Darryl Thackwell isolated his late mother in her declining years exercising undue influence to take control of all her assets, the High Court ruled, ordering he repay $305,000 to her estate. Sister Karen, as estate administrator, was invited by the High Court to sue Darryl for profits he made using this money to buy properties in Southland.
Long-running hostility between the two siblings came out in evidence at the High Court following the 2022 death of their mother Enid at age 95.
Karen said Darryl had been abusive towards her for her entire life, dismissing her as the ‘adopted bitch.’
The court was told Karen lived and worked overseas for many years.
Darryl married and remained in New Zealand, living in Christchurch near his parents.
Despite being absent for long periods, Karen said she had a close relationship with her parents; returning to visit each year, and talking with Enid by phone at least once a week.
Circumstances changed around the time Enid was widowed in 2013.
Regular phone contact was cut off, with Enid’s phone number changed. She did not learn of her father’s death until well after the event.
A family friend, asked by Karen to go round and check on Enid, was blocked by Darryl from accessing Enid’s Estuary Road home where Darryl was now living with his widowed mother.
Evidence was given of suspicious circumstances surrounding transfer of Estuary Road to Darryl.
Enid, with Darryl, went to her family lawyer in 2014 saying she wanted to transfer Estuary Road to Darryl and have a will prepared leaving all her assets to him.
When the lawyer suggested Darryl wait outside while he talk to Enid privately, Enid said she wanted him to stay. In Darryl’s presence, the lawyer said he was unwilling to prepare the documents; it would leave Enid with no assets and dependent entirely on Darryl for financial support.
Darryl then took his mother to another lawyer who, as requested, completed a transfer of Estuary Road to Darryl at a price of $305,000 with a deed signed at the same time forgiving payment of this debt. Enid also signed a will leaving all her assets on death to Darryl.
Nearly a decade later, Karen challenged these dealings, claiming her late mother was not fully aware of what she was doing and that Darryl exercised undue influence in having her sign.
There was limited medical evidence of Enid’s mental state at the date she signed.
Justice Harland ruled medical evidence from the following year indicated developing dementia. By early 2016, her mental competence had declined to the extent that doctors triggered an enduring power of attorney in favour of Darryl, which had been signed some years previously.
The court was told Darryl sold Estuary Road within a year of taking ownership, using the proceeds to buy properties in Invercargill and Tuatapere.
He brought Enid down to Invercargill to live with him.
The manner in which he was caring for his mother led to intervention by Age Concern and local health authorities. It was alleged Darryl was drawing down his mother’s fortnightly pension payments, but not using this money to care for her.
He ignored a Family Court order to provide accounting records itemising use of her money.
In the High Court, Justice Harland ruled the $305,000 forgiveness of debt was obtained by Darryl’s undue influence. This debt is now owed by Darryl to Enid’s estate.
Justice Harland ordered that a charging order be registered against property owned by Darryl to secure payment.
She suggested further legal action be taken to recover profits made by Darryl investing proceeds from sale of Estuary Road in his Southland property purchases.
Further, Enid’s 2014 will was declared invalid on grounds of Darryl’s undue influence and Enid’s lack of testamentary capacity.
It appears Enid had no earlier will. If so, Enid died intestate. Her assets will be divided according to statutory rules in the Administration Act, with both Karen and Darryl being the prime beneficiaries.
Darryl did not appear in court to defend his sister’s claims.
Hooper v. Thackwell – High Court (26.03.25)
25.14