A High Court has put a number on the care: £127,500 owed to a Bristol woman who delivered round-the-clock care to her mother at home for 850 days. The ruling, issued in August, clarifies how informal family care arrangements can be recognised and compensated through the courts.
The judgment followed an earlier 2025 ruling that Bern Rogers had entered into an informal contract with her mother, Sheila, for payment of a reasonable sum for her care. Together, the two decisions establish both the existence of the arrangement and its value. They close a nine-year journey that included a criminal trial, a cleared verdict and a civil claim.
The delivery of care itself sat at the heart of the dispute. Sheila, who was later diagnosed with dementia, moved into her daughter’s Bristol house in September 2017. According to Bern, her mother preferred to be cared for by family rather than receive costly professional home care or move into a residential home, and the two agreed that Bern would be paid for the round-the-clock care she provided. Bern described the work as like a full-time job. “I couldn’t leave her really. She became unpredictable,” she said. Her husband John called it a 24-hour job, saying the couple had to put their lives on hold for more than two years, and recalled that in Sheila’s final weeks his wife slept on the floor of her mother’s bedroom to make sure she was alright.
What changed after Sheila died in April 2020 was the operational question of what the arrangement was worth. Bern transferred £100,000 from her mother’s estate, acting on what she says was an understanding that she would be paid properly. She was instead reported to the police for fraud and theft, the money was seized, and she was charged. A jury at Bristol Crown Court found her not guilty in 2022. She then turned to the civil courts.
The estate, whose executor is Bern’s brother Andrew Wills, disputes the basis of the claim. In a statement, he said the only agreements the siblings were aware of were for their mother to give Bernadette £50 per week “keep” and to ensure she was not out of pocket, and that no other contract had been made known to them. He said the estate had always been willing to pay Bernadette her genuine expenses as well as an additional gratuity in recognition of her efforts, and that its offers were not accepted before she issued legal proceedings. The estate intends to appeal against the second ruling that decided the amount owed, though the ruling confirming Bern’s entitlement to payment cannot be appealed.
Legal experts say the case’s significance lies in how courts will handle informal care agreements going forward. Emma Holland, partner in trust and litigation at Stewarts, said the case demonstrates that courts are willing to apply ordinary contractual principles to family relationships, which was not clear before, meaning family members are more likely to be entitled to payment where an informal agreement exists even without an amount being agreed. She added that these are considered, well-reasoned judgements by highly esteemed judges, so it is very likely future courts will follow them. Beth Middleton, senior associate in private wealth and disputes at JMW, described it as a hugely significant case that would open a floodgate of claims. Sarama Dutton, partner at Collyer and Bristow, who specialises in trusts, inheritance and wills, said the judgements were likely to be influential, showing a willingness to look beyond individual care tasks and acknowledge the broader reality of caring for an elderly relative, including continuous supervision, responsibility and restrictions on personal freedom.
For Bern, the outcome closes a period she described as harrowing and deeply sad, in which a normal family relationship became what she called being treated like a scapegoat, five against one. “The weight off my shoulders was phenomenal,” she said after the two judgements. “It has been absolutely wonderful to be vindicated. It means I can get on with my life now, the rest of my retirement.” She said she was terribly proud that her case could influence others, calling it her mum’s legacy. John said he was very proud of her for sticking up for her mother, for carers and for herself, calling it a very long and tough journey of nine years that has finally delivered justice, though he stressed families still need open discussions about what is fair. Whether the pending appeal over the amount alters that settlement now waits on the courts.