Ian Percival was walking his dog, Snowy, along the coast near his home in South Wales, when he met Anita George, a cancer nurse at a local Swansea hospital. It was the same route he took every night, but this time he stopped. 

“She happened to be on the promenade and crying about her relationship, I believe,” says Ian’s daughter Helen, who doesn’t think that meeting was a coincidence.

What happened next set in motion a chain of events that would lead to allegations of financial grooming, neglect and an NHS nurse being struck off.

Ian Percival was a wealthy businessman in his 70s, who worked as an investor in property and an insurance broker. Part of his business involved renting homes to NHS staff locally.

“Dad was a workaholic, he loved it,” his son, Richard, says fondly.

Ian and his wife, Margaret, who were married for more than 50 years, were well-known and well-liked figures in the Swansea area.

Anita was a seemingly trustworthy nurse – who, just three days after meeting Ian, moved into one of his properties to help look after Margaret, who had mobility problems. It was a private arrangement, a deal struck personally, not through the NHS.

“I was doubtful about her from day one,” says Richard.

This is the first time Ian’s children have spoken publicly about what happened, from their home in Brisbane, Australia.

‘She took over their lives’

As time went on, they became increasingly concerned about how involved Anita was becoming with their parents. When Ian was diagnosed with cancer, she began also caring for him.

“She took over our parents’ lives. She was constantly with them,” Richard recalls. Increasingly, he felt she was coming between their parents and isolating them from their family.

“Mum was getting excluded,” says Richard. “I felt that she [Anita] had full control, which I have never witnessed before. I just don’t understand how, after mum and dad being together for 52 years, things she did changed everything.”

Helen says Anita’s professional credentials initially reassured her. “I trusted her because she was a nurse at a local hospital.”

But in the months before Ian’s death in December 2016, she could tell things had drastically changed. Anita was refusing to take care of their mother, Helen claims. Instead, she focused all her attention on Ian.

It wasn’t until their father died, that Helen and Richard became aware of the extent of Anita’s involvement with Ian. They believe she’d struck up an inappropriate personal relationship, manipulating him for financial gain.

As they investigated, they moved Margaret to live with them in Australia, where she later died in 2018.

“On dad’s computer, we managed to find some evidence. We thought, this is crazy. I don’t understand… so it made us dig deeper,” says Richard.

Cash, a car and property

Ian had given her nearly £15,000 in cash and shares, a car and left her a property worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.

“I felt sick because I knew this was her doing,” recalls Helen. “The first thing that came to my mind was that he was financially groomed… she had one motive – to get money.”

“Only when the will was read did I realise how skewed it was.”

Helen believes the will had “huge input” from Anita.

Anita George said she was simply receiving gifts from a friend – but this is not just a story about money and material goods. On Ian’s medical records she had listed herself as his next of kin, even as his daughter and adoptive daughter. All this without his wife or children’s knowledge.

She was managing his hospital appointments, taking his bloods at home, accessing medical equipment. How did Helen feel about a woman she barely knew passing herself off as her father’s daughter?

“It’s devastating. It should never have happened. That’s a massive failing by the NHS.”

It has taken eight years for the family of Ian Percival to achieve any form of justice.

Struck off as a nurse

In December 2024, the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) carried out a hearing into the allegations – and found that Anita George had breached professional standards and abused the position of trust as a registered nurse to gain inheritance from a patient.

It ruled that her actions were motivated by the pursuit of financial gain, and it struck her off from the nursing register – its toughest sanction. The NMC report outlines how Ian and Margaret’s isolation, poor health and geographical separation from their children made them particularly vulnerable.

Anita George declined our request for an interview.

During the hearing her legal team argued this all happened outside of her formal employment as a nurse. The situation was unlikely to happen again as her personal life has changed and she’s now married, they added.

Swansea Bay University Health Board, which runs the hospital, is now carrying out a review into any possible failures:

“In light of the findings of the NMC’s hearing we are appalled and want to state clearly to the family that we’re very sorry about what happened. We will be reviewing this case to see if there are any learnings that need to be taken into account. It is important, however, to clarify that the inappropriate financial relationships did not relate to care provided within an NHS context.”

South Wales Police carried out an investigation at the time but no charges were brought.

It says it will reopen the case if new lines of inquiry are found.

Financial exploitation of the elderly

The case of Anita George and Ian Percival highlights the growing issue of financial exploitation of the elderly. The Hourglass charity, which works exclusively in this field, says the problem is now at “epidemic” levels.

The number of calls it has received since 2017 has risen by 182% from around 4,500 to 12,700.

In just 14% of economic abuse cases in the last three years, £53m has been reported stolen from the elderly.

It says awareness among the public of what constitutes economic abuse is “shockingly low” – with a poll last year finding more than 26% of people did not believe forcing an older relative to change their will was an act of abuse.

The charity says abuse of the elderly comes in many forms including financial, psychological and physical.

“There are lots of cases we’ve dealt with where the enormity of the abuse is only obvious once the person has passed away,” says Richard Robinson, the charity’s chief executive.

“But there is another issue here; lots of older people don’t want to criminalise their family or their carers because if they [do so] they’ll be left to fend for themselves or they’ll be put into a home.”

While Ian’s children hope police will reopen the case, they also want tougher rules on how carers become involved with patients. Currently, nurses must adhere to the NMC’s professional standards known as the Code, which include acting with “honesty and integrity” in any financial dealings.

“We want legislation put in place so that carers can’t be caring without proper background checks, the next of kin cannot just be somebody they’ve known for two years.”

‘Someone finally listened’

Richard added that they were “relieved” Anita George was struck off following the damning report by the NMC.

“Somebody listened to us and took our evidence onboard. You can’t have someone doing what she did – using her position as a nurse…to gain their trust.”

While the pair cherish their memories of their father what happened with Anita George has tarnished the end of his life, for them.

Neither of his parents deserved to suffer this type of abuse, says Richard.

“Dad was a genuine hard-working guy who loved his family. It’s just horrible,” he says, grimly.

Do you have a story you would like to share? Email sky.today@sky.uk or Whatsapp 07583000853

A survivor of the Grenfell Tower fire has called on Angela Rayner to reconsider her decision to demolish the west London tower block.

Bereaved family members and survivors of the 2017 blaze, which killed 72 people, have been critical of the deputy prime minister’s decision, which she delivered to them in a meeting on Wednesday night.

Speaking on The UK Tonight with Sarah-Jane Mee, Marcio Gomes, who escaped from his 21st-floor flat with his then wife and two daughters, called on Ms Rayner, who is also housing secretary, to “reconsider her decision”.

“There was not one person in the room who agreed with her decision,” he said.

“She didn’t really explain the decision, we just got told what was going to happen.”

He said Ms Rayner “wouldn’t really give any answers” to any questions asked by the bereaved families and survivors.

“I was shocked and quite frankly appalled by it. If you looked around the room, and it was packed, everybody was appalled by the decision – there was a lot of heartbreak, a lot of anger, a lot of tears.

“The consultation was, in my view, minimal. I can say, in the meeting, I think 90% were not consulted with, including myself.

“Nobody knew what was happening,” he said.

Read more:
Grenfell fire families sent letter about unidentified remains
Minister loses brief after complaint by Grenfell survivors

Other relatives of the victims have also hit out at Ms Rayner’s actions.

Karim Mussilhy, whose uncle died in the fire, said the decision was “unforgivable” and “disgraceful”.

“This conversation is so sensitive, so sacred. This is the last resting place of our families whose deaths were clearly avoidable and we haven’t been involved in these conversations.”

‘Very saddening and hurtful’

Meanwhile, Nabil Choucair – who lost six relatives in the North Kensington tower – said it was “very saddening and hurtful” and called for a “fitting memorial to be designed in its place or within in”.

“It’s about our 72 loved ones, it’s all about them.”

Mr Gomes said he would like any future memorial to maintain the height of the tower though admitted that “everybody is going to have a slightly different view” of the future plans for the site.

But one thing is certain for Mr Gomes: “Grenfell should have been the catalyst for change.”

“And nearly eight years on, not a lot has changed.

“We’re still going through the process, we still haven’t had justice. The victims aren’t being put at the centre of the decisions that are being made.

“It’s almost like they want to knock it down, out of sight, out of mind,” he added.

“This can still happen again. There’s so many buildings up and down the country with this type of cladding.”

Grenfell United, which represents some bereaved and survivors, said: “Angela Rayner could not give a reason for her decision to demolish the tower. She refused to confirm how many bereaved and survivors had been spoken to in the recent, short four-week consultation.

“But judging from the room alone – the vast majority of whom were bereaved – no-one supported her decision. But she claims her decision is based on our views.”

In September last year, the public inquiry into Grenfell found “systematic dishonesty” contributed to the fire.

Inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick said the “simple truth” was all the deaths were avoidable and that those who lived in the tower were “badly failed” by authorities “in most cases through incompetence but, in some cases, through dishonesty and greed”.

The Metropolitan Police said last year that decisions on criminal charges for the blaze are not expected until the end of 2026.

Sky News has contacted the Department of Housing, Communities and Local Government for a response.

Let’s start with the simple bit: interest rates have been cut – down by another quarter percentage point to 4.5%. But what happens next?

Not long ago, the answer was quite simple: the Bank of England would carry on cutting borrowing costs, one quarter point cut every three months, until they reached, say, 3.5%.

That, at least, was the expectation this time last year.

Money latest: First-time buyers warned over auctions

But things have become more complex, more unpredictable in recent months.

Instead there are two paths ahead of us. One of them, let’s call it the high road, sees those borrowing costs being cut only gradually, down to 4% in a couple of years’ time.

Down the other road, the low road, the outlook is quite different: rates will be cut faster and more. They go down below 4%, perhaps as low as 3.5%, perhaps even lower.

The funny thing about today’s splurge of information and forecasts from the Bank of England is that it’s not entirely clear whether we’re on the high road or the low road anymore.

Now, strictly speaking, the forecasts and fan charts produced by the Bank’s staff tend towards the former, more conservative view – the two cuts.

But then look at the voting patterns on the monetary policy committee (MPC), where two members, Swati Dhingra and Catherine Mann just voted for a full half percentage point cut, and you’re left with a different impression. That rates will go lower, and quickly.

And in truth, that’s what often happens when the economy is weakening.

When gross domestic product, the best measure of economic output, is flatlining or shrinking, when inflation is low (especially when you look beyond the temporary bump caused by energy prices) – that’s usually precisely the time the Bank slashes rates with abandon.

And that’s precisely the situation the UK finds itself in at the moment.

Read more from Sky News:
Tesco eyes delivery of Crown Post Office branches
Starmer to slash red tape to build nuclear reactors
Race to avoid Trump tariffs as US imports hit record high

But the problem is that a few things have complicated matters.

One is that the government decided to splurge more money in last October’s budget. That extra money sloshing around in the economy makes the Bank somewhat less willing to cut rates.

Another is that although the economy is weak, inflation is still high – indeed, the Bank actually raised its forecast for the consumer price index in today’s forecasts. Another is that the world economy has become a significantly more unstable place in recent months.

Germany is in recession. The US, under Donald Trump, is threatening tariffs on its nearest allies.

It’s not altogether clear whether the response to all this is lower interest rates.

Added to this, despite the chancellor’s best efforts, there is little evidence that her pro-growth policies are boosting economic growth – at least according to the Bank’s own forecasts.

These are tricky waters to navigate.

All of which helps explains why it’s no longer quite as clear as it once was what happens next.

My suspicion is that the Bank will end up cutting rates, probably more than those two cuts baked into its forecasts. But such forecasts are even more fraught than usual.