Image AI generated
She was born in Birkenhead on 26 August 1927 and had lived with her husband, John Wills, in Southrepps, near Cromer on the East Anglian coast, for many years. In September 2017, she moved into the Bristol home of Rogers and her husband, Dr Rogers, a retired general practitioner. Sheila lived in the family’s Bristol home from September 2017 until her death on 19 April 2020. During the final weeks of Sheila’s life, after she suffered a fall on 2 April 2020 and sustained a head injury, fractured ribs and a fractured hip, Rogers and her husband worked in shifts to care for her. Sheila died at their home on 19 April 2020. Rogers sought payment at a rate of £150 a day for 900 days, amounting to £135,000. the agreement was found to have been formed on or around 2 November 2017 Although the evidence established 900 days of care.
Because of her frailty, forgetfulness and episodes of confusion, after her husband died in 2012, Sheila eventually became unable to continue living independently. The contractual period was therefore 850 days.
HHJ Matthews recorded that Sheila had insisted that her return to Bristol would be on terms that she “wanted to pay her way” and that Rogers would be “paid properly” for looking after her. Rogers’s mother, Ursula Wills, was known within the family as Sheila. The judgment stated that there had been no discussion about a specific amount, with the sum to be determined later. The court concluded that the absence of an agreed figure did not prevent the arrangement from constituting a contract for services at a reasonable price. Rogers was found to have been the principal carer for her mother during the relevant period. The judgment described her as suffering from several health conditions, including vascular dementia, diabetes, angina, chronic kidney disease, glaucoma and recurring rectal prolapse. She also experienced impaired mobility, incontinence and periods of confusion. The court accepted Rogers’s evidence that her mother required continuous supervision and that either Rogers or her husband generally had to remain at home with her. The care included preparing meals, cleaning, doing laundry, helping with washing and toileting, managing medication and arranging medical appointments. Rogers also provided companionship, reassurance and activities, while helping to manage her mother’s medical conditions. The court found that the arrangement affected Rogers’s household routine and prevented her from continuing to care for her grandchildren for payment two days a week. The family also incurred additional expenses associated with accommodation, heating, utilities, food, transport and other household needs. However, the court identified a distinction between the total period during which care had been provided and the period covered by the contract. The court assessed the claim on that basis rather than awarding the full amount initially sought.
A British woman has been awarded £127,500 plus interest from her late mother’s estate after the High Court upheld her claim for years of unpaid care. Bernadette Rogers had initially sought £135,000, arguing that her mother, Ursula Wills, known as Sheila , had agreed to pay her a reasonable sum for looking after her in her later years. Handed down on 25 August 2026, the court found that a binding informal contract existed between mother and daughter, according to the High Court judgment.
The ruling followed a dispute with Rogers’s brother, the executor of their mother’s estate, over the amount payable for the care provided.