Stamp collector’s step-daughter loses battle to overturn his will that gave her simply £1 – leaving her dealing with £100,000 courtroom invoice whereas his cleaner inherits most of his £250,000 property

A stamp collector’s step-daughter has lost a legal dispute to overturn his will after she received just £1 while his sprawling £250,000 estate was passed on to his cleaner.

Step-daughter Beverley Neate has also been slapped with a £100,000 court bill as she tried to challenge the decision in a bitter legal dispute.

Sue Pope originally met philatelist Ray Watts when she responded to his advert for a cleaner, but became a close friend of the pensioner, sharing his interest in stamps and attending fairs with him. 

Mr Watts had previously wanted to split his estate among his family, but wrote a new will in 2019, leaving most of his fortune to Mrs Pope, having already sold her his stamp collection for £1.

But after his death aged 90 in 2021, the will was challenged at Central London County Court by his step-daughter, Beverley Neate, who was left only a single pound.

The stamp collector split the rest of his estate – roughly £50,000 – between his three children from his first marriage, but cut out his three step-children from a second marriage. 

Mrs Neate claimed Mrs Pope could not prove that his final will reflected her stepdad’s true intentions and that he could not have really wanted to disinherit her.

But after a trial last week, Judge Nigel Gerald threw out Mrs Neate’s claim, leaving Mrs Pope to inherit most of Mr Watts’ estate – and his step-daughter facing more than £100,000 in court bills.
Giving judgment, Judge Gerald said the will was valid and that the evidence pointed to Mr Watts having known what he was doing when he made it.

Speaking afterwards, Mrs Pope’s solicitor Eleanor Clarke, of Myerson Solicitors, said: ‘This is a fantastic result for Sue after such a long, bitter and stressful battle.’

‘She is happy that Ray’s wishes for her and his children are finally being carried out.’

Ms Neate consistently contested the validity of her step-father’s will – dated May 2, 2019 – saying he could not have meant to snub her in favour of the cleaner.

But Ms Pope argued Mr Watts wanted to cut out his ‘disrespectful’ stepdaughter after she changed the locks at his home when he was in hospital.

During the trial, the judge heard how Mr Watts had three children – Nicholas and Lesley Watts and Deborah Humphreys – by his first wife, Madeline Watts, before she died in 1995.

He went on to remarry, taking Fay Watts as his second wife in 1998, with her children, Mrs Neate and sons Mark and Sean Brennan, becoming his stepkids. She died in 2011.

Mr Watts had been a clerk at Lloyds Bank during his working life, but in retirement devoted himself to philately, attending fairs and dealing in stamps.

Valued at up to £200,000 by Mrs Neate, but which Mrs Pope said was worth more like £40,000, his stock included stamps dating back as far as the 1840s.

Mrs Pope came into Mr Watts’ life after he placed an advertisement for a cleaner, but gradually she took on more and more duties until she was caring for him too.

Under a will written in 2007, Mr Watts had intended to leave his estate, including his share of the family home in Great Waldingfield, near Sudbury, Suffolk, to his six children and stepchildren equally.

But a new will was made in 2019 after he had been admitted to hospital following a serious fall at home, following which he had lain undiscovered for hours.

The will left £15,000 to each of his three children and Mrs Neate, with the rest of an estate valued at about £250,000 going to Mrs Pope.

However, he then executed a codicil, a document altering the effect of a will, in 2020, slashing Mrs Neate’s share to a ‘deliberately derisory’ legacy of a single pound, the court heard.

Challenging the validity of the will and codicil, Mrs Neate’s lawyers claimed that Mrs Pope could not show that the ailing pensioner had ‘knowledge and approval’ of its contents, legal language meaning they represented his ‘testamentary intentions.’

Her barrister Nathan Wells said Mr Watts had been described in hospital as ‘confused with a reduced level of consciousness’ and that there had been a ‘slowing of his thinking.’

There was also evidence of ‘significant’ involvement of Mrs Pope in the making of the will, she having contacted the solicitors to attend to Mr Watts in hospital, he said.

‘The terms of the 2019 will represented a radical change from the provisions of the 2007 will, which is recognised as a factor going to knowledge and approval,’ he said.

‘Because of the concerns about the deceased’s ‘failing mind’ and the obvious and substantial degree of beneficiary involvement, Mrs Pope also has to meet the stricter requirements for establishing knowledge and approval.

‘Mrs Neate confirms that it would have been very out of character for the deceased to do something as spiteful as leaving her a deliberately derisory legacy of £1 in his will.’

For Mrs Pope, barrister Elis Gomer insisted the step-daughter’s challenge was based on a ‘rather nebulous jumble of allegations’ and that the will and codicil were perfectly valid.

Mr Watts wanted Mrs Pope to benefit from his 2019 will and had gone on to further slash his step-daughter’s inheritance to £1 because of her ‘disrespectful’ actions in having changed the locks on his home when he was in hospital, he said.

‘Mrs Pope’s position is that the 2019 will and the 2020 codicil were prepared at the deceased’s instigation, read over with him, and in every respect reflected his testamentary wishes as he expressed them to be,’ said her barrister.

‘Mrs Pope’s position is simply that the 2019 will arose out of a desire to benefit Mrs Pope.

‘The 2020 codicil came about as a result of the deceased’s view that Mrs Neate’s behaviour towards the end of his life was – to use the deceased’s words – ‘disrespectful and distressing’, to the point that he no longer wished to make any meaningful provision for Mrs Neate.’

He said Mrs Pope’s account had been corroborated by Mr Watts’ three biological children, with Nicholas Watts saying his dad considered he had given the three children enough during his lifetime.

‘It is submitted that it is neither surprising nor suspicious that the deceased wished to make provision for Mrs Pope in these circumstances,’ he added.

He also criticised Mrs Neate’s continual reference to Mrs Pope as a ‘cleaner’ in case documents, when despite beginning as a paid cleaner, she had gone on to become much more involved in his life.

In his judgment, Judge Gerald found that the will and codicil were valid, since the evidence showed that Mr Watts had taken steps to make sure what he wanted with his money actually happened.

He dismissed Mrs Neate’s claim and ordered her to pay the lawyers’ bills for the case, with £108,000 up front.

The case continues.