An increase in life expectancies and professional care costs has led to a rise in informal care arrangements between family members and a return to multi-generational households.
It's generally assumed that care provided by family or friends is given out of love or moral duty, and not out of an expectation of compensation, and this is often the default position of the court when it comes to claims of this nature. However, the recent case of Rogers v Wills illustrates that when there is a clear intention on behalf of the carer and the deceased that the carer should be compensated, those costs could be payable from the deceased’s estate.
In this article we provide detail of the Rogers v Wills case, reveal the court's findings and highlight the key takeaways for beneficiaries and executors.
In this case, Sheila Wills was cared for by her daughter Bernadette for the last three years of her life. Although Sheila had other children who provided ad hoc care when necessary, the lion’s share of the responsibility fell to Bernadette and Sheila ended up moving to live with her in Bristol.
Sheila made it clear to Bernadette that she wanted to ‘pay her way’ and that Bernadette should be financially compensated for the care she provided, which Bernadette agreed to. Bernadette’s siblings were also in agreement that Bernadette should be remunerated fairly and were grateful to Bernadette for the care she provided to Sheila. Despite this agreement, Bernadette did not take any payment from Sheila during Sheila’s lifetime. Initially after Sheila moved in with her, Bernadette received a nominal rent from Sheila however this ceased after a short period, and the payments were returned during Sheila’s lifetime.
In 2018, Sheila granted lasting powers of attorney for health and welfare and for property and financial affairs to Bernadette and her son, Andrew. Sheila’s will appointed Andrew as sole executor of her estate.
Upon Sheila’s death in April 2020, Bernadette made payments from Sheila’s bank account to her own in respect of the care provided by her. Andrew reported this as theft and Bernadette was prosecuted, but later acquitted at trial at Bristol Crown Court.
Bernadette then made a claim against the estate in the sum of £135,000 as payment for care provided on the basis that her agreement with Sheila amounted to a contract. Bernadette also asserted that in conversation with Andrew about payment to her for care provision, Andrew told her to ‘just take it’ from Sheila’s accounts. Andrew denied this.
The court held that, although there was no written agreement between Sheila and Bernadette, it was clear that an agreement was reached between them that Bernadette would provide care to Sheila, and Sheila would pay her a reasonable sum in return. This was sufficient to amount to a binding contract. The key facts that the court relied on in its decision were:
Although the court agreed that Bernadette should receive an award from the estate in respect of the care provided, the outcome of a further hearing to decide the quantum of that award is awaited.
Beneficiaries, and in particular those who are due to receive a share or whole of the residuary estate, are advised to keep in mind that informal care arrangements could amount to a liability of the estate. All liabilities of the estate must be paid before any residuary beneficiaries receive their entitlement.
Whenever there is a potential claim for payment for care arrangements, executors should be encouraged, in particular where a probate dispute might arise, to make enquiries at an early stage to establish whether they might amount to a liability of the estate.
If you require any advice or assistance on any of the topics covered in this article, please contact the Ashfords' disputed wills and trusts team.
We produce a range of insights and publications to help keep our clients up-to-date with legal and sector developments.
Sign up
