Katy Perry Seeks Nearly $5M in Damages in Ongoing Dispute over Montecito Home

The dispute has prompted people looking out for older Americans to propose an act that would safeguard elderly civilians in real estate dealings.

A luxury mansion, a beloved pop star, and an ailing veteran caught in a multimillion-dollar tug-of-war. A new development in the continued legal battle between musical superstar Katy Perry and the former owner of her Montecito home, entrepreneur Carl Westcott, has surfaced.

According to a court document filed on November 21, 2025, that People magazine obtained, the artist is requesting a hefty sum of money. However, Westcott has claimed that Perry still owes him millions from the original sale price of the home.

Katy Perry's Shocking Demand: Millions in Damages

Perry is requesting a total of $4,718,698.95 in damages from Westcott. The pop icon claims she is "entitled to $3,525,000 in rental value," which she says was lost due to the dispute.

Additionally, she is seeking $1,343,401.95 for what she describes as necessary repairs to the property. After a $149,703 offset in recognition of Westcott's own reported losses, the total amount Perry believes she is owed comes to just under $4.72 million.

However, Westcott's legal team paints a different picture. In a filing submitted on November 7 in Los Angeles, he contends that Perry has yet to pay the full purchase amount for the Montecito mansion. He alleges she still owes about $6 million of the $15 million sale price, claiming she has only paid $9 million to date.

Accounting for the cost of repairs, Westcott's side proposes that the adjusted total still outstanding is approximately $5,740,418.18. The Montecito estate, a sprawling 1930s mansion, was purchased by Perry and her then-partner, actor Orlando Bloom, in July 2020.

'Lacked Capacity': A Seller's Plea After a Painful Surgery

Not long after the transaction, Westcott — who is also known as the owner of 1-800-Flowers — began to take legal action in an effort to reverse the sale. He argued that he "lacked capacity" at the time of signing the contract.

By August 2020, Westcott had filed a lawsuit against Perry's business manager, Bernie Gudvi, setting the stage for a protracted courtroom battle that has only continued to intensify with time.

When Westcott — a former Army serviceman now in his 80s — attempted to withdraw from the agreement just days after finalizing the sale, he claimed that a back surgery had left him heavily medicated, impairing his mental capacity during the transaction.

At the time, Westcott had already been diagnosed with Huntington's disease, a degenerative neurological condition that progressively erodes cognitive and physical abilities. Despite Westcott's efforts to challenge the validity of the contract, a judge ruled in Perry's favor at the end of 2023.

The court determined that Westcott had failed to present convincing evidence that he lacked the mental capacity to consent to the sale. Perry's legal team further argued that Westcott even had a backup offer from Maria Shriver.

By then, Westcott's health had severely deteriorated. He was bedridden, and, according to reports, is currently receiving around-the-clock hospice care. The emotional weight of the case has been palpable for his family, particularly his son, who publicly voiced the toll the ordeal had taken on his father.

Westcott's Family Speaks Out: 'We Proudly Fought for Carl'

Westcott's son stated that an apology would be welcome, highlighting the human side of the years-long dispute. In 2023, Westcott's daughter-in-law further personalized the family's struggle with an emotional Instagram post.

She shared intimate images of Westcott in hospice, surrounded by loved ones, offering a stark visual of the toll Huntington's disease has taken.

In a heartfelt caption, she thanked supporters and expressed her heartbreak at the court's ruling. "While he was unable to fight for himself, we proudly fought for Carl and will continue to fight for the rights of those with Huntingtons [sic], Alzheimer's, and all diseases that impair cognitive function against those who try to take advantage of those battling these heartbreaking life impairments," she wrote.

"I know the truth," she added, reflecting the family's deep disappointment while still urging compassion and perseverance. "Let this be a reminder and encouragement to all of us to be the differences and the kindness we need in this world, even when we're up against obstacles that seem unjust and unethical 🤍."

The PERRY Act Emerges

While the courtroom battle between Perry and Westcott continues to draw headlines, the impact of the case has extended far beyond the gates of the Montecito estate. In response to the controversy, advocates for elder rights have begun pushing for legislative reform aimed at preventing similar disputes in the future.

Among the proposals gaining traction is the PERRY Act — short for Protecting Elderly Realty for Retirement Years Act — a fitting acronym given the case's high-profile catalyst.

The proposed law seeks to "address the risks of elder financial abuse," particularly in real estate transactions where older adults may be vulnerable to impaired judgment or external pressure. If passed, the legislation would require a mandatory 72-hour cooling-off period in any residential property sale involving an individual over the age of 75.

During this window, either party would have the right to rescind the agreement without incurring any penalties, offering a buffer period to reconsider such significant decisions.

The framework echoes existing "cooling off" laws already in place in certain states, such as New Jersey, where contracts prepared by realtors can be canceled within a limited time after execution — regardless of the parties' ages.

Though it remains to be seen whether the PERRY Act will be signed into law, its emergence underscores a growing concern about protecting seniors from potential exploitation — especially when it comes to high-stakes financial dealings.

Whether intentional or not, the dispute between Katy Perry and Westcott has sparked a broader dialogue on safeguarding dignity, autonomy, and fairness for aging Americans.