
Predatory marriages could be banned after pensioners ‘groomed' for inheritance payouts
Ministers are considering reforming marriage rules to stop elderly people from being preyed on and their families disinherited.
So-called 'predatory marriages' – which lawyers claim are on the rise – see the elderly and vulnerable groomed into marriages they may not properly understand.
Current rules mean that pre-existing wills are invalidated when a person marries, meaning that spouses, who can inherit without paying any death duties, stand to get everything under intestacy laws.
But a major report from the Law Commission, published last week, recommended that wills should no longer be discarded when a person marries.
In a letter to Sarah Sackman, a justice minister, and Fabian Hamilton, a Labour MP, raised the case of Joan Blass, a 91-year-old woman suffering from dementia who married a younger man in a 'secret' wedding.
She was widowed in 2008 but towards the end of 2011 struck up a conversation with the man, who was standing at the end of her garden. Within a month, he had moved into her spare bedroom.
The marriage – made without the knowledge of Ms Blass's family – meant that when she died in 2016, she was buried in an unmarked grave, against her wishes, and 'stripped of all her assets and money'.
Her husband claimed she did have the capacity to marry him and that it was a 'loving and caring' relationship, the i newspaper reported.
Mr Hamilton wrote on X: 'The Wills Act hasn't been updated since 1837. Marriage should never revoke a previous will.
'The Law Commission has put forward decisive recommendations. I have written to the justice minister calling on the Government to act on them.'
Current rules 'hard to justify'
The Labour MP put forward a Private Members' Bill in 2018 proposing a change in the law, which was supported by MPs including Rachel Reeves and Sir Ed Davey.
Mr Hamilton said he had been contacted by several families who had experienced 'predatory marriages', demonstrating the scale of the issue.
Daniel Edwards, a partner at law firm Browne Jacobson, said many people were unaware of the rule, and that it 'can seem a little hard to justify, given changes in society since the rule came about.'
Mr Edwards added: 'It is also one that can be open to abuse; in cases of 'predatory marriage' a will – that perhaps leaves everything to the testator's children – would in all likelihood be revoked by a marriage.
'While Law Commission reports can sometimes take years to be considered and debated in Parliament, the fact we have already seen the Government's response suggests there is motivation and intention to bring forward changes in the not-too-distant future.'
Government 'recognises current law is outdated'
Ms Sackman said in response to the recommendations: 'Marriage should no longer automatically revoke a will – this recommendation is designed to address the problem of 'predatory marriages' where vulnerable people are befriended, and the effect of the marriage is to disinherit families and others from any will they have made.'
The Law Commission began looking into wills in 2016, before pausing the research in 2019 to focus on marriages at the Government's request. It published the results of two public consultations and draft legislation earlier this month.
Other recommendations from the review included allowing children to make wills, making electronic wills valid and the recognition of more informal wills.
The commission also proposed abolishing rules which stop second spouses, stepchildren and divorced partners from challenging mutual wills under the Inheritance Act 1975.
Ms Sackman added: 'The reforms proposed by the Law Commission are significant and wide-ranging. They deserve detailed consideration.
'The Government recognises that the current law is outdated, and we must embrace change, but the guiding principle in doing so will be to ensure that reform does not compromise existing freedoms or protecting the elderly and vulnerable in society from undue influence.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
24 minutes ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer says he was ‘distracted' by Middle East and Nato during welfare rebellion
Sir Keir Starmer has admitted his focus was on matters involving Nato and the Middle East while a rebellion over welfare cuts took hold of his party at home. The prime minister has faced a growing backbench rebellion over proposed disability benefits cuts. Some 126 Labour backbenchers have signed an amendment that would halt the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill in its tracks when it faces its first Commons hurdle on 1 July. Responding to questions about what went wrong during the difficult week, Sir Keir claimed full responsibility for the welfare U-turn. 'All these decisions are my decisions and I take ownership of them,' he told The Sunday Times. 'My rule of leadership is, when things go well you get the plaudits; when things don't go well you carry the can. I take responsibility for all the decisions made by this government. I do not talk about staff and I'd much prefer it if everybody else didn't.' He continued that this was due to his heavy concentration on foreign affairs instead of domestic matters, first at the G7 meeting in Canada and then a Nato summit in the Netherlands. He also had to deal with the US's strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. 'I'm putting this as context rather than excuse: I was heavily focused on what was happening with Nato and the Middle East all weekend,' he said. 'I turned my attention fully to it [the welfare bill] when I got back from Nato on Wednesday night. Obviously in the course of the early part of this week we were busy trying to make sure Nato was a success.' He added: 'From the moment I got back from the G7, I went straight into a Cobra meeting. My full attention really bore down on this on Thursday. At that point we were able to move relatively quickly.' The government's original package restricted PIP eligibility, the main disability payment in England, and cut the health-related element of Universal Credit in a bid to save £5bn a year by 2030. The government has offered Labour rebels a series of concessions in an effort to head off the prime minister's first major Commons defeat since coming to power, as discontent bubbles among backbenchers surrounding welfare cuts, but campaigners have warned that these concessions could continue to cause problems Instead, the PIP eligibility changes will be implemented in November 2026, applying to new claimants only, while the existing recipients of the health elements of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. While lead rebel Dame Meg Hillier has accepted the prime minister's £1.5bn U-turn as a 'positive outcome', Sir Keir has been warned that his decision to protect existing benefits claimants from upcoming welfare cuts would only create a 'generational divide' as hundreds of charities and campaigners urged MPs to continue their opposition to the proposed cuts. Disability charity Mencap warned that the changes will create a 'generational divide in the quality of life for people with a learning disability'. Think tank the Resolution Foundation warned earlier this week that the prime minister's U-turns on benefit cuts and winter fuel payments have blown a £4.5bn hole in the public finances that will 'very likely' be filled by tax rises in the autumn Budget.


Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: If ever we needed an effective opposition to rout Labour, it's now
Is there no limit to the price Britain must pay for having given Keir Starmer 's Labour Party a chance a year ago? This is rapidly becoming one of the worst governments in modern history. Some of its hopelessness and nastiness was predictable. Labour signalled loudly to its more militant supporters that it planned a class-war attack on private education. Other plans were buried deep in the small print. Or they were hinted at by the choice of ministers to carry them out. Chancellor Rachel Reeves, for instance, had disclosed to all who paid attention to her writings that she was gripped by Left-wing dogmas. She professed to revere the Cambridge eccentric Joan Robinson, who spent much of her career admiring the disastrous policies of Maoist China and North Korea. Later we discovered that she was inexperienced as well. Did Sir Keir Starmer realise this, or was he also beguiled by her dubious claims that she had spent a decade working as an economist at the Bank of England? It appears he has now decided to leave her in place to absorb as much as possible of the derision and dissent which her policies have brought about – a cruel revenge, if so. As her next duty will almost certainly be a huge stealth tax rise, achieved by failing to raise thresholds in line with inflation, he will no doubt prefer to let her take the punishment for that too. But this will not protect him from the general civil war which he began by permitting ill-planned attempts to slash the winter fuel allowance and cut welfare payments. Did he really not grasp that his huge new parliamentary party was full of men and women who are profoundly, emotionally committed to spending other people's money on a grand scale? Perhaps not. Sir Keir's own politics are something of a mystery, even to him. The sense of a man floundering between vague principles and a definite desire to stay in office is very strong. For example, he now says that he deeply r egrets describing Britain as an 'island of strangers', which many took as an echo of the late Enoch Powell's 1968 speech about immigration. He claims not to have read it properly before delivering it – a ridiculous thing for a Prime Minister to say. This retraction of his own scripted words must surely be the end of his attempt to save his bacon by trying to copy Reform UK. He also claims to be sorry about an earlier pessimistic speech about the economy, saying: 'We were so determined to show how bad it was that we forgot people wanted something to look forward to as well.' But do they have anything to look forward to, apart from an intensifying civil war between Sir Keir and his traditionally Leftist deputy Angela Rayner? Sir Keir and Ms Rayner are like two opponents grappling with each other on the edge of a precipice. The danger is that they will both fall together, leaving the country to suffer. As things stand, we could have four more years of this unsuccessful and increasingly divided government. It is vital that those who are opposed to its policies coalesce quickly into a coherent and effective opposition, which can both hold Labour to account and prepare to replace it with a competent pro-British government ready to step in, stop the rot and undo as much of the damage as possible.


Sky News
42 minutes ago
- Sky News
Two more people arrested over damage to aircraft at RAF base
Two more people have been arrested on suspicion of a terror offence after two aircraft were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire. Counter Terrorism Policing South East said the men, aged 22 and 24 and both from London, were arrested on Saturday afternoon on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, contrary to Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000. On Thursday, police said a woman, aged 29 of no fixed address, and two men, aged 36 and 24 from London, had been taken into police custody after the incident at RAF Brize Norton on 20 June. A 41-year-old woman, of no fixed address, was also arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender, they previously said. The group posted a video online claiming it was behind the vandalism at the Oxfordshire airbase last Friday, saying activists had damaged two military planes at the base. Palestine Action - which focuses its campaigns on multinational arms dealers and has previously targeted corporate banks - said two activists "broke into the largest air force base in Britain and used electric scooters to swiftly manoeuvre towards the planes". 5:01 Repurposed fire extinguishers were used to spray red paint into the turbine engines of two Airbus Voyagers, while further damage was made using crowbars. "Red paint, symbolising Palestinian bloodshed was also sprayed across the runway and a Palestine flag was left on the scene," a statement by the group said. Brize Norton is the largest RAF station, with approximately 5,800 service personnel, 300 civilian staff and 1,200 contractors. A security review was launched across the "whole defence estate" following the breach, which was condemned as "absolutely staggering" by Ben Obese-Jecty, a Tory MP and former Army officer. Sir Keir Starmer condemned the "act of vandalism" as "disgraceful", adding: "Our Armed Forces represent the very best of Britain and put their lives on the line for us every day. It is our responsibility to support those who defend us." Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said on Monday that Palestine Action will be proscribed as a terrorist organisation following the breach at RAF Brize Norton. She said a draft proscription order will be laid in parliament next week, and if passed, it will make it illegal to be a member of, or invite support for, Palestine Action.