For grad-student Lucy Campeon, being a Cat-Nanny to Beaker, the beloved pet of the rich and dying Mrs Handine, was the ideal job to augment her bank account, solve her housing problem and preserve her dignity. So what if she had to resort to deception to get it?
When the old lady dies, she leaves her extensive fortune to Beaker, including permanent employment for the staff, for the rest of the cat's natural life. This is a boon to the household staff as their jobs are the only source of income for their impoverished families.
Beaker's inheritance upsets Mrs Handine's relatives, who felt the money should have gone to them. Believing they will inherit the fortune with the cat out of the way, they kill Beaker.
Lucy and Doctor Andrew, Beaker's private veterinarian, try to prove Beaker was murdered, but they can't. Without proof of murder, the relatives will indeed inherit, and the whole staff will lose their livelihoods.
Their new solution: replace Beaker with another cat and hope the lawyers don't notice.
So the lines of battle are set, with the relatives trying to prove deception or death (even if it means they have to kill five successive "Beakers" to do it) and Lucy and Doctor Andrew trying desperately to make it seem Beaker is alive (replacing Beaker with a new cat each time one is killed).
Will this save everyone's jobs and thwart the greedy relatives or will their deception be discovered?
Ok, this is hysterical and I'd probably read it but it's not a very good hook.
You need to be concise: Lucy Campean has a job as long as Beaker, cat heir to millions, stays alive. The next in line kin have no cat killing scruples. When they succeed, Lucy and the rest of the staff hit upon the perfect solution: another Beaker.
That's very rough and spur of the moment, but you get the idea.
I'm indulging Killer Yapp in asking for pages. He loves Ding Dong the Wicked Cat is dead story lines...even if the cat isn't wicked at all.