Two warring sisters were yesterday stripped of the right to control their aged mother’s fortune because of the intensity of the hatred between them. The hostility between the women – one a 61-year-old retired GP and the other a 58-year-old radiographer – meant they would never be able to make rational decisions about how to deal with the 97-year-old widow’s property, a judge said. Senior Judge Denzil Lush said the elder sister could be jailed for attempting to alter a legal document, so she could gain greater control over her mother’s money. The mother, who has dementia, lives in a care home in Stoke Mandeville, Buckinghamshire. She owns a £600,000 house, has savings and shares worth £100,000, and has an income of £1,200 a month. The Court of Protection case was brought by the Office of the Public Guardian (pictured) - the regulator of agreements for people without capacity . The judge said both sisters were unsuitable to control her affairs ‘because of the intense acrimony between them’. Instead he appointed a court deputy to carry out this role. The ruling was made in the secretive Court of Protection in which hearings are routinely closed to the public. The judge ordered that none of the family be named. Senior Judge Lush said the ‘daughters don’t see eye to eye. In fact, they detest each other.’ According to the GP, the judge said, ‘the two of them have been in the same room together on five occasions during the last five years, and on each occasion her sister has refused point blank either to speak to her or even acknowledge her presence. The only communication between them is by email, and this is usually rancorous in tone.’ The disastrous relationship between the two sisters and their failure to handle their mother’s affairs as she slipped into dementia were revealed in a ruling by the secretive Court of Protection. The sisters agreed with their mother in 2007 that they should draw up an agreement to control her money and property if she became unable to do so herself. The mother, a widow since 1984, owns a house in Marlow worth between £550,000 and £600,000, savings and shares worth about £100,000, and has an income of around £1,200 a month. Since suffering from dementia she has lived in a care home in Stoke Mandeville that costs £940 a week. However, the sisters have rowed over their mother’s care. The dispute has involved the younger sister, the radiographer, objecting to her elder sibling’s choice of care home - which is a two-hour journey away from her own house. It has also involved an accusation from the GP that her younger sibling only visits their mother once a week or once a fortnight. The document drawn up by the sisters in 2007 to control their mother’s affairs - an Enduring Power of Attorney - was put into effect in 2013. Since suffering from dementia the mother has lived in a care home in Stoke Mandeville (pictured) costing £940 a week . But Senior Judge Lush said that at some stage the elder sister had attempted to alter the document. She attempted to change the attorneys’ appointment from ‘joint’ to ‘joint and several’. It meant that the doctor could take decisions on her own about the money, without reference to her sister. The judge added that when she registered the new document the GP ‘knew that this statement was false.’ The Court of Protection case was brought by the Office of the Public Guardian - the regulator of agreements for people without capacity. The OPG told the court that there were no witnesses to the alteration of the document. Judge Lush said there were criminal penalties for dishonestly tampering with an Enduring Power of Attorney . Laura Knight of the OPG told the court that ‘it is more difficult to believe that a professional person with the responsibilities of the GP would misunderstand the difference in appointment types’. Miss Knight added that the GP said that her late aunt had agreed that the document should be changed, but ‘while this seems plausible, it is alarming to see an attempt by reasonably educated people at amending an important legal document without any witnessing being attempted or legal advice being taken.’ Judge Lush said there were criminal penalties for dishonestly tampering with an Enduring Power of Attorney. He said the punishments could run up to two years in jail but any charges were a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service. He added that he thought prosecution would not be in the interests of the mother, who would be caused ‘significant distress’. The judge said of the doctor: ‘Notwithstanding the natural love and affection between them and the undoubted support she has provided to her mother in recent years, I find her unsuitable to be the donor’s attorney.’
Sisters, one 61 and the other 58, unable to agree because of  mutual hatred . Judge Denzil Lush said one could be jailed for trying to alter a document . Lost control of a £600,000 house and savings and shares worth £100,000 .