Daughter wins £127k claim for caring for mum at home

[SerendipityJane]

Interesting ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr93zp78g580o

This is from the Telegraph article about this case.

The executor brother did not even know about the Mother’s complex medical needs until the case came to court. That tells me how involved he and the other siblings was with care and what was required - not very involved at all.

The daughter took an amount in my opinion that was very reasonable for 2 and half of live in, 24/7 care for a loved parent with complex medical needs.

And the amount does not include the cost of housing and feeding her dear Mum for 2 and half years

From the Telegraph

“The court heard that the estate was worth up to £402,000.
The sitting judge also pointed out that Mr Wills was “not aware” of his mother’s double incontinence, Type 2 diabetes, cataracts, or glaucoma, diverticulitis or kidney disease until the criminal trial.
Ruling the case a “real tragedy” for all involved, the judge ruled that Mrs Rogers “established that Sheila agreed to pay her [Mrs Rogers] a reasonable price for the care that the claimant provided”.”

Excerpt From
“Daughter wins £127k for caring for dementia-stricken mother”
Tom McArdle
The Telegraph
https://apple.news/Al-TvLRRwRwGzSAro-hO4ng
This material may be protected by copyright

I do feel a bit for the siblings in this case. Don't get me wrong, I don't think they've behaved perfectly either but I think they've been caught between two very strong personalities between their brother and sister. They all clearly did have the intention that their sister should get some recompense for the work she'd done but given the particular factors in the case, the fact that money had been repeatedly offered to her in the past and refused (at one point the mother went to the length of getting cash out and giving it to Bern, Bern refused and handed it back), several of them repeatedly said there needed to be a proper discussion about money and again neither Andrew nor Bern seemed willing to do that, the fact that on the odd occasion specifics were discussed it was much smaller sums more in the region of £50-100 per week, you can forgive them for maybe assuming that Bern was broadly OK with being given a token amount that was way under market rate for her input, and that she was in no particular hurry to get it. I don't know, you could say that's a very comfortable and therefore maybe dangerous assumption to make, but I do think in their shoes I would have been surprised to be presented with such a big invoice within a few days of the mother's death (I know this was done following pressure from the older brother as part of probate etc), and then I certainly would have felt really shocked if the money was just taken unilaterally. Not saying rationally speaking it would be right to feel that way but I do understand at least...

I get the feeling and it is only a feeling that something else has been said, or someone has pointed out, "Bern you've saved the estate a fortune by providing that amount of care, why should the rest of them benefit"

Either that or she's sat on the couch for the first time in 2.5 years and been able to actually feel 'I've got my life back'. And think about what she and Jon had done over the 2.5 years and actually try to put a figure on it, inc what she'd saved the estate in professional care fees.
Remember the care needs have crept up very slowly over the 2.5 years, until the last 2.5 weeks when she was sleeping on her mothers bedroom floor.

A bit like the opposite to when you have a newborn is just so intense but it eases off so gradually, you don't actually notice day to day until you have a 2.5 year old who's potty trained sleeps through the night and can tell you where hurts. And you sort of forget how intense and nackering those early days of middle of night feeds and nappy changes actually were.

I do think it’s fair that she got the money, the husband was also helping so you’ve got two people giving up over two years of their lives and opening up their home.

However this is not the best way to go about things. Generally more realistic conversations should be had and better planning. My understanding is that is that if you havd financial POA then you aren’t allowed to basically pay yourself an hourly rate which is a shame as lots of people may be able to help more if their time was properly compensated.

I suspect a lot of people will think you shouldn’t charge for family but really it’s about offsetting thr opportunity cost for the person who is sacrificing their time as they could be out working.

When my dad died and I needed someone to give me a break for overnight care at her house, it cost £150 a night. That was back in 2011 - and that was only for the overnight care - the daytime hours were on top of that.

I shudder to think how much it would have cost nowadays.

Ive come across this many times, he would have absolutely had a clue because he would have been told many many times and simply didnt want to hear it and didnt believe it.

Yes exactly if you take her £150 a day it comes out at £6.25 an hour.

Using your figures in 2011 the adult minium wage was £6.08
If you say a night was 10 hrs, £150/10 is £15 an hour. So about 2.5× min wage

In 2020 when the mum died it was £8.72.
So 2.5x £ 21.80 an hour 10 hours would be £218.00 a night.

My guess of £25 is high I was thinking current NMW.

While I have done the sums based on NMW I believe people providing that sort of care and dignity to elderly people should be paid far more than NMW.

The family were still getting a bargain and much more loving care than you'd get from someone who wasn't emotionally invested.

This is so true, he didn't want to know how ill his mum was.

People often think dementia is just being a wee bit forgetful but is much more than that, its forgetting everything, where the toilet is, forgetting to remove clothing going to the toilet, then eventually forgetting how to eat, as in forgetting how to put food in mouth, chew and swallow.

I know someone who had to clean cupboards multiple times because the dementia patient couldn't remember where the toilet was, they eventually ended up in a home.

There's a lot more.

When I read it, I read it as they could only appeal on the figure of the money due, not that A sum of money was due to her.

She was cleared of taking the money without consent. In the criminal courts, he wanted her invoice so she could be compensated before he tried to settle the estate.

I spent the afternoon reading that Court judgment and it seems completely that she was told by all the family members over and over again that she would be recompensed. The brother also told her to take 150,000 pounds. He said he had set that aside for his mother's care.

Yes, I just don't get why he didn't just accept it.
Its nuts hes caused 6 years of stress to his Sister and BIL for nothing and a family fallout that will probably never be repaired

Very greedy and he obviously had no idea how much she had had to put her life on hold to care for her mother so devotedly.

If the mother had gone into a home there would have been nothing left over.

Horrible man.

The getting more loving care isn't always the case. Not saying it wasn't in this case, but abuse of the elderly can happen when relatives don't want to lose their inheritance on care fees so do minimal themselves and not in the best interest of the elderly person or can't really cope with caring and don't act in the best interests of the person

I don't disagree but that definitely not the vibe Im getting here.
There were a team worth of adult children, and grandchildren none of them ever expressed concern that the mum wasn't being well cared for.

Yes I read that thread.

Siblings can be very cruel to a sibling that cared for a loved one when thry want their inheritance.