Skip to content
Bramble

UK

Daughter awarded £127,500 by High Court for caring for her mother at home

Bern Rogers, 71, of Bristol, was awarded £127,500 from her late mother's estate for 850 days of care, after being acquitted of theft and fraud over a £100,000 withdrawal. The executor, her brother Andrew Wills, disputes that a contract existed, and the BBC reports the estate intends to appeal the amount.

2 outlets · 0L · 1C · 1R First reported Account updated
Image: BBC News
Image: Daily Mail

1 / 2

The story, neutrally told

Mixed · 2A High Court ruling has entitled Bern Rogers, from Bristol, to be paid £127,500 from her late mother Sheila Wills's estate for caring for her at home. Mixed · 2Mrs Wills moved into Ms Rogers's Bristol home in September 2017. She had dementia and physical health problems including a painful prolapse, and she was cared for there for about two-and-a-half years until she died in April 2020. Mixed · 2Ms Rogers and her husband Jon describe the care as round-the-clock, saying they could not leave Mrs Wills alone and that Ms Rogers slept on the floor of her mother's bedroom in the final weeks. Ms Rogers says her mother wanted to be cared for by her daughter rather than by paid carers or in a home, and insisted she be paid.

Mixed · 2Shortly after her mother's death, Ms Rogers transferred £100,000 from the estate. The money was seized or recovered by banks amid fraud concerns, she was reported to police for theft and fraud and charged, and a jury at Bristol Crown Court found her not guilty in 2022. Mixed · 2Ms Rogers then went to the civil courts. In 2025 a High Court judge ruled she had entered into an informal contract with her mother for payment of a reasonable sum for her care, and the estate was ordered to pay her legal costs. The Daily Mail adds that the court also found the estate had benefited from the care through unjust enrichment. Mixed · 2In August 2026 a second High Court judge set the amount at £150 a day for 850 days. Messages from Ms Rogers's five siblings shown in court said she should be paid something for the care, though no sum was agreed.

Mixed · 2Her brother Andrew Wills, the estate's executor, said the siblings knew only of an agreement to give her £50 a week 'keep' and ensure she was not out of pocket, and were not told of any other contract. He said the estate was willing to pay genuine expenses plus a gratuity, and that Ms Rogers rejected its offers and issued proceedings. The Daily Mail quotes him calling the judgment 'disappointing' and saying he doubts his 'frugal' mother would have agreed to commercial care rates for family. Centre · 1The BBC reports that the ruling on entitlement cannot be appealed, but the estate intends to appeal the second ruling on the amount. Centre · 1Legal experts told the BBC the ruling does not automatically set a precedent but is likely to prompt similar claims. Emma Holland of Stewarts said courts are willing to apply ordinary contract principles to family relationships, and Beth Middleton of JMW said it would 'open a floodgate of claims'.

Right · 1Ms Rogers says the estate was worth over £400,000, including about £235,000 from the sale of her mother's Norfolk home, and that her siblings received their shares while she received nothing. The couple say they remain estranged from the siblings, all five of whom gave statements against her in the criminal case.

Every sentence links to the reporting it rests on. The pill in front of each says where its sources sit: Left, Centre or Right when one side supplies at least half of them, Mixed when they are evenly split. The number is how many outlets it cites.

Left0 outlets

No left outlet in our sources has covered this story yet.

Centre1 outlet

Framing
A human-interest report built on Ms Rogers's relief at vindication, followed by legal experts on what the ruling means for future claims, with the estate's statement included.
Emphasis
The legal significance for other carers, with three named solicitors, and the estate's intention to appeal the amount.
Leaves out or plays down
Does not give the £150 daily rate, the unjust enrichment finding or the estate's value.
Charged language
“phenomenal”“hugely significant”“open a floodgate of claims”
For example
“Legal experts said the "hugely significant" High Court ruling would lead to other claims.” — BBC News

Right1 outlet

Framing
A personal-grievance story told through Ms Rogers and her husband, with the headline and lede centred on feeling like a criminal after the family dispute.
Emphasis
The family rift, the criminal trial, the estate's size and her siblings' inheritances, plus the £150-a-day calculation.
Leaves out or plays down
The visible text does not include the legal experts' caution that the ruling is not automatically a precedent, and does not mention the estate's planned appeal. The lede says she 'took £127,500' although the £100,000 withdrawal and the award were separate.
Charged language
“terrible criminal”“bitter family court battle”“scapegoat”
For example
“I went from being held up as a saint for looking after mum to suddenly being this terrible criminal.” — Daily Mail

Ask about this story

Loading…