I have just been reading about the Supreme Court decision in Marley v Rawlings and Another featured in your headline of 27 January. I have not read a full description of the Supreme Court report and am not sure that I want to.

It seems horrific that the court should argue that wills are valid when each party has signed the wrong will. Is the same rule going to apply if somebody else signs a contract instead of me?

Am I going to be bound even though my signature is not on the document?

This seems crazy, frankly. It is not as if they can look at the wider picture and say that they are righting some form of injustice, since if any party had been dispossessed because of the solicitor’s negligence, then they would be able to claim against his insurance.

Richard Crumly, solicitor, Thatcham, Berkshire