• March 28, 2024
 Brother who acted as live-in carer demands larger share of mother’s estate

Brother who acted as live-in carer demands larger share of mother’s estate

A 62-year-old man still living in his parent’s home has demanded a larger share of his mother’s estate than his two siblings who “pursued careers”.

Doctors Dominic and Jeremy Heath left their parents home in London as young adults before entering the medical profession and carving out successful careers.

However, their brother Timothy never left the family home and continues to reside in his parents’ property at the age of 62.  Both have now died.

Rachel Heath, the mother, passed away in October 2015 aged 93. In her will, she split her fortune – an estimated £1.8 million – between her sons equally, as well as appointing them as executors.

Timothy has disputed this, stating that as he acted as his mother’s “primary carer” for “many years”, he should be entitled to a larger share of the estate. He claims that his siblings “took none of the burden”.

Contesting this, Dominic and Jeremy argue that their brother should leave the parental home so the wealth of the family should be distributed in line with the will.

Mr Justice Carr heard at London’s High Court that whilst brothers Dominic and Jeremy had both gone on to pursue careers in the medical profession, Timothy has stayed on in the family home where he has lived for over 50 years.

Though he now dedicates his time to creative projects, he is a maths graduate and qualified barrister.

Delivering his statement, Timothy told the court that for the past eight years he had been an unpaid “live-in carer” for his mother whilst she was living with dementia. In light of this, he said that this sacrifice should be acknowledged and reflected in his share of her estate.

He said: “I have been looking after mother for many years, a difficult person to look after. I was her principal carer for many years.”

In contrast, he claimed that his brother Dominic visited about once a month, whilst Jeremy only visited twice a year.

Though he did highlight the presence of his mother’s two live-in carers who were paid for, he told the court that he had taken on an equal share of the responsibility. Whilst Timothy reiterated that he didn’t ask to be paid, he drew attention to the notion that his brothers “took none of the burden” and left him to do “what they took advantage of”.

During the hearing, Timothy expressed his discontent directly to his brother Dominic, stating: “”You are employed as a consultant and you have multiple properties. You are a wealthy man.

“You offered no financial support. You didn’t visit often enough for it to manifest any form of care. I’ve looked after her almost single-handedly.

“I don’t own a house and I don’t have a pension or a steady income.

“I’m not prepared to be bullied by people who have pursued a career with money and don’t value things that don’t attract money, and I don’t think I should be made homeless or put into penury if it can be avoided.”

In response, Dominic acknowledged that whilst he was wealthy, his children should be entitled to their share of his mother’s estate.

He went on to state that despite the huge esteem he had once had for his brother, this had since “deconstructed”.

Delivering his verdict on the case, Mr Justice Carr drew attention to a conflict on interest between Timothy’s position as both a beneficiary of the will and executor, given the caring role he had taken on.

He stated: “I accept that 24 hour-a-day care was provided by three carers, each doing eight-hour shifts, one of whom was Timothy.

“His position is that, for several years, he provided care for his mother and his brothers did not.

“He claims to be entitled to a greater share of the estate than the 1971 will provides, that he is entitled to recompense and that his services to his mother ought to be recognised.

“That gives rise to a conflict of interest between his duties as an executor and his potential claim against the estate.

“I think that the claim to remove Timothy as an executor is well founded and I intend to accede to it.”

As well as ordering both Dominic and Jeremy to cover their own costs of £25,000 for bringing the application, Mr Justice Carr ordered for Timothy to step down as an executor and to be replaced by an independent solicitor.

The judge told the doctors that they too may have to step down if conflicts of interests emerge later down the line.

Georgia Owen

Georgia is the Senior Content Executive and will be your primary contact when submitting your latest news. While studying for an LLB at the University of Liverpool, Georgia gained experience working within retail, as well as social media management. She later went on to work for a local newspaper, before starting at Today’s Wills and Probate.

1 Comment

  • Has there been a further development in this case??

Comments are closed.