Snooker Star Matthew Selt Engaged in High Court Battle with Mother Over £500,000 Family Home
In a dramatic family rift that has spilled into the legal arena, professional snooker player Matthew Selt, ranked 37th in the world, is pitted against his own mother in a High Court dispute to determine the rightful owner of their £500,000 family home in Essex. The case has exposed deep-seated tensions and conflicting accounts of property ownership, with accusations flying between the siblings and their mother, Susan Hickenbotham.
Conflicting Claims Over Property Ownership
The heart of the dispute revolves around a three-bedroom property in Romford, Essex, where Ms Hickenbotham has resided since 1998. Originally owned by the snooker star's father, Michael Selt, Ms Hickenbotham testified that she secured the property following their separation in 2000 through a £7,500 down-payment, with her own father later clearing the remaining mortgage. She maintains that while her daughter, Claire Noble, holds the legal title to the home, she remains the true beneficiary and has a rightful claim to ownership.
However, Matthew Selt, aged 41, and his sisters staunchly dispute this version of events. Representing themselves in court, the siblings allege that their father gifted the property directly to them, and they contend that their mother has lived in the property merely as a tenant, never holding a monetary interest in the home. The case hinges on disagreements over the property's history and a series of financial transfers, with Mr Selt telling the court that his father always maintained the house was bought for the three of us.
Financial Transfers and Family Tensions
The court heard that Claire Noble became the registered owner of the property at age 20 in 2000, claiming she held the title in trust for herself and her then-underage siblings. In 2019, she reportedly provided a £100,000 'gift' to Matthew and pledged an equal amount to their sister, Charlotte Hamblin, becoming the sole owner. Matthew Selt, who currently resides in Dubai and flew to the UK to testify, acknowledged using the £100,000 to purchase his first home but stated he was unaware of the funds' specific origin. He added that he could not recall details of the original 2000 agreement, as he was only 15 years old at the time.
During cross-examination, Tom Russell KC, representing Ms Hickenbotham, pointedly asked the snooker professional if he was making this evidence up as he went along. Selt replied, I'm a little bit confused as to the timelines, but no, I'm not, defending his testimony. In contrast, Ms Hickenbotham offered a starkly different account, testifying that she remortgaged the home multiple times specifically to help her children get on the housing ladder, under the strict agreement that they would cover the repayments.
Allegations of Pressure and Benefit Fraud Concerns
The mother-of-three delivered a scathing assessment of her children, describing them as convincing and accomplished fibbers. She told the court she was ultimately forced to sign over the property deeds under duress in August 2019, marking the climax of what she presents as a campaign of pressure from her own family. Ms Hickenbotham claims they turned up mob-handed and left her extremely distressed, though the siblings deny these allegations.
Complicating matters further, Ms Hickenbotham, who has not worked in nearly 50 years and has been claiming housing benefits since 1992, was served an eviction notice by Ms Noble when she stopped paying rent in 2024. In a risky legal move, she is essentially putting her own liberty at risk by admitting to a potential crime to win the civil case. She claims she owned the house while simultaneously claiming housing benefits, which are only for renters. At the start of the trial, Judge Simon Monty KC warned her that if her claim succeeded, she would be guilty of benefit fraud, stating, If the claimant is right and the property was always hers, there has been a benefits fraud. He added that he would have no choice but to report her if her claim were upheld.
The High Court battle continues, with the family's fractured relationship laid bare as they await a ruling on the rightful ownership of the £500,000 Essex home.
