Most people assume a will is airtight once it’s signed, witnessed, and tucked away. In reality, the wording inside that document matters enormously, sometimes more than the intentions behind it. A single poorly worded sentence can unravel years of careful planning and push grieving families straight into court.
The rise in will disputes over recent years reflects not just family conflict, but a deeper problem with how these documents are written. As estates grow more complex and family structures more complicated, small legal oversights carry heavier consequences than ever before.
Will Contests Are Increasing, and the Numbers Show It
According to Ministry of Justice data obtained by TWM Solicitors, the number of will challenges increased from 76 in 2020/21 to 122 in 2024/25. That’s a rise of roughly 61 percent in just a few years. A growing number of disputes are being fueled by inheritance taxes, delayed inheritance, dementia, and complicated family structures.
In the last quarter of 2024, there were 3,061 applications to enter a “caveat” with the Probate Registry, which was an all-time high. As a result, early in 2025, nearly 5 percent of probate applications submitted faced a caveat.
Ambiguous Language Is One of the Most Common Triggers
Ambiguous language is one of the top reasons wills are contested in probate court. Whether it’s a confusing clause, an undefined term, or a contradiction between two sections, any room for doubt can lead heirs to question the testator’s true intent.
One of the most common causes of inheritance disputes is ambiguity in the language of the will. If a will is unclear about the distribution of assets, beneficiaries may interpret the document differently, leading to conflicts. Ambiguities can arise from vague language, where phrases like “fair share” or “as they see fit” can lead to varying interpretations.
Patent vs. Latent Ambiguity: Two Very Different Problems
Ambiguous language is wording that can be read in more than one way. In wills and trusts, that uncertainty often shows up in a gift description, a beneficiary name, or a clause that conflicts with another clause. When language is unclear, beneficiaries can disagree, and the personal representative or trustee gets stuck in the middle. If people cannot agree, a judge might need to step in to interpret the document.
Latent ambiguity is hidden at first, then surfaces when someone tries to carry out the terms. The language looks fine, but real-world facts make it unclear as to who or what the clause targets. Think of a gift “to the decedent’s nephew” when there are several nephews, or a nickname used instead of the person’s legal name. These issues often don’t appear until estate administration is underway.
DIY and Handwritten Wills Carry Extra Risk
Ambiguity issues show up most often in handwritten or DIY wills. These documents often lack formal structure and tend to use casual or emotional language. Holographic wills are more prone to interpretation problems because the testator usually isn’t working from a guided template, making it easier for clauses to conflict, terms to go undefined, and family members to misunderstand the testator’s intentions.
Handwritten or “do-it-yourself” wills are especially prone to errors, making them vulnerable to legal challenges. Even a well-intentioned personal document can create an expensive legal battle when the language leaves too much open to interpretation.
Lack of Testamentary Capacity Is Another Sentence-Level Problem
One of the most common grounds for contesting a will is a claim that the testator lacked the mental capacity to understand the consequences of their actions when the will was drafted. Proving lack of testamentary capacity requires demonstrating that the deceased didn’t grasp their property, beneficiaries, or the will’s implications when signing.
As of December 2024, 483,000 people aged over 65 had a formal dementia diagnosis, representing 4 percent of the population aged over 65. A dementia diagnosis does not automatically mean a lack of capacity to make a will, but it is potentially a factor. The language used in the will itself can become evidence of whether the testator truly understood what they were signing.
Undue Influence Often Hides in Plain Sight
Undue influence occurs when the testator is influenced by someone when they are in a weakened mental state to divide property in a way that wasn’t their actual preference. Undue influence exists where the provisions of a will reflect the desires of someone other than the person who made the will, usually due to excessive mental, moral, or physical pressure.
In many states, a rebuttable presumption of undue influence arises when a confidential relationship existed between the testator and the devisee at the time the will was executed, the devisee played an active role in preparing the will, and the disposition under the will is different from what might naturally be expected. A single sentence that benefits a caregiver or recent acquaintance over established family members can be all it takes to trigger a challenge.
How Courts Handle Disputed Sentences
Courts look to the clear meaning of language contained in a will if the language is otherwise unambiguous. Unfortunately, conveyance language in wills is not always clear, meaning courts must look to their rules of construction to determine the meaning behind such ambiguous language.
A good example of how ambiguity gets resolved can be found in the case of Bonham v Stringer, decided by the High Court in January 2025. In that case, the testator had left a will drafted by a firm of solicitors, which created a trust over the residue of the estate. Even professionally drafted documents can contain clauses that require judicial interpretation, demonstrating that no document is fully immune from challenge.
The No-Contest Clause: Protection with Limits
A no-contest clause, also known as an in terrorem clause, is a provision in a will that threatens to disinherit any beneficiary who contests the document. The term “in terrorem” is Latin for “in fear,” and its purpose is to make beneficiaries think twice before contesting in court.
While no-contest clauses can be effective, they are not guaranteed to prevent every dispute. Legitimate challenges based on undue influence or lack of testamentary capacity may still succeed. About half of U.S. states enforce a no-contest clause unless the person suing had “probable cause,” meaning a good reason, to sue. So the clause offers a deterrent, not a guarantee.
The Financial and Emotional Cost of a Contest
The process of disputing a will or trust can add significant costs for the estate and reduce what’s left for beneficiaries. Since these are court processes, resolution can take quite a bit of time, sometimes even years to sort out.
The cost, the time, the emotional toll, and the legal standards required to successfully contest a will discourage many potential challengers from ever filing. Still, when a contested sentence involves a large asset or a significant share of an estate, those barriers are increasingly being overcome. Relatives are more willing than ever to engage in expensive legal action to defend what they believe to be their rightful share of the family’s wealth.
Winning a Contest Is Harder Than Most People Expect
While will contests are not uncommon, winning one is statistically difficult. Courts generally prefer to honor the intentions of the deceased, especially when the will appears to be valid on its face and was properly executed. Estimates suggest that the success rate is often below 10 percent, with a large number of will contests being settled out of court or resulting in partial alterations.
Around 3 percent of all wills filed in the U.S. face challenges, according to the Nevada Law Journal. That may seem low, but it represents a significant volume of estates caught in prolonged legal disputes. Even with strong suspicions, many will challenges fail because courts need documented proof, not speculation.
How to Prevent a Single Sentence from Costing Everything
To avoid ambiguities, a will should be drafted with precise language, clearly outlining the distribution of assets. Working with a skilled attorney ensures that the will accurately reflects the testator’s intentions.
Circumstances change over time, and it’s important that a will reflects current wishes. Regularly updating a will can prevent disputes by ensuring that it accurately represents intentions, taking into account changes in relationships, financial situations, and other significant life events.
Keeping thorough documentation of the will-making process, including the testator’s mental state, the involvement of legal counsel, and the execution process, can provide evidence to defend against challenges. Clear records transform a questionable sentence into a defensible one.
The Takeaway
A will is only as strong as its weakest sentence. The legal battles that unfold from ambiguous wording, overlooked clauses, or carelessly borrowed phrases are rarely quick or cheap, and they almost always damage the relationships left behind.
Writing a will is genuinely one of the more consequential things a person can do, yet it’s often treated as a formality rather than a precise legal document. The evidence is clear: vague language, unreviewed templates, and outdated provisions are not minor oversights. They’re the raw material for disputes that can last years.
Getting the language right the first time isn’t about distrust. It’s about making sure the people you care about don’t spend their grief in a courtroom arguing over what you actually meant.
AI Disclaimer: This article was created with the assistance of AI tools and reviewed by a human editor.