Please allow us a reasonable time ?

poseidon1

OP, I would take heed of the impressive investigative work conducted by Dead_keen. There are all kinds of red flags here which as someone who professionally  dealt with deceased estates myself,  ring alarm bells. By the way I would never advised anyone to use unregulated firms for any legal service since you will be outside the ambit of any SRA compensation scheme, and such firms are not required to hold guranteed PII cover against professional negligence.

It is a particular concern they are unregulated when it comes to holding client funds ( not allowed!) see below -  and begs the question how they were going to handle the property sale

https://nexa.law/the-benefits-of-sra-regulation-why-instruct-a-regulated-law-firm/#:~:text=Unregulated law firms also don,risks this poses to them.

Despite being unregulated, if there are actual active lawyers delivering services, the firm still has (limited) SRA  accountability so I would not delay in approaching the SRA complaints process to ascertain exactly who you are dealing with  and what   remedies may be available - see link

https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/complaints-solicitors-working-outside-sra-regulated-firms/#:~:text=8.3 You ensure that clients are informed,when they can make any such complaint.

Finally the long list of awards listed on their website  are bogus -

https://www.seagulllegalservices.co.uk/about

Chambers & Partners are the definitive UK guide on excellence and  achievement within the UK Legal  sector. Needless to say Seagull does not exsist in the guide -

https://chambers.com/

Frankly, their poorly constructed website, and conspicuous omissions should be a clue all is not well here.

silvercar

Emmia said:

Does nobody pick up on the fact the registered address for this company and the people involved is at best a postbox?  Whilst legal, this would be ringing alarm bells loudly for me.

Having received abusive mail from due to having my personal address as the registered address of my company, I can totally understand a company registering their address elsewhere.

Emmia

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

Does nobody pick up on the fact the registered address for this company and the people involved is at best a postbox?  Whilst legal, this would be ringing alarm bells loudly for me.

Having received abusive mail from due to having my personal address as the registered address of my company, I can totally understand a company registering their address elsewhere.

But for a legal firm (or a company purporting to be a legal firm) the use of this type of address, indicates they have no offices and would be at odds with the image they're seeking to portray... "Award winning" "covering a range of areas" etc. doesn't sound like a one person band working out of a back bedroom.

For sole traders I can understand the use of this type of address - but as all mail is scanned and sent I'm not sure it would prevent the abuse.

silvercar

Emmia said:

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

Does nobody pick up on the fact the registered address for this company and the people involved is at best a postbox?  Whilst legal, this would be ringing alarm bells loudly for me.

Having received abusive mail from due to having my personal address as the registered address of my company, I can totally understand a company registering their address elsewhere.

But for a legal firm (or a company purporting to be a legal firm) the use of this type of address, indicates they have no offices and would be at odds with the image they're seeking to portray... "Award winning" "covering a range of areas" etc. doesn't sound like a one person band working out of a back bedroom.

For sole traders I can understand the use of this type of address - but as all mail is scanned and sent I'm not sure it would prevent the abuse.

It makes it harder for someone to find your personal address. It won’t prevent mail being received, but it could deter more dangerous activity.

Emmia

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

Does nobody pick up on the fact the registered address for this company and the people involved is at best a postbox?  Whilst legal, this would be ringing alarm bells loudly for me.

Having received abusive mail from due to having my personal address as the registered address of my company, I can totally understand a company registering their address elsewhere.

But for a legal firm (or a company purporting to be a legal firm) the use of this type of address, indicates they have no offices and would be at odds with the image they're seeking to portray... "Award winning" "covering a range of areas" etc. doesn't sound like a one person band working out of a back bedroom.

For sole traders I can understand the use of this type of address - but as all mail is scanned and sent I'm not sure it would prevent the abuse.

It makes it harder for someone to find your personal address. It won’t prevent mail being received, but it could deter more dangerous activity.

My point though is that if you take the website at face value, this isn't a one person company and so should have an office, with that being used as the address for correspondence, as well as meeting clients etc.

The use of a "forwarding company" for client privileged legal correspondence which they open and scan also rings all manner of alarm bells for me.

Dead_keen

Emmia said:

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

Does nobody pick up on the fact the registered address for this company and the people involved is at best a postbox?  Whilst legal, this would be ringing alarm bells loudly for me.

Having received abusive mail from due to having my personal address as the registered address of my company, I can totally understand a company registering their address elsewhere.

But for a legal firm (or a company purporting to be a legal firm) the use of this type of address, indicates they have no offices and would be at odds with the image they're seeking to portray... "Award winning" "covering a range of areas" etc. doesn't sound like a one person band working out of a back bedroom.

For sole traders I can understand the use of this type of address - but as all mail is scanned and sent I'm not sure it would prevent the abuse.

It makes it harder for someone to find your personal address. It won’t prevent mail being received, but it could deter more dangerous activity.

My point though is that if you take the website at face value, this isn't a one person company and so should have an office, with that being used as the address for correspondence, as well as meeting clients etc.

The use of a "forwarding company" for client privileged legal correspondence which they open and scan also rings all manner of alarm bells for me.

I research dodgy companies quite regularly.  For me he registered office is something I look at and when I see that is correspondence address / serviced offices, it's something that pushes me a tiny bit more on the "it might be dodgy" bit.  But only a very tiny bit.

If it was a regulated law firm, then it would be "unusual" but I would assume that they manage their correspondence properly.  I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that, for a regulated law firm, it would  make it seem dodgy.  It might be dodgy, but a regulated law firm is likely to have proper processes in place to protect correspondence.  

Here though we do not know who is doing the trading (or that privilege is relevant).  The website doesn't mention who is doing the trading (e.g. no company name).  For me, that pushes things into the "very dodgy" category, especially when it is not mentioned on the privacy policy page / terms and conditions / legal statements type pages.  Most of the pro formas for this type of page have a name for the entity.  So to not have a name on this page increases my concerns as to why it may have been deleted.  Similarly, there are no names of individuals in the "about us" pages which is strange for a firm that provides the services of people. That increases my concerns.  Similarly the lack of any LinkedIn page for a people business increases my concern. 

A massive red flag is the lack of a regulator being mentioned on the website when they appear to be providing legal services:

We take full responsibility for getting the grant of probate and dealing with the legal, tax, property and estate administration affairs on your behalf. We can meet with you in your home, our offices or another location (in England or Wales) to explain the probate process and to answer your questions.

But there might be a reasonable explanation for it.  I have no clue.

The name of a company has been mentioned on this thread but this (at least until 31 March 2025) appears to be dormant and is not mentioned on the website.  To me that is in the "potentially-dodgy-but-might-be-explained" category.  In some cases, it might be because the dormant company is the agent for an undisclosed principal.  That can be a sign of bigly dodginess (e.g. when the principal is based is Mauritias and paying contractors tax free through the purchase of a conditional deferred annuity).  But it might also be that they thought about trading via a company, decided to use a general partnership in the end and kept the dormant company going to protect the name.  That isn't dodgy at all. 

user1977

Emmia said:

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

silvercar said:

Emmia said:

Does nobody pick up on the fact the registered address for this company and the people involved is at best a postbox?  Whilst legal, this would be ringing alarm bells loudly for me.

Having received abusive mail from due to having my personal address as the registered address of my company, I can totally understand a company registering their address elsewhere.

But for a legal firm (or a company purporting to be a legal firm) the use of this type of address, indicates they have no offices and would be at odds with the image they're seeking to portray... "Award winning" "covering a range of areas" etc. doesn't sound like a one person band working out of a back bedroom.

For sole traders I can understand the use of this type of address - but as all mail is scanned and sent I'm not sure it would prevent the abuse.

It makes it harder for someone to find your personal address. It won’t prevent mail being received, but it could deter more dangerous activity.

The use of a "forwarding company" for client privileged legal correspondence which they open and scan also rings all manner of alarm bells for me.

Why? That's completely normal these days - plenty of firms redirect their incoming post somewhere else to be scanned and distributed.

Bebe1980

mta999 said:

I am guessing there are ongoing costs that have to be paid as it is a retirement property and normally you have to pay these until the property is sold?

Yes that's correct - or possibly, I doubt it but, the management company let you run up a slate and then you clear it when the property is sold.

poseidon1

I am hoping the OP can cut through the irrelevant side issues that have cropped up in this thread, and consider a course of action as follows:

1) Consult the sister  as a named executor on the will, to agree to conduct a thorough investigation into the bona fides of the firm that has been entrusted to obtain the grant of probate and apparently sell the flat. Some of @Dead_keen's research might assist.

2) If after doing so and ascertaining from the  SRA  that there are no regulated lawyers engaged by the firm in any capacity, your sister would be strongly advised to terminate the firms instructions in this matter and engage a regulated firm to progress thereafter.

If however , it transpires Seagull holds office as co executors of the estate with your sister or she delegated her executorship by way of power of attorney, that would be unfortunate and would make discharging them more complicated. If this was a delegation by her she may have endangered herself by way of potential personal liability for any estate losses, by failing to excercise appropriate  due care and diligence in choosing this particular firm.

I would therefore suggest that the OP  refer to the will to check whether Seagull are indeed appointed executors. In any event he should be alerting his sister  of the grave misgivings expressed in this thread of the firm she has entrusted this work to. She may not be best pleased by your intervention but doing nothing and hoping for the best, would not be an appropriate course of action.