The situation
When Margaret died in 2013, she wanted to provide for her two granddaughters.
She left £50,000 to be held in trust until the girls turned 25. By then, she hoped, they would be old enough to use the money wisely — perhaps for a house deposit, or to start a business, or simply to have a financial cushion as they began adult life.
Margaret appointed two trustees to look after the money: her daughter, and her elderly husband. The granddaughters’ own mother and grandfather.
It seemed like a sensible arrangement. Who better to protect the girls’ future than their closest family?
What went wrong
The trustees opened a Barclays Everyday Saver account — an instant-access account with no restrictions on withdrawals.
Within a year, between March 2016 and March 2017, the account was emptied.
There were at least ten withdrawals. One was for £15,000 in cash. Another was a direct transfer of £2,300 to the mother’s personal bank account. Receipts later showed spending at high street shops, including Primark.
The mother claimed the shopping was “for the girls.” She said her daughters had been “harassing” her for money and had grown accustomed to a “lavish lifestyle.” She also said she had permission to use some funds for an operation on the family dog.
The grandfather, in his nineties, later told the court he had posted envelopes of cash through his granddaughters’ letterbox — to “save his daughter’s sanity.”
None of this was true. Or at least, none of it was legal.
The money was gone. Every penny.
The impact
The theft was discovered in 2018, when one of the granddaughters wanted to use part of her inheritance as a deposit for a house.
She contacted the bank. The account was empty.
What followed was years of emotional and financial devastation.
One granddaughter described being “exploited by my own blood.” She was left in significant debt and developed anxiety. The other needed counselling as a teenager to cope with the betrayal.
Their attempts to recover the money through insurance failed — partly because the trustees had submitted misleading claims, saying the funds had already been received.
Eventually, the family contacted the police. A criminal investigation began.
The outcome
In 2024, both trustees stood trial at Swansea Crown Court.
The mother was found guilty of fraud by abuse of position. The judge, Recorder Greg Bull KC, described her as “thoroughly dishonest.”
His words were unsparing:
“You were so annoyed that your daughters received more money than you, that you spitefully and dishonestly decided to take their inheritance. You did it in greed and spite — using the money as a weapon against your own daughters. I can’t imagine a more cynical breach of trust than this.”
She was sentenced to 30 months in prison.
The grandfather, now 93, received a 12-month suspended sentence. The judge accepted he had been manipulated by his daughter, but noted he was still culpable.
A proceeds of crime order was made to recover the funds. Due to inflation, the stolen inheritance was now worth approximately £65,000.
As the mother was led away, she kissed her father on the cheek.
What could have helped
This tragedy might have been prevented with different safeguards.
Choose trustees carefully. Family members are not always the safest choice — particularly when there is any history of financial difficulty, resentment, or complicated relationships.
Use a restricted account. An instant-access savings account offers no protection. A proper trust structure, or an account requiring multiple signatures for withdrawals, would have made theft far harder.
Appoint an independent trustee. A solicitor or professional trustee adds a layer of oversight. They have legal duties and professional consequences if they breach them.
Build in accountability. Regular statements sent to beneficiaries — even minors — create transparency. If someone had been monitoring the account, the withdrawals might have been spotted earlier.
Why this matters
Trustees are supposed to protect assets for beneficiaries. That’s the entire point of a trust.
But when trustees are also family members, the lines can blur. Access becomes easy. Oversight becomes lax. And when money is tight or relationships are strained, temptation can overwhelm duty.
This case is a stark reminder: trust is not just a feeling. It’s a legal structure — and it only works when the right people are in charge.
If you’re setting up a trust for loved ones, think carefully about who you appoint. The wrong choice can turn a gift into a wound that never heals.
Related topics
Based on a case heard at Swansea Crown Court in 2024. Names have been changed.