A professional snooker player’s mother is facing legal action for suspected housing benefits fraud following a contentious dispute over a £620,000 family property. Susan Hickenbotham alleged that her son, Matthew Selt, ranked 43rd in the world, along with her daughters Claire Noble and Charlotte Hamblin, pressured her into transferring ownership of their Romford home to them, causing her emotional distress. Hickenbotham, a recipient of social security and housing benefits since 1992, asserted her claim to the house where she has resided since 1998, now valued at approximately £620,000.
The conflict escalated when Hickenbotham received an eviction notice from her daughter Claire Noble in 2024. She claimed to have purchased the property from her ex-husband, Michael David Selt, for £75,000 as a goodwill gesture post their separation. Hickenbotham stated that she contributed £7,500 towards the mortgage in 2000 and fully acquired the house in 2011 with inheritance funds from her father.
Allegations arose that Noble retained funds intended for house renovations, prompting Hickenbotham’s legal representation to accuse her children of orchestrating a deceptive tenancy agreement to exploit housing benefits. Despite discrepancies in testimonies, Judge Simon Monty KC discredited Hickenbotham’s claims of coercion and ruled against her, emphasizing her role in a potential housing benefits scam.
The judge condemned the sham tenancy setup designed to deceive authorities for financial gain, implicating Hickenbotham and Claire Noble in the fraudulent scheme. Legal proceedings highlighted the family’s internal strife and deceitful practices regarding property ownership and benefits claims.
Matthew Selt’s involvement in the legal battle was minimal, with his lawyer suggesting his lack of detailed recollection possibly influenced by his public profile. Hamblin, representing herself and her siblings, presented counterarguments challenging her mother’s accusations and highlighting inconsistencies in her claims.
The case shed light on a complex family dispute intertwined with allegations of fraud, manipulation, and deceit. As the legal proceedings unfolded, it became evident that the family’s internal conflicts and financial misrepresentations had led to a regrettable and foreseeable outcome, culminating in legal repercussions for the individuals involved.
