A daughter who cared for her dementia-hit mother at home has been awarded £127,000 after a legal battle with her brother.

Bern Rogers looked after her mother Sheila Wills for two-and-a-half years at home with her husband after she could no longer look after herself, and claimed Mrs Wills had agreed she should be paid in return for her efforts.

Mrs Wills had become increasingly frail and forgetful but insisted she would rather live with Mrs Rogers than pay for costly care.

When her mother died in April 2020, Mrs Rogers took £100,000 from her mother's estate. 

However, this sparked a feud between Mrs Rogers and her family, which saw her reported to the police for theft and fraud, only to be found not guilty following a jury trial.

Mrs Rogers later turned to the civil courts and sued her brother, Andrew Wills, the executor of their mother's estate, seeking £135,000 for the care she provided. 

The High Court ruled Mrs Rogers was owed £127,500 for the 850 days of care that she provided.  

After Mrs Rogers won the case in the summer, the estate said it would appeal the judgment.

Now Mrs Rogers has told of her 'phenomenal relief' following her 'harrowing and deeply sad' dispute hanging over the family for years. 

She told the BBC: 'Mum came to live with me, she became very confused and was seen wandering in the garden and obviously needed care.

'She was very insistent and would tell anyone that would listen that she wanted to make sure that I sorted out money for her care, I was to make sure I got paid properly.'

Although no amount was agreed, she felt that it was reasonable to take £100,000 out of her mother's account for payment of the care. 

She described being reported to the police as a 'terrible and devastating betrayal'. 

'It has been harrowing and deeply sad for it to go from a normal family relationship to being treated like a scapegoat, five against one.' 

The Rogers family said that their lives were 'put on hold' for the time Mrs Wills lived in their house with one person always needing to stay at home to look after her. 

Near the end of Mrs Wills's life, her daughter was sleeping on the floor to make sure her mother was all right. 

Now legal experts have told the Mail that the decision taken in High Court is 'genuinely significant'. 

Kate Harris, partner at law firm Birketts LLP said: 'Historically, family care arrangements have often been viewed as arising from natural love and affection...  However, this judgment suggests that where there is sufficient evidence of an agreement, or a mutual understanding that care would be paid for, the courts may be prepared to intervene [to pay out].'

She added: 'Where there is credible evidence that a parent intended that sacrifice to be recognised financially, it would be unjust to assume the care was provided entirely for free simply because it occurred within a family relationship.' 

John Gorner, of Slater Heelis Solicitors, said that this case would become more important given 'the aging population in the UK and the spiralling costs of professional care'. 

He added that, if an agreement for payment was made before the care began, courts could look to pay out market rate for the cost of looking after someone. 

Mr Gorner clarified though, that Mrs Rogers looked after her mother at significant cost to herself – working around the clock to help her. 

Ms Harris added that she now expects a notable increase in claims against estates following this case. 

She said: 'The practical lesson is straightforward: if a family member is expected to provide substantial care and there is any intention that they should be paid or compensated from the estate, that arrangement should be recorded in writing. 

'A short, properly drafted agreement during lifetime can prevent years of litigation after death and avoid turning a loved one's final wishes into a bitter inheritance dispute.'