Tony Hetherington is the Financial Mail on Sunday’s star investigator, battling readers, revealing the truth behind closed doors and securing victories for those left out of pocket. Find out how to contact him below.
JA writes: I responded to an advert offering to prepare wills for £47. I ended up paying Town and Country Law Ltd £600 for wills for me and my wife. I am still furious about this. I complained and also emailed the representative who came to our house, telling her I was not happy. I feel like I was conned.
Tony Hetherington answers: He The offer to draw up wills for £47 was a first step. The representative’s job was to get you and your wife (both over 70) to pay more.
You said to me: “I don’t remember her ever mentioning £47 wills. The visit was a bit of a whirlwind and a bit beyond our means.”
Unregulated: No legal qualifications are required to prepare the wills offered by Town and Country Law, and there is no regulator to lodge complaints with.
The result, under Town and Country Law, is that you instructed the firm to prepare not only the two wills but also four durable powers of attorney, two for you and two for your wife.
You commented: ‘I did not ‘instruct’ anyone to prepare the LPA; they suggested I take them out.’
The company denies having received any complaints from you, but you told me: “I did complain on the phone and they said, ‘Well, you signed it. ’ I also sent an email saying that my head was spinning.”
Unfortunately, no legal qualifications are required to prepare the wills or similar documents offered by Town and Country Law, and there is no regulator to whom you can lodge a complaint.
Here’s a helpful description of the situation: “Legal services that are not provided by a lawyer are not regulated. So if anything goes wrong, whatever it is, it’s very difficult to get your money back and there are no agencies that can help you.”
It’s all true, but the man who said this was solicitor Jonathan De Vita, who is no longer practising as a lawyer. Several months ago, he was cleared of criminal fraud charges, but the Solicitors Regulation Authority closed his South Humberside law firm and he was banned from the legal profession.
A disciplinary tribunal found that his firm had overcharged clients, falsified business records and used client funds without their knowledge or permission.
De Vita had behaved dishonestly and his misconduct had been “deliberate, calculated, repeated and continued over a number of years”.
The court added that De Vita had “taken advantage of vulnerable people: much of the work involved dealing with probate and beneficiaries and executors were entirely dependent on their ability to trust solicitors”. De Vita owes £143,456 in costs, so I asked the Solicitors Regulation Authority how much he had paid so far. The reply: “Not a penny.”
De Vita has filed for bankruptcy and his debts are still being reviewed by his bankruptcy trustee, who is beyond his control. What does he do now? He works for Town and Country Law, one of the unregulated legal service providers he used to tell people to avoid.
I asked De Vita if he had changed his mind, if he stood by the advice he gave before he was disbarred.
Without actually answering the question, he told me: “After a very difficult period in my life, I was acquitted. Although it was the right decision, I have learned some very valuable lessons and I look forward to putting behind me parts of my career that I greatly regret.”
I also asked Town and Country Law director James Scotney whether he agreed with De Vita’s advice to use proper lawyers, and why clients should find De Vita trustworthy, given the harsh ruling handed down by the court which found he had taken advantage of vulnerable clients.
Scotney did not respond to any of the questions, De Vita is still with Town and Country Law and the firm continues to advertise wills for just £47.
Now that I have a solicitor at 10 Downing Street, I wonder whether the need to regulate firms that draw up wills might become more important. I hope so.
Banking services for children in care
Mrs. KH writes: As a foster carer I am desperate to contact them. It has been a nightmare dealing with NatWest when it comes to opening accounts for foster children.
Social Services requires all carers to open a bank account for the children in their care, and I have been trying to open one for the young teenager in my care for a year.
Don’t count on it: NatWest has been a nightmare when it comes to opening accounts for foster children
Tony Hetherington answers: You have worked at NatWest for over 15 years, so the bank knows you. However, your first attempt to open an account for Julie (not her real name) was rejected because she did not have a passport.
You got Julie a passport and applied again. NatWest then refused to recognise your fostering arrangement. The bank then refused the letter from the local authority confirming that Julie would be with you at least until she turned 18.
After contacting NatWest, the bank requested the breeding agreement again and this time the bank accepted it.
There were also issues because the bank does not accept screenshots of documents taken with phones and questioned whether the letter from the local authority provided sufficient evidence of the link between you and Julie.
However, Julie now has her NatWest account. In total, it took her a year to get it, although several months of delay were due to the time it took to obtain the passport. NatWest told me: “We apologise to Ms H for the delays in opening the account.”
If you believe you have been a victim of financial crime, please write to Tony Hetherington at Financial Mail, 9 Derry Street, London W8 5HY or email tony.hetherington@mailonsunday.co.uk. Due to the high volume of enquiries, it is not possible to provide a personal reply. Please only send copies of the original documents, which unfortunately cannot be returned.
Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on them we may earn a small commission. This helps us fund This Is Money and keep it free to use. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationships to affect our editorial independence.
