A heated family conflict has unfolded in court, where a mother’s attempt to reclaim money and property given to her daughters ended in disappointment.
Divorce Settlement and Asset Transfer
Camilla Bains, a mother of three, divorced her husband in 2011, but their financial settlement wasn’t finalized until 2019.
As part of the settlement, she received £1 million, including £295,000 in cash and an £800,000 home in Sutton.
Due to health issues, Camilla relied on state benefits.
To avoid jeopardizing her welfare support, her lawyers advised her to transfer the cash to her daughters — Sonia, a sports doctor, and Sharn, a trainee solicitor.
Additionally, she signed over ownership of the house to Sonia after moving out of her previous home, which was near her ex-husband.
Family Rift and Court Battle
The family later fell into a bitter dispute.
Camilla claimed the money had only been entrusted to her daughters temporarily and that she was still the rightful owner of the house.
Sonia and Sharn disagreed, with Sonia describing her mother as “greedy” and “jealous” of her daughters’ success.
Court Findings and Judgment
Judge Nigel Gerald ruled that Camilla had no claim to the money or the house.
The judge highlighted that Camilla had deliberately relinquished her assets to safeguard her welfare benefits.
Evidence showed that she signed a letter confirming her loss of ownership over the house and burned trust deeds that previously identified her as the true owner.
The judge stated that Camilla knowingly transferred ownership of her property and cash as a calculated move to protect her state support.
He emphasized that Sonia and Sharn were rightful owners of their respective shares — £55,000 and £240,000 — while an additional £45,000 in Sonia’s possession was earmarked for their brother.
Emotional Toll and Family Strain
The ruling marked the tragic deterioration of a once-close family bond.
The court acknowledged the heartbreaking circumstances, particularly since Sonia had previously donated a kidney to her mother in 2017 when Camilla faced life-threatening health issues.
Conclusion
Despite the emotional history and past sacrifices, the court upheld that Camilla’s actions were intentional and legally binding.
The decision leaves Sonia as the sole owner of the house and both daughters retaining their respective financial shares.