Two top doctors are embroiled in a bitter row with their brother over their dead mother's £1.8million fortune.

Dominic, 53, and Jeremy Heath, 65, left their parents' £1.5million house in leafy Hampstead, north London, as young men, each forging successful careers in medicine.

However, while they went on to reach 'the top of their profession,' amassing 'wealth and properties', their brother Timothy never flew the nest.

Dominic (left), 53, and Jeremy Heath (right), 65, are embroiled in a bitter row with their brother Timothy over their dead mother's £1.8million fortune

Timothy, who describes himself as a 'self-employed creative,' is still living in his parents' home at the age of 62.

When their widowed mother, Rachel Heath, died aged 93 in October 2015, she left a will, splitting her estate equally between the three, and appointing them all executors.

But middle brother Timothy now claims he deserves a bigger share of the family fortune, because he acted as the 'primary carer' for their mother 'for many years' whilst his brothers 'took none of the burden' and 'left him to do it.'

James and Jeremy say he is 'over-egging the pudding' and should get out of their parents' house so the family wealth can be fairly shared out.

At London's High Court, Mr Justice Carr heard that the brothers' parents bought their Grade II listed family home in 1965.

Their three boys grew up there, before Dominic and Jeremy left to make their way in the world.

Timothy (left), who describes himself as a 'self-employed creative,' is still living in his mother's home at the age of 62 (right, Rachel Heath, with a carer before she died)

The pair have each achieved distinguished careers in the medical profession, their barrister, Mark Baxter, said.

Father-of-four, Dominic, is a consultant ophthalmologist who lives in Hertfordshire, whilst Jeremy, who the judge heard has also reached the 'top of his field,' lives in Wales.

Timothy is a maths graduate and a qualified barrister, but 'was never employed', Mr Baxter added.

He stayed on in the family home, where he has lived for over half a century, since he was aged 10.

He devotes his time to 'creative' projects and helping to run a society devoted to the life and works of William Blake, the court heard.

He said in the witness box that he was in effect an unpaid 'live-in carer' for his mother for the last eight years of her life during her battle with dementia.

And Timothy told the judge that his sacrifice ought to be recognised by him receiving a bigger slice of her estate than his already 'wealthy' brothers.

'I have been looking after mother for many years, a difficult person to look after. I was her principle carer for many years,' he said.

Dominic, he claimed, 'visited about once a month and stayed for an hour,' while 'Jeremy visited about twice a year.'

Timothy explained that his mother had two paid live-in carers, but that he took on an equal share of the care duties unpaid.

'I never asked to be paid. I didn't ask to be paid for looking after a parent. But my brothers took none of the burden,' he said.

'They pursued their careers and pensions and their income and they left me to do what they took advantage of,' he went on.

At London's High Court, Mr Justice Carr heard that the Heath brothers' parents bought their Grade II listed family home (pictured) in 1965

'The presence of myself in the house has made our mother's final years richer and allowed her to die in her own home, rather than in the secure mental unit my brothers wanted to send her to.

'There was no support from my brothers and what I was doing with my work totally collapsed,' he added.

'Dominic and Jeremy are at the top of their profession,' he told the judge, adding: 'You cannot have a society where somebody dedicates their life and is denied compensation, or a roof over their head.

The other two professional carers cost £45,000 a year each.'

He told Dominic, as the brothers faced off across the courtroom: 'You are employed as a consultant and you have multiple properties. You are a wealthy man.

'You offered no financial support. You didn't visit often enough for it to manifest any form of care. I've looked after her almost single-handedly.

'I don't own a house and I don't have a pension or a steady income.

'I'm not prepared to be bullied by people who have pursued a career with money and don't value things that don't attract money, and I don't think I should be made homeless or put into penury if it can be avoided.

'There was an implicit contract. You cannot have three people (carers) living in a house with two earning £45,000-a-year and one getting nothing... I think the estate should honour its debts,' he added.

Dominic, replying, disputed Timothy's claim to have acted as a full time carer for their mother and told him: 'It's not your house, it's mum's house.'

'I have admitted I am financially wealthy. I have saved assiduously. I am happy with where I am in life, but I want my children to be happy, and that's why we are in court, because you are not allowing my children the contents of our mother's will,' he added.

He told the judge that for many years he 'held Timothy in huge esteem and respect as the younger brother,' but that their relationship had since 'deconstructed' due to the 'huge conflict' between the three over their mother's house and money.

Mr Baxter told the judge that Timothy is currently 'in occupation and control of Mrs Heath's house and its contents' and accused him of using his position as executor as a 'bargaining chip' with his brothers.

Timothy had been 'wilfully obstructive to the administration of the estate by failing to comply with reasonable requests,' Mr Baxter claimed.

He asked the judge to remove Timothy as an executor due to an 'inherent conflict between his duties as an executor and his own personal interests.'

The barrister also disputed Timothy's claim that he had been unable to match his brothers' financial success in life because they had left the job of caring for their ailing mother to him.

'He was 45 years old by the time he began this care', said Mr Baxter.

'He is over-egging the pudding by saying that the care he has given for the last eight years has prevented him establishing himself in life.'

Ruling on the case, Mr Justice Carr accepted that Timothy was 'acting as one of three full time carers' for the last eight years of his mother's life, adding: 'Dominic did not give any recognition of the fact that his brother must have given care to their mother.'

'I accept that 24 hour-a-day care was provided by three carers, each doing eight hour shifts, one of whom was Timothy.

'I got the impression that Dr Dominic Heath didn't want to acknowledge that Timothy provided any care for their mother, despite living with her in the property for many, many years,' the judge said.

'I am not satisfied that Timothy has acted in any way improperly...nor do I accept that he has acted deliberately in any attempt to frustrate probate,' the judge went on.

But he found that there was an 'irreconcilable conflict between Timothy having a claim on the estate, on one hand, and being an executor on the other.'

'His position is that, for several years, he provided care for his mother and his brothers did not.

'He claims to be entitled to a greater share of the estate than the 1971 will provides, that he is entitled to recompense and that his services to his mother ought to be recognised.

'That gives rise to a conflict of interest between his duties as an executor and his potential claim against the estate.

'I think that the claim to remove Timothy as an executor is well founded and I intend to accede to it.'

The judge ordered Timothy to step down, to be replaced by an independent solicitor, but ordered the two medics to pay their own £25,000 costs of bringing the application to remove their brother as an executor.

He also warned the two doctors that they may have to step aside as executors themselves if further conflicts of interest arise.