Sisters in £500,000 court battle as one accuses other of cutting her out of their mother’s will

Two sisters face each other in court over a half-million pound inheritance, while one claims the other ‘monitored’ their mother during Covid lockdowns to remove her from the will.

Julie Sinclair said her sister Helyn Sinclair sent her a ‘you’ve f****ed my life too long’ message a week before their mother signed a new will, leaving almost all of her £500,000 estate to Helyn.

In 2021, Helyn was living with her mother Betty and caring for her mother at her home in Selsey, West Sussex, and Julie believes her mother did not know what she was signing when she changed the will.

The mother of five is now asking Judge Deputy Master Bowles for an injunction to enforce an earlier 2015 will that will divide the estate equally among the sisters.

But the judge declined to hear the case without bringing before him the original 2015 will, owned by Helyn.

He also said he was not satisfied with hearing nothing from Helyn – who has not initiated proceedings, adding: “This case has a strange feel to it.”

The court heard that Betty passed away on July 22, 2021 at the age of 89, about a month after she made her new will on June 18, 2021.

Helyn had been living with Betty at her £500,000 home in East Street, Selsey at the time of her death and had been a live-in carer for her mother since the start of the pandemic in March 2020, Julie’s lawyer Adam Smith-Roberts told the judge.

“As a result of the global Covid-19 pandemic, Helyn lived on the deceased’s property from about March 2020,” he said.

Helyn was the only point of contact the deceased had with the outside world and she controlled who was allowed to visit and speak to the deceased until her death.

“There is evidence that the deceased’s cognitive function, and in particular her memory, has deteriorated during the lockdown period.

“Relationships between Helyn and the rest of the family became further strained during the lockdown period, with Helyn limiting contact with the deceased and becoming increasingly erratic.”

He argued that the will being amended in those circumstances should arouse the “suspicion” of the court, especially in the context of a WhatsApp message Helyn sent to Julie about a week before the new will was signed.

He said the message read: ‘I’m no longer willing to fool myself into taking advantage of half the house when Mom eventually dies…while I’m more than happy to take care of Mom, I’m not willing to do it for you to benefit in the end.

‘My financial profit from my mother’s estate has so far been 28.5 pence per hour for 24/7 intensive care from attendance allowance and many thousands of profit for you that has been saved by not having to contribute for the necessary care. You’ve ruined my life for too long and now it’s over.’

A court heard Helyn message Julie: ‘I’m no longer willing to fool myself into taking advantage of half the house if Mum eventually dies’ (Photo: Selsey, West Sussex house)

Mr Smith-Roberts argued that suspicious circumstances surrounding the making of the New Will are such that Helyn would have to prove that Betty knew what she was signing, was in her right mind and was not put under undue pressure.

He told the judge that Julie and all her children “all reported a significant decline in the deceased’s cognitive abilities and mental state” during the lockdown.

The new will was prepared using an online portal, he said, adding: “The 2021 will was clearly drafted by Helyn rather than by the deceased, who lacked the necessary IT skills due to arthritis.

“Nobody but the deceased and Helyn was present during the drafting.

“To Julie’s knowledge, the 2021 will differs from the 2015 will in that Helyn was named sole executor and the entire estate of the deceased was left to Helyn.

“Importantly, there is no rational explanation for the change in the 2021 will compared to the position in the previous will.

“Julie and the deceased hadn’t argued and the deceased was close to Julie and all her children. To almost completely remove them from her will without explanation raises suspicion.’

He also said there was an “error in the text of the 2021 will” referring to Julie’s children as Betty’s cousins ​​rather than grandchildren, “which in itself is telling and gives the strong impression that the deceased did not know what she was signing.” ‘ .

The judge said he had to see the original copy of the 2015 will, which contained both sisters and the defendant – Helyn

“Around the time of the preparation of the 2021 will, Helyn had a desire to benefit financially from caring for the deceased at the expense of Julie,” he continued.

“That’s clear from the message she sent to Julie.

“There is enough doubt about the validity of the will to shift the burden onto Helyn to prove capacity, knowledge and approval at the time of execution.

“Evidence shows that Helyn had complete control over the life of the deceased as of March 2020.

Helyn is a volatile character who exerts emotional pressure on the deceased.

“These factors, combined with the execution of the 2021 will that significantly benefited Helyn and the lack of explanation for the amendment to exclude Julie, make undue influence the most likely scenario,” he concluded, telling the judge that Julie wants an injunction against the 2021 will, plus the cost of her sister’s share of the estate.

But Vice-Master Bowles said, “I can’t go on without the original will. We need to apply to submit the will.

“There is no medical evidence whatsoever. I have no clues as to the expert evidence and most unusual of all, I have no evidence whatsoever as to how this came about. I will not proceed without every effort being made to obtain the (2015) will.

“I need to have that will in front of me and ideally I’d like to have the defendant in court.”

Mr Smith-Roberts told him: ‘The original will is in the possession of the defendant, who did not participate in these proceedings. We have a copy that was provided by the defendant by e-mail in August 2021.’

But the judge insisted on seeing the will, concluding: ‘In a case like this, where the circumstances are highly unusual, I am not prepared to proceed without being satisfied that every effort has been made to ensure the will. to set up.

“I am issuing a third party disclosure order regarding medical matters and I also order that the defendant submit the original of the will to the court within 14 days.

“In a case as difficult and unusual as this one, I think these matters should at least be resolved.”

The case will now return to court at a later date.