Plucky pensioner who reported care home bosses tells jury of upsetting mistakes in her vulnerable cousin's 'fraudulent' will

Rita Barnsley's only living relative Verna Woodley has given evidence in the trial of Amberley Care Home's former manager Jamiel Slaney-Summers and owners Graham and Lyn Walker.

Slaney-Summers, 65 and of Raven Hays Road, Northfield, is on trial accused of theft and abusing her position for financial gain after Mrs Barnsley's will was allegedly changed in favour of her and the home's owners.

Graham Walker, aged 74, and Lyn Walker, aged 71, both of Ribbesford Close, Cradley, are also accused of dishonestly abusing their position to make financial gain.

The trial at Wolverhampton Crown Court has entered its second week with witnesses taking the stand detailing how the trio allegedly defrauded the estate of Mrs Barnsley who signed a new will.  

Allowed to give evidence from her living room due to her age and agoraphobia, the 86-year-old Ms Woodley explained Mrs Barnsley was only meant to stay at Amberley Care Home in Brierley Hill for a few months.

However, soon after Mrs Barnsley moved into the Stourbridge Road home in May 2020, despite Ms Woodley being her only living relative, staff allegedly stopped them speaking on the phone. 

The court heard that manager Jamiel Slaney-Summers became the executor of Mrs Barnsley's £175.000 estate. In the six months before she died in August 2021, Slaney-Summers allegedly withdrew £6,000 cash from her bank accounts.

The prosecution say she also convinced two colleagues to sign a new will, giving her and the Walkers three quarters of the estate and awarding staff £5,000. As well as allegedly changing the financial wishes of their resident, the court heard they rode roughshod over her plans to be laid to rest in her beloved Black Country.

Ms Woodley's suspicions were aroused by a text message about Mrs Barnsley's funeral arrangements. She said: "Rita would never have wanted to be cremated in Perry Barr as she always talked about wanting her funeral to be in Gornal where she wanted her ashes scattered."

After reading the new will Ms Woodley raised the alarm with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

She told the court: "We only ever called each other cousins - we loved each other."

The will was dated January 2021 but Ms Woodley did not see it until that September, after Mrs Barnsley had died in August. She said: "The will had different handwriting in different ink."

The trial previously heard evidence from former workers of the Stourbridge Road care home who said they saw the manager waving around the will in celebration when Mrs Barnsley had signed the paperwork. 

Despite only residing in the home for less than a year she signed away 75 per cent of her estate, which included a £175,000 house and more than £20,000 in savings, to the three defendants. 

Mrs Barnsley moved into the care home in May 2020 due to a dip in her health which meant she found coping at home hard. However, Amberley Care Home was only ever supposed to be a temporary residence. 

Ms Woodley said: "When I saw her address as the care home I knew something was wrong. She was only there until she was better. It was a mistake her ever going there."

She did not know Slaney-Summers had befriended Mrs Barnsley.

She said: "There was no reason why she would give staff from the care home anything from her will."

After being quizzed by Mark Jackson, prosecuting on behalf of Dudley Council, Ms Woodley was then cross-examined by Slaney-Summers's barrister David Burgess KC.

He told the white-haired grandmother that Slaney-Summers had phoned her on several occasions to keep her up to date with Mrs Barnsley's health.

Ms Woodley replied: "No, I do not remember that."

Mr Burgess said: "Jamiel would ring you regularly, would she not?" Ms Woodley replied: "No, not regularly."

The barrister then asked: "Do you remember when Jamiel phoned you asking about details of your grandchildren so they could be included in in Rita's will?"

Ms Woodley said: "That did not happen."

Mr Burgess ended his cross-examination with one final question: "Do you remember Jamiel saying she had worried about the validity of the will?"

Ms Woodley replied sternly: "No, she did not say that. I was the one who it was not valid. I told her I was not happy with the will and would be reporting them to the CQC."

She contacted the CQC and other relevant organisations concerning her cousin's last will and testament. 

An investigation was launched and Slaney-Summers and the Walkers were charged.

The defendants deny all the charges and the trial continues.