Staff can fail to record phone calls, or file letters in the wrong place or lose them, and cause mayhem in dozens of ways. The answer is training, checking, and, in a word, management. Once you get into key recovery, you're building yourself a problem, not a solution. You might as well require all staff to provide duplicate sets of their housekeys, in case they take office documents home before leaving on holiday. Nobody has a duty to leave any particular information for his executors, and the tidyness of peoples' records varies, to put it mildly.
Executors seem to manage.
At the moment, banks and insurance companies send out reams of paper, so most people have far more in the way of records of assets than most ever want. I wouldn't lose too much sleep as a CA who didn't keep a private key at the thought of being sued by executors who found encrypted data. First, because I don't think a court would find there was any duty to do more than advise the user to keep a backup of the private key. This all seems absurd to me at the level of theory. All this entertaining disagreement, however, may overshadow Alistair's important conclusion, which is that the Bill remains a potent vehicle for the promotion of key escrow.