GitLab

Two nephews are secured a ₤ 400,000 will contest the fortune of a 'houseproud' widow, who disinherited one side of her household after they suggested she enter into a care home.

Doreen Stock, 86, died childless in 2021 and left her entire estate to her nephew, Simon Stock, and his spouse Catherine, who lived just a few minutes from her south London home.

But her Michigan-based great-nephew, 39-year-old Ben Chiswick, has now launched a bid to acquire the lot himself - regardless of not checking out and even talking with her over the phone because his move to the US 8 years back.

Propulsion engineer Mr Chiswick had been because of inherit her fortune under a previous will composed almost 40 years ago in 1986 when he was a baby, however was drastically disinherited by his great-aunt a year before her death.

The row emerged after his moms and dads recommended Ms Stock hang around in a care home while they took pleasure in a three-week vacation.

Fighting to reinstate the previous will, Mr Chiswick claims Ms Stock, who he says was a 'fixture in his youth,' was too stricken by dementia to effectively understand what she was doing when she changed her testament.

However, Simon and his other half are fighting the case, declaring Mr Chiswick - who has resided in the US given that 2017 - had no 'meaningful relationship' with Ms Stock beyond his early years while Mr Stock had actually been 'the nearest thing to a boy she had'.

Sitting at Central London County Court, Judge Jane Evans-Gordon heard that 'independent' and sometimes 'stubborn' Ms Stock had a deep emotional accessory to her home in Charminster Road, Mottingham, having actually shared it with her partner Samuel until his death in 2001.

Ben Chiswick, 39, imagined right with dad Brent, is challenging Doreen Stock's will in the courts after she disinherited him a year before her death

Doreen Stock, 86, passed away childless in 2021 and left her entire estate to her nephew, Simon Stock (imagined), and his spouse Catherine

Without any children of her own, Ms Stock's first will, made in 1986, left her estate to Mr Chiswick, child of her niece Patricia Chiswick and partner Brent.

The estate primarily contains the Mottingham house, which is valued online at about ₤ 400,000.

The court heard Ms Stock had had an excellent relationship with the Chiswicks, who assisted her with her shopping and visited her frequently.

She even made a lasting power of lawyer in their favour, however before she died withdrawed the file and altered her will, leaving everything to a nephew on her partner's side.

Challenging the will, Mr Chiswick claims that his great-aunt's dementia in her last years implies there is serious doubt whether she had the essential capacity to make the changes.

And he stated the fact there was no conversation with his side of the family about the new will suggested 'something not right' about her modification of mind.

'Doreen and I had an actually happy relationship and she understood that leaving her estate to me would make a huge difference to my life,' he said in his evidence.

For Simon and Catherine, barrister James McKean told the court that Ms Stock had likewise been close to Simon, who was 'the nearest thing to a kid she had,' contributing to his school costs as a kid.

And although she previously had a close relationship with Mr Chiswick's parents, that was destroyed when they recommended she enter into a care home in 2019.

Patricia had actually then scheduled a 'capacity assessment' for her aunt, which the barrister stated led to Ms Stock fearing her independence was being threatened and ultimately altering her will.

The estate principally includes the Mottingham home, which is valued online at about ₤ 400,000

Can we gift our daughter 3 of the bedrooms in our home to lower estate tax bill?

The court heard there had actually been 'structure bitterness' with the method her power of lawyer was being administered, which 'finally boiled over in the summertime of 2019 when the Chiswicks made an ill-judged - though perhaps well-intentioned - recommendation to Doreen that she spend a period in domestic care.

'Doreen was, by all accounts, jealously independent. It is little marvel that she discovered the proposition to be worrying and offensive.

'No doubt Doreen was fretted about the prospect of going into a home, then was asked to undergo the capacity assessment, and put 2 and 2 together.'

Within weeks of the evaluation, which led to a report mentioning she 'lacked capability,' she had started actions to withdraw the power of lawyer and make a brand-new will in Simon and Catherine's favour, he told the judge.

Quizzing Patricia Chiswick in the witness box, he included: 'Doreen loved her home and it had actually been her and Samuel's home before his death. There was a deep emotional connection to that residential or commercial property.

'Saying to Doreen that she should leave that residential or commercial property and invest a long time in a care home stank to her, wasn't it?

'From Doreen's point of view, this should have looked a genuine hazard to her self-reliance.'

But Patricia denied upsetting the pensioner, firmly insisting that the plan was only ever for a time-out in a care home while she and her spouse went on holiday.

'It was merely a suggestion since we do not normally go away for 3 weeks at a time, and I believe she had actually been rather unwell and her health was deteriorating in basic,' she said.

'I was worried about leaving her and I believed it would be rather great if she could go somewhere where she might be cared for while we were away.

'It was absolutely stressed that it was for 3 weeks. There was no tip she was going to remain there forever.'
consumersearch.com
The Chiswicks did not check out Ms Stock again between the capability assessment in 2019 and her death in May 2021.

For Patricia's boy Mr Chiswick, who is the complaintant in the event, lawyer Simon Lane said that, at the time she made the new will, she was 'susceptible and was acting out of character.'

The 2019 assessment performed after the tip of a care home relocation had led to a specialist's finding that she 'lacked capability,' he said.

But Mr McKean said the evaluation was deficient, with Ms Stock answering with 'irritable hostility' when she was about things that made no sense to her, such as a fire which never in fact occurred.

Other assessments around the very same time had actually led to findings that she did have capacity, although she was experiencing 'mild' dementia,' he said.

'Doreen might have had some memory issues, but capability and memory are different monsters,' he stated.

'The court will struggle to find any proof of impaired cognition or thinking. On the contrary, Doreen's behaviour, worths and thinking corresponded and possible at all times.'

He stated there was reason for her to decide to change her will, the last being made more than 30 years formerly, and that by then Mr Chiswick - living and working on the opposite of the Atlantic - would have been 'far from her mind as a beneficiary.'

He had not seen her again or even spoken on the phone after transferring to the US, while most of the evidence of their relationship came from when he was a child.

On the other hand, Mr Stock and his better half had been able to visit her regularly, living not far from her in Eltham, south London, he stated.

'The court can be stunned neither by the making of the disputed will, nor by Doreen's option of beneficiaries,' he included.

The judge is expected to provide her ruling on the case at a later date.