

How to Choose the Right Executor for Your Will in Perth, WA

June 25, 2025
Discover how to choose the right executor for your will in Perth, WA. Click here for essential tips and guidance from the experts at Biddulph & Turley.

Why You Should Never Rely on an iPhone for Your Will: Lessons from the Peek v Wheatley Case

June 11, 2025
In recent years, the rise of technology has made it easier than ever to create, store, and even amend important documents like wills. Many people assume they can simply jot down their wishes on their phone or leave a note in a digital app, believing this to be sufficient for estate planning. However, legal cases such as Peek v Wheatley [2025] NSWSC 554 highlight the dangers of informal, unprofessional will-making—especially when using a device like an iPhone. The Case at a Glance In Peek v Wheatley, the court examined whether a note found on the late Colin Peek’s iPhone could be considered a valid informal will under the NSW Succession Act 2006. The note, titled ‘Last Will of Colin L. Peek,’ was discovered after his death, and it appeared to specify how his estate should be distributed—primarily passing significant assets to a friend and executor, Mr Wheatley. However, the court faced the challenge of determining whether this digital note truly represented Colin’s testamentary intention—that is, whether it was his clear, deliberate wish to dispose of his estate as stated, with the intention for it to have immediate legal effect. When Will a Document Be Accepted as an Informal Will? In most Australian States, a document that does not meet the formal requirements of a will (such as being signed and witnessed) can sometimes still be accepted as a valid "informal will" if certain criteria are met. The key questions are: Did the deceased intend the document to operate as a will? Was the document clearly intended to dispose of the estate? Did the document demonstrate a genuine testamentary intention? In Peek v Wheatley, the court examined whether the note on the iPhone was created with the intention for it to serve as the deceased’s final testament. The court recognized that while the note contained the deceased’s wishes, it was unclear whether the document was intended to take effect, without more (that is without the will making doing anything else). It was possibly a “working document” or a ‘dry run’ that might be amended later by the will maker or simply a document that he intended to pass on to his solicitor to prepare a will based upon it. The Pitfalls of Informal, Digital Wills This case underscores why relying on informal methods—such as notes on a smartphone—is perilous: Lack of Formalities: A valid will typically requires signatures, witnesses, and clear language. Digital notes often lack these formalities, making their validity uncertain. Ambiguity of Intent: A casual note or message may not conclusively demonstrate the testator’s intention for the document to be their final will, especially if created in a moment of emotion or without legal advice. Potential for Disputes: Informal documents are more easily challenged, leading to costly and time-consuming court disputes, as seen in this case. Risk of Misinterpretation: Digital notes can be vague or incomplete, and their meaning can be misinterpreted, especially if they are not drafted with legal precision. Why You Should Have a Lawyer Prepare a Formal Will The Peek v Wheatley case exemplifies the importance of engaging a qualified lawyer to draft your will. A lawyer ensures that your testamentary wishes are clearly articulated, legally valid, and less susceptible to challenges. They will: Use precise language to avoid ambiguity Follow all legal formalities (signatures, witnesses) Provide advice on estate planning tailored to your circumstances Minimize the risk of intestacy or disputes after death Final Thoughts While it might seem convenient to jot down a quick note on your iPhone or leave a casual message, this approach is fraught with legal uncertainty. The law prefers formal, properly executed documents to ensure your wishes are respected and to minimize disputes among your loved ones.  If you want your estate to be distributed according to your wishes, consult a qualified estate planning lawyer. They will craft a robust, legally sound will that stands up in court and provides peace of mind for you and your family. Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For personalised estate planning assistance, please contact a qualified lawyer. Would you like me to help you draft a tailored legal will or provide further information?

Should you seek to get probate where the Deceased may not have had capacity?

By websitebuilder • March 13, 2024
The recent case of Diedler v Borowiec 2023 WASC 396 is perhaps a cautionary tale for those beneficiaries of a doubtful will. The Deceased made a will with the Public Trustee in 2018. At the time he has 97 years old. For all intents and purposes, when the will was prepared, the Deceased appeared to have capacity- he lived independently, drove his own car (!) and managed his own finances. He did not want his step son and his own daughter to benefit from his estate. Following a trial , a judge found that the Deceased suffered from delusions at the time he made the will including a belief that his daughter was a witch, was trying to poison him. That she was practising witchcraft and that she flew through his window and was stealing items form him. In fact there had been concerns about his mental health for a least five years prior to him making the will. Following his death, the Public Trustee obtained medical reports and came to the conclusion that the 2018 will was invalid. However, the beneficiaries of the 2018 will were not happy with that decision and decided to seek proof of it by issuing proceedings in solemn form in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Having lost the case, the question arose as to who should pay the solicitors costs. The court found that, having regard to the medical evidence, it was unreasonable for the beneficiaries of the 2018 will to have sought to prove it. Several offers of settlement (‘Calderbank Offers’) had been made by the beneficiaries of an earlier (1981) will, all of which had been rejected. The court ordered that the Plaintiffs (the beneficiaries of the 2018 will) pay the Defendants costs on an indemnity basis. Those costs would no doubt be very substantial. Although the person seeking to propound the will may have a honest (bona fide) belief that the will is valid, the belief must also be reasonable. On the facts, with the available medical evidence, the court found that the belief was not reasonable and the Plaintiff should bear not only their own legal costs but also the Defendants. As a point of reference, in the Victorian case of O’Donoghue v Mussett [2008] VSC 63, the Plaintiff’s costs were $250,000 up to the third day of a trial. The Defendant’s costs would be similar, so it becomes a very expensive exercise and not on to be lightly undertaken. If you need advice concerning the validity of a will, contact us now.