Our mum went to jail for stealing our inheritance
Two sisters whose mother went from being their best friend to stealing their £50,000 inheritance say they have been left feeling anxious and unable to trust anyone.
Katherine Hill, 53, from Alltwen in Pontardawe, Neath Port Talbot, and her 93-year-old father Gerald Hill from Fairwood in Swansea were found guilty of fraud by abuse of power after a trial last year.
They were sentenced to 30 months in prison and a 12-month sentence, suspended for 18 months, respectively. On Monday, Hill was ordered to repay the money, which was left to her daughters Gemma and Jessica Thomas by their grandmother Margaret Hill.
"I'll never have a relationship with my mother now," said Jessica.
Swansea Crown Court previously heard, due to inflation, the sum stolen by the "greedy and spiteful" Hills was now worth about £65,000.
Katherine Hill put the money in an instant access Barclays Everyday Saver account, despite being advised not to, and both she and her dad had cards to access it - draining the contents within a year.
Between March 2016 and March 2017, the account where the money was held was emptied in 10 withdrawals, with £35,000 withdrawn in three transactions alone, the court heard.
Scammers target widowed nan's loneliness - family
Trio took more than £400,000 off vulnerable siblings
'I was conned out of my inheritance - by a friend'
Gemma and Jessica grew up in Neath Port Talbot with their parents, and said Hill was a "good mother".
"She was like my best friend", said Gemma, now 26, adding "no-one saw this coming".
She said Hill did not have a good relationship with her own mother Margaret Hill - who split from her father when Hill was a teenager - though the girls did not know why.
Margaret Hill died in 2014, while [Katherine] Hill was divorcing the girls' father, Chris Thomas.
At the time Jessica was just 12 and not told about the inheritance, but Gemma, who was 15 "understood a little bit more".
The £50,000 was placed in a trust fund with their mother as a trustee - to be accessed when they were 25.
Following the divorce, the girls stayed living with their mother for about six months, but say she would often leave them alone for long periods of time while she visited her new boyfriend.
"It would start where she was going on dates and stuff. And I think I was at that perfect age of 'my mother's going out for the night, I can have friends over', and I was kind of loving it for a while," said Gemma.
"But it got to the point where it was happening every weekend and people expected that I wasn't going to have a parent at home, and I would be like, 'please will you stay home this one time?'."
Mr Thomas decided his daughters would be better living with him, so the girls moved out of their family home and with him, while Hill moved in with her current partner, Phillip Lloyd.
The sisters said their mum would sometimes take them out on a weekend, to a pub or McDonalds, but the conversation would often centre around their father and her upset that they left.
"I think she just could never get over the fact that we were choosing to live with him over her," said Gemma.
Jessica said it was "clear from then that we weren't really a very important thing to her".
"I remember when she came to see me on my 13th birthday, and took me out for the day, saying she had to leave early because she was going out with [her boyfriend] and his family.
"It wasn't like she'd spend a lot of money on us... not 50 grand's worth, anyway."
They said, looking back, there were signs of extravagance from Hill and her partner, such as building a back garden pub and hot tub, and going on holidays.
But nothing set off alarm bells, as Hill had also received her own money from her late mother.
Now, the girls said, they know it was really them paying for their mum's lifestyle.
It was when Gemma phoned her mum to ask about accessing the money early, as she planned to buy their childhood home from their dad, that the claims the inheritance never existed began.
She said her mum told her "the money's not yours" and blocked her number, before later claiming in court it had been posted through the girls' letterboxes.
Jessica, who is now a nurse, recalled the shock of discovering the money existed, and then immediately that it was gone.
"How can you grieve something you never had? But [also] she's robbed me of an opportunity not a lot of people get."
She and her boyfriend currently live with his parents, and she said saving up to move out without her inheritance would take a very long time.
Gemma said she was angry, adding she found it frustrating the more time went on and the more Hill lied.
She said the initial confusion and hurt was hard, given their happy memories of their mum, and the woman she saw in court did not seem like the same person.
"I'd sit there and be like, 'What if we're all wrong? What if she hasn't done it?'
"But I have to accept that she has."
Gemma said giving evidence in court was stressful, but the relief came more from feeling validated, than from money or the sentences.
"When it actually was the case that she was being sent down... it was like we were being told that we're not crazy," she said.
The girls said they saw people on social media claiming they were in prison with their mum and she "was still saying that she was innocent".
"And people would believe in her... that's the most shocking thing to me," said Jessica.
"Even though the relationship had started to break down before this, it could have possibly been fixed, whereas we're at that point now that we'll never go back to how we used to be."
She added their mum had "showed no remorse for anything she did".
"She would look at me while we were standing up giving evidence, and she was shaking her head as if I was the one telling lies," she said.
"It's like she'll never take responsibility for what she's done."
Jessica said she had been going to counselling for many years, to address "massive issues with trust", while Gemma said she became "very needy in friendships".
"[I thought] 'if my mother doesn't love me, who the hell is going to love me?'"
Now a mother herself to a two-month-old boy, she said she saw the betrayal on a new level.
"I came home [after court] on Monday and I was feeding my son. I was looking at him, and I was like, I could not go 10 days, not even 10 hours really, without knowing how he was or what was going on in his life. Never mind the past 10 years.
"It doesn't make any sense, she's missing out on all of that."
Jessica was still living and working in the same area as her mum brought her anxiety and she lived with a tic, which a doctor told her had been triggered by trauma.
"The whole thing has just had a massive effect on me, mentally and physically."
She added she did not know how they would have coped without each other, or their father, who supported them emotionally and financially through the long legal process.
Now, with the result they wanted, they hope they will eventually see the money and "let go of this part of our lives".
They say they want to forget their mother, and the end of court proceedings has brought a kind of closure, allowing them to "finally breathe".
Mum must repay £50,000 she stole from daughters
'Spiteful' mum stole daughters' £50k inheritance
Lives 'shattered' by scam builder as victims warn others
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
10 hours ago
- CBS News
Minnesota girl with epilepsy wins Supreme Court ruling expected to make disability lawsuits against schools easier
A teenage girl from Minnesota who has a rare form of epilepsy won a unanimous Supreme Court ruling on Thursday that's expected to make it easier for families of children with disabilities to sue schools over access to education. The girl's family says that her school district didn't do enough to make sure she has the disability accommodations she needs to learn, including failing to provide adequate instruction in the evening when her seizures are less frequent. But lower courts ruled against the family's claim for damages, despite finding the school had fallen short. That's because courts in that part of the country required plaintiffs to show schools used "bad faith or gross misjudgment," a higher legal standard than most disability discrimination claims. The district, Osseo Area Schools, said that lowering the legal standard could expose the country's understaffed public schools to more lawsuits if their efforts fall short, even if officials are working in good faith. The family appealed to the Supreme Court, which found that lawsuits against schools should have the same requirements as other disability discrimination claims. Children with disabilities and their parents "face daunting challenges on a daily basis. We hold today that those challenges do not include having to satisfy a more stringent standard of proof than other plaintiffs," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. The court rebuffed the district's argument, made late in the appeals process, that all claims over accommodations for people with disabilities should be held to the same higher standard — a potentially major switch that would have been a "five-alarm fire" for the disability rights community, the girl's lawyers said. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, wrote separately to say he would be willing to consider those arguments at some point in the future, though he didn't say whether they would win. But Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, saw it differently. Sotomayor wrote in another concurrence that adopting those higher standards more broadly would "eviscerate the core" of disability discrimination laws. The girl's attorney Roman Martinez, of Latham & Watkins, called Thursday's ruling a win for the family and "children with disabilities facing discrimination in schools across the country." He added that "it will help protect the reasonable accommodations needed to ensure equal opportunity for all."
Forbes
10 hours ago
- Forbes
The Fraudulent Human Trafficking 'Hack' That's Erasing Bad Credit
New credit repair scams are exploiting CFPB lifeline for human trafficking survivors Maria (not her real name) thought she had found the answer to her prayers when she found a TikTok influencer promising to boost her credit score by over 100 points in as little as seven days. She needed a car for work, but her credit score was bad, and she couldn't get financing. What she didn't know was that the influencer was about to embroil her into a fraud scheme by claiming she was a victim of human trafficking. Maria was just one of thousands who have been caught up in a credit repair scam sweeping social media - 'The 7-Day Credit Hack', and just the latest example of how people are unknowingly being lured into sweeping fraud schemes on social media. In 2022, The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created a new lifeline for survivors of human trafficking. The rule allowed people to submit proof they were victims of human trafficking to credit bureaus, who would then be required to remove the negative items from the victim's credit report within four days. The intention of the rule was noble - help human trafficking survivors rebuild their financial lives after their captors exploited their credit, taking out cards and loans in their name without repaying them. For victims, providing proof was straightforward. They could provide documentation from a court, an NGO, or a human trafficking task force confirming they were a victim, or they could simply offer a "self-attestation letter." It was the letter that scammers honed in on. Virtually anyone could easily create a fake attestation letter and use it as proof of human trafficking. The CFPB even published a template letter that anyone could simply fill out as proof. Self attestation sample letter provided on the CFPB website It didn't take long for credit repair companies and influencers on social media to sniff out the business opportunity with the new CFPB rule. They could charge thousands to help people exploit the system. By April 2024, TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook videos were popping up everywhere, advertising the "New 7-Day Credit Sweep". People could merely log in to the credit bureaus, dispute all the negative credit items, and upload a self-attestation letter explaining they were victims of sex trafficking. One influencer says in a popular video, "First, you are going to want to set up an account on "Then, you will want to include all of the accounts acquired when you were 'human trafficked'. She emphasizes the words human trafficked by holding up air quotes with her fingers. "And finally, you will need to upload a victim determination letter. Its that easy.", she concludes. The technique apparently worked. Within 4-7 days, people were reporting that their bad credit had vanished, and their credit scores shot up - sometimes by 100 points or more. And for people that didn't want to do it, experts were more than willing to do the sweep for a price. For a payment between $1,000 to $2,000 they would sweep the credit for them. One person that watched the it emerge and warned people to avoid it - The Credit Plug- reported the scheme on his YouTube Channel and advised people to 'leave it alone'. The "7-Day Credit Hack" was reported by The Credit Plug in June 2024 with a warning not to try it 'As anyone knows these types of situations are 100% being abused right now,' he says, 'where people who may not necessarily have been a victim or survivor are using this loophole to get things wiped off of their credit report.' Social media wasn't the only place lit up with red flags that something was amiss. Signs were also showing up in industry reporting. First, there was CFPB's own reporting that showed a spike in complaints submitted by consumers through their portal - a 285% increase from 2023 to 2024, after the new rule went effect. CFPB consumer complaints submitted through their portal show a 285% increase in the last two years Credit repair companies will often file complaints with the CFPB on behalf of consumers while they perform these credit sweeps. Point Predictive tracked a suspicious spike in "credit washing" during the social media hack last year. Credit washing is the finance industry's term for any activity where borrowers fraudulently remove bad debt through false identity theft or trafficking reports. The analysis showed a 161% increase in applicants for auto loans who appeared to have erased their bad credit through credit washing. Suspicious Credit Washing (where consumers erase bad credit by falsifying reports) appeared in 1 out ... More of every 60 auto loan applications Those credit washers can result in big losses to financial institutions. In 2023, Sentilink found that the losses to the credit card industry alone from credit washing was more than $297 million. It wasn't like the CFPB wasn't warned that the rule would be exploited. The American Bankers Association predicted it would most certainly happen. In a letter to the CFPB dated May 9th, 2022, months before the rule went into place, they wrote that it would encourage criminal activity. "The ease of blocking accurate information by submitting to a governmental entity a form in which the person self-identifies as a victim will allow and encourage people who are not victims of trafficking- including criminals-to block accurate negative information in their consumer reports, introducing the risk of widespread inaccuracies in consumer reports." And they weren't the only ones raising the red flag. Other industry groups including the American Financial Service Association (AFSA) argued people would use attestation as a way to remove accurate information from their credit reports. It's a cruel irony that a rule designed to help society's most vulnerable victims has become a weapon for criminals who want to exploit it. And that hurts survivors more than anyone else. Many will face a "cry wolf" effect as the system becomes more skeptical of all claims, forcing them to prove their claims with even more documentation and proof. Consumers should be wary of credit sweeps on social media and following some practical advice. When someone promises to wipe your credit clean in less than seven days for $1,500 thats not a miracle, its likely just plain old fraud. And while it may seem like an easy and painless process, they could be filing fraudulent documentation or claims in your name that could be tied back to you in the future. Honest credit repair does exist, but it can take weeks and involves careful attention to finding actual errors on your credit report and removing them through a legitimate process. And be cautious of any credit sweep that promises to remove 'all of your bad credit' including legitimate items you are responsible for. Before working with a credit repair company, check their online reviews as well as any complaints that they have with the Better Business Bureau. Legitimate credit repair companies don't guarantee unrealistic results or demand large payments before doing any work. Those are high pressure tactics that should be considered a red flag. They will also not ask you to sign false affidavits claiming you are a victim of identity theft or human trafficking. Remember, those documents are official records that are often retained and can be used against you later if they suspect fraud, which unfortunately is increasingly common now.
Wall Street Journal
13 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
The Ferrari That Lured Me to the Brink
Last month, while admiring the blurry, roaring scenery of California's high desert in a Ferrari 296 GTS ($500,538, as tested), I happened to glance at the speedometer. Oh sweet Jesus. I hope that's kilometers per hour. Dude, get a hold of yourself, I thought. You've got a family, responsibilities. You can't spend the next month just lounging around the pool at the Riverside County jail. And yet there I was, asking for it.
