AI Generated
When Grace Baillie Key died in September 2022, her estate included a house valued at £2 million and a shareholding in a family care-home business that she left equally to her two children. By the time of the hearing, interest on the unpaid inheritance tax had risen to about £142,000, adding to the financial consequences of an estate that had remained unsettled for years. Grace Baillie Key died aged 84 on 28 September 2022, leaving a will dated 11 November 2014. The principal assets included Ebury Lodge, a property in Westland Green, Little Hadham, Hertfordshire, with a probate valuation of £2 million, alongside their mother’s interest in Ebury Court Residential Home Limited. As reported by Bailii England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions, draft accounts prepared by Richard’s solicitors put the gross estate at approximately £2.28 million as of November 2024. After liabilities of about £366,750, the net figure stood at roughly £1.91 million. The inheritance tax due at the date of death was calculated at £556,388, before interest was added. By 5 November 2024, that interest had reached £67,040, taking the combined tax bill to more than £623,000. At the later court hearing, the judge was told that the interest alone had climbed to around £142,000, accruing at £117.81 a day. Laura wanted an independent administrator from October 2022. By September 2023, the solicitors had stopped acting after receiving conflicting instructions, with their correspondence indicating that the lack of clear agreement had contributed to the costs.
The dispute reached the High Court, where a judge considered whether the siblings could continue as joint executors or whether an independent professional should take over, according to Bailii England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions. Richard did not respond to those letters, according to the judgment. What followed was a prolonged disagreement between Laura Key and Richard Key over how her estate should be managed, with their deteriorating relationship making it increasingly difficult to settle matters. Her children, Laura and Richard, were named as joint executors and were the only beneficiaries. Under the will, each sibling was to receive half of that shareholding. Personal belongings and a small life insurance policy also formed part of the estate. The figures were not entirely accepted by Laura, who questioned some of the expenses included in the accounts, particularly costs she believed related to Richard’s personal occupation of the property. The judge observed that she had not clearly identified which entries she accepted or set out a fuller response to the figures. The relationship between the siblings had already broken down by the time their mother died. Within little more than a week, Laura had instructed solicitors to contact Richard over allegations that he had excluded her from Ebury Lodge and removed their mother’s belongings. The correspondence also sought assurances about the handling of the property and its contents. They also disagreed over the funeral arrangements, including whether there should be a service or a direct cremation. A service eventually took place, although Laura did not attend. The disagreements continued into the administration of the estate, with both siblings seeking information and questioning the other’s decisions. Richard initially proposed a firm of solicitors, and both siblings instructed the firm BRM to deal with probate. The judge later described the wider dispute as one marked by mutual mistrust, with responsibility for the difficulties resting on both sides.
Ebury Lodge sale, mortgage arrears and occupation dispute
A market appraisal from Savills in November 2022 put its value between £2.25 million and £2.5 million. The property went on the market in April 2023 with an asking price of £2.5 million, but viewings were limited and no offers followed. A formal valuation completed in July 2023 put the property at £2 million. After further discussions, the asking price was reduced to £2 million in late 2023. The property remained on the market until May 2024 without an offer. He also found that Richard had no proper grounds for entering a caveat against the estate in August 2023 after Laura refused to agree to renting the property. Richard said he had paid £22,031 towards the arrears in October 2023. In March 2024, their father, Rodney Key, paid £330,000, leaving a further balance outstanding. His evidence was that his own contributions towards the arrears and redemption totalled £64,137, as reported. Laura’s application, issued in July 2025, sought the removal of both siblings as executors and the appointment of an independent administrator. By the time of the judgment, Laura’s legal costs stood at £170,000 and Richard’s at £96,000, bringing their combined costs to £266,000. The proposed fees were estimated at £6,000 to £9,000 plus VAT for the work needed to obtain probate, followed by £20,000 to £25,000 plus VAT for the subsequent administration. An expert report dated June 2026 valued Ebury Lodge at £1.65 million, below its earlier £2 million probate valuation and the initial asking price. The expert also estimated monthly rental values ranging from £3,485 in September 2022 to £4,250 in September 2025.
Because Laura and Richard would no longer remain in office as executors, the court did not need to make final decisions on the property’s sale price or the amount Richard might owe for living there.
Richard later said he paid the remaining amount, allowing the mortgage to be discharged. Laura, by contrast, said their relationship had deteriorated to the point where joint administration was no longer practical. The financial cost of the litigation was already substantial, according to the Business and Property courts of England and Wales.
Ebury Lodge became a central point of disagreement. The house continued to be marketed, but the revised price did not attract a buyer either. Richard proposed renting the house to generate income towards the mortgage and running costs. Laura opposed the idea, pointing to the mortgage lender’s position that the property could not be rented and that the mortgage needed to be repaid. The judge criticised Richard’s persistence with the proposal despite the lender’s restriction. The caveat prevented a grant of probate from being obtained while it remained in place. Mortgage arrears added another layer of pressure. Richard also moved into Ebury Lodge after it had stood empty for around three years. Laura objected to his occupation and argued that he should pay rent to the estate. The judge accepted that having someone live in the property could help protect and maintain it, potentially benefiting the estate, but made clear that this did not automatically entitle Richard to live there without financial adjustment. Her complaints included the delay in dealing with probate, Richard’s occupation of the house, the caveat and disputes over documents and money. She also made allegations concerning company funds, signatures and access to an online health account. Richard denied the allegations, and the judge found that several had not been substantiated in the estate proceedings or belonged to separate litigation concerning the family business. Richard argued that the estate was manageable and that the siblings could continue as joint executors, with the court providing directions on the matters they could not resolve themselves. He also maintained that appointing a professional would create unnecessary expense. Those expenses sat alongside the inheritance tax and accumulating interest, as well as the costs associated with the property and the estate’s other liabilities. The judge concluded that there was no realistic prospect of the siblings working together to finish the administration. Resolving the immediate questions about the house would not, in his view, remove the underlying hostility or prevent further disputes. The court appointed Cripps Trust Corporation Limited to administer the estate independently. the judge considered it a more workable option than leaving the siblings in a position where they could not agree Although that appointment would add professional costs. The ruling did not determine every dispute surrounding Ebury Lodge. The judge did, however, offer guidance for the independent administrator. The administrator will be able to consider the relevant valuation evidence, the benefit to the estate of Richard’s occupation and the expenses he properly incurred maintaining the property. You use AI every day. Now get your AI Quotient. Take the AIQ test.