The Daily Telegraph interviews clueless survivors and misses an interesting story.
Here’s a story headlined “Treasures Found Behind Bedroom Door” which entirely misses the point. The paper asserts that two Fra Angelico panel paintings have been found in Oxford and that their owner didn’t know what they were because she lived a modest life:

“She bought her clothes from a catalogue, ate frozen meals and went everywhere on the bus,” he [the owner's nephew] said.

My suspicions were raised by this throwaway line in the story: She had been curator of manuscripts at two universities in America, Princeton and Huntingdon [sic].
Hmmm. Someone who is curator of manuscripts at the Huntington Library (not university, silly Englishman) is not a naive. So I googled and read this in her obituary on a page of the Early Book Society Newsletter (click and search for “Preston”):

Jean’s lovely little home in Oxford was filled with treasures: Jean was the largest private collector of manuscript leaves by the Spanish forger, and she owned several important pre-Raphaelite paintings.

Miss Preston may have been the twit’s maiden aunt, but she’s not sounding nearly so naive as to live for 45 years with two Fra Angelico panels without figuring out what they were – the woman collected forgeries! That’s someone who is well beyond mildly aware of her collection. I think she reveled in looking at the two paintings for a long, long time without ever having to increase her insurance premium. I salute Miss Jean Preston!
I first read about this at the Commonplace Book of Zadok the Roman.
Further:
About collecting forgeries . . .
There are a couple of reasons Miss Preston might have collected forgeries – I’ll speculate here. People who collect forgeries are often interested in conoisseurship – the study of determining who made what by careful analysis of works of art (and the word usually excludes technical examination in favor of the ‘trained eye’). Miss Preston was an expert on manuscript books (not necessarily manuscript painting – I don’t know enough about her to say) and the Spanish Forger (many of whose works have been detected but who evaded identification, so is still known by the sobriquet – here’s a quick link to a work) is a fascinating case. So she must have been interested in conoisseurship! Therefore she would have consulted friends with more expertise in 15th C. panel painting about her own examples (and given her profession and the places she worked she would have regularly met folks with a LOT of expertise).
Now there are two other reasons she might have collected forgeries – they’re cheaper than ‘real’ manuscript pages AND they don’t involve dismembering books. She may have developed a taste for a kind of 14th and 15th century ms painting that was beyond her price point. She may well have had a librarians’ distaste for people who dismember books to sell isolated leaves, but that’s not an issue with forgeries. Therefore collecting (relatively) inexpensive forgeries solves both the ethical and the financial problem.