A woman in her 70s may be forced to sell her childhood home to fund her elderly mother ’ s care after losing a landmark court case that could have implications for families across Britain . Theatre director Glen Walford has been told by judges that the house , where she has recently invested £40,000 in renovations , was not her home at the time when her mother went into care because she rents a flat in London . Miss Walford , 75 , has spent two years fighting Worcestershire County Council over whether the £205,000 house should be used to recover the cost of her mother ’ s care . Glen Walford ( left ) has been embroiled in a legal battle with Worcestershire County Council since her mother Mary ( right ) moved to a care home in 2006 . The theatre director intended to retire to the property . Now the council has won the right to force Miss Walford to use the equity in the house , where she intended to retire , for care home fees , which can be up to £600 a week . Solicitors warned that the case could pave the way for relatives across the country to be liable for their parents ’ care . Charlotte Kelly , an associate at Worcestershire legal firm Kerwoods , said : ‘ This was a very significant judgment and one which will affect many in similar situations. ’ When her mother Mary Walford , now aged 100 , was admitted into care in 2006 , the council agreed that the house in Stourport-on-Severn should not be taken into account during means testing . But in 2013 they reversed their decision and said that Miss Walford would need to begin contributing towards bills . Frustrated by the U-turn , Miss Walford became embroiled in a legal battle with the council which was taken to the High Court in January 2014 . Miss Walford said she had always planned to retire to her mother 's house in Stourpour-upon-Severn ( above ) There , a judge ruled that her home should not be taken into account when means testing was carried out on her mother ’ s finances . In his ruling , Justice Supperstone concluded : ‘ A “ home ” is a place to which a person has a degree of attachment both physical and emotional. ’ But the council took the case to the Court of Appeal , arguing that although the property may be her home , it was not at the time her mother was taken into care . Yesterday Miss Walford said : ‘ I am now in a position where I will almost certainly have to sell my home to pay for my mother ’ s care bills which will leave me homeless . I have no energy or money left to fight them. ’ Sunnydene has been in the family for decades and was built by her grandmother ’ s aunt in the mid-1800s . Miss Walford ’ s car is parked in the drive , her belongings fill the bedrooms and she has an office where she carries out her work . Yet she is often posted across the globe and , when working on national productions , needs to be based in London . As a result Miss Walford rents a bedsit owned by a friend in the centre of the capital . Miss Walford , who has never married and has no children , said : ‘ Sunnydene is my home . I have lived there since I was 13 . ‘ I pay council tax , the electricity bills and have spent £42,000 renovating it . It was always my intention to retire in the house . A judge at the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Worcestershire County Council in January . Earlier the High Court ( above ) had sided with the Walford family . ‘ It is quite simply my home and it is going to be sold from underneath me . God knows how many other people will face the same heartache following this ruling. ’ In the Court of Appeal hearing on December 9 last year , her barrister Fraser Campbell argued that the only reason his client did not permanently live at Sunnydene was because her work ties her to London . By saying that the house would have been Miss Walford ’ s residence had she not worked in London , the council was discouraging people over the age of 60 from working , Mr Campbell argued . Despite the submissions , two out of three judges ruled in the council ’ s favour . Lord Justice McCombe , who rejected the council ’ s appeal , said he saw ‘ no reason ’ to assess whether the property was Miss Walford ’ s home based on a ‘ historic ’ date . Yesterday a Worcestershire Council spokesman said : ‘ This was an important legal challenge and we are pleased that the Court of Appeal ruled in our favour . ‘ There are ever increasing demands being made on the public purse and it is important that decisions about how public money is used to support individuals are fair and consistent . ’
Glen Walford , 75 , grew up in her parents ' house in Stourport-upon-Severn . The theatre director 's mother Mary was forced to move into care in 2006 . Worcestershire County Council tried to sell the house to pay for her care . But Miss Walford fought them , claiming the property was hers to retire to . High Court sided with the Walford family who were allowed to keep house . But its decision was overturned in the Court of Appeal earlier this year . Now the council will decide whether or not to put the house on the market .