Judges warning about Power of Attorney

I think Mum has one in place for the possibility of her going Ga-ga but as she is 99 I somehow can't ever see it being an issue.

The only case I know of personally where an old person was cheated of a lot of money wasn't through a PoA but two people she trusted implicitly ( non relatives).

No. I have two attorneys, appointed jointly, as a safeguard. But if he thinks the Court of protection only costs £320 a year he is way out of touch. It was the costs incurred by a friend who had to go back to the Court of Protection every six months for money to pay her mums care fees that prompted me to set up a POA.
I think it likely that the legal profession is worried about their own drop in income now that relatives can make the decisions and not have to involve them every time.

I have Loa over my He's affairs. He cannot deal with anything financial any more.
I definitely need this.
There must be some reason, not disclosed, why the man mentioned used a neighbour instead of his daughter to have that Power.
My D would take over if I weren't capable, she had to agree to that when we made the application.
I trust her implicitly.

Yes I wondered about his comment on Court of Protection costs - we set up our PofA partly because we had heard dreadful stories about not only the Courts costs but also the delay in getting the money. At the end of the interview, I did wonder if he'd been less than helpful

PoA not LoA

Eglatine the two attorneys you have, does 'jointly' mean that neither can act independently?

I went on a carer 's course when my H developed Alzheimer's and a solicitor came to speak. He strongly advised setting one up and told of the costs involved when the Court of Protection got involved, it was thousands not hundreds and they go on for a lifetime.

My sister has PoA for our mother. She has always lived near her, and I'm the other end of the country. Mum is nearly 99 and in a very nice care home which needs paying for.
My sister had legally to send me a declaration that she had done this, so I could object if I wanted to. Which I don't, I admire my sister for taking the responsibility. I just hope Mum's money holds out.

Maryeliza, they are jointly and severally but must consult with each other and with another third party before any decision is is taken. They are my children and I do trust them. Also I have very stern instructions in the health one about not keeping me alive if I'm in a state where I can't make my own decision!
I am the sole attorney for a friend. He knows I'm so honest I've never even parked on a yellow line!

We have POAs designating each other and 3 children to deal with things in various circumstances. My OH has started having delusional states caused by his medication and his PD, so it may come into its own at some point, although I have dealt with all the finances for years anyway.

I trust all my DDs implicitly; and also my sons-I-L not to influence them unwisely.

I have seen how valuable these are with my parents. We were able to deal with everything when Dad was widowed and became ill. He also set up a joint bank account with my brother and put in (I think) £10K - this was hugely useful when he died as my brother could sign cheques for the funeral and a meal out afterwards to celebrate his life.

And I and my siblings all went out for a meal courtesy of this fund - we knew he would have been delighted that we all got together in his name.

I think part of the problem is that companies and services such as banks do not understand what POA is.

It can only be activated once the named person has lost the ability to make decisions and even so, they should still be included in decisions as much as possible and adjustments made to make decisions as easy as possible to understand and make. This is not put in place as much as it should be.

Of course there are situations where people take advantage but these should be investigated by the police and social services. Getting a court of protection order takes years and costs thousands. Power of Attorney is so much cheaper and easier.

I will definitely do it in the future

I thought it was only the Health LPA that couldn't be activated unless capacity was lost.

I think the problem is there is no accountability with POAs.

The solution is to make it obligatory for POA's to be registered at the court when they are activated and for it to be obligatory for those exercising a POA to file audited annual accounts with the court.

I have had to deal with both POAs prepared while the person concerned was able to set it up themselves and those where it has been done through the courts, and those prepared in advance are so much easier and cheaper to deal with.

However I always kept meticulous accounts of how I spent the money, with receipts wherever possible and, as I was not a legatee, in either case passed these accounts onto the solicitor dealing with the will when the person whose POA I held died.

I have made a POA, naming my DCs as attorneys, they are also the legatees in my will, bar a few small legacies to godchildren. So, even if they did raid my estate, they would only be taking what they were due to get anyway.

Eglantine19 The problem with having POAs that can only work jointly, is that if one of the appointees dies, the whole POA has to be done all over again. If by that time it has been activated because you can no longer manage your affairs it has to be done through the Court of Protection.

A friend's parents set up POAs appointing her and her DH as joint attorneys. Her father died, her mother developed dementia and went into a home and the POA was activated, then my friend's DH died unexpectedly.

The joint POA was immediately invalid because her DH's death meant he could no longer act with her and it took her nearly a year and a lot of money to get a new POA through the courts. In the meanwhile her DM's care home fees had to be paid each month. Fortunately her DH's death activated a life insurance policy, otherwise she would have had to find a bank or other financial body prepared to lend her money until the problem was resolved.

All the POAs I have held and the one I have made have been 'jointly and severally', just to be on the safe side.

Yes, thanks Monica. That's why I made it jointly and severally. Maryeliza both the health and fnancial POA only come into play when the person concerned is no longer able to make any decisions for themselves and as franjess says, every effort should be made to involve them as much as possible.
The case the judge cited was where an Attourney had acted illegally. Falling victim to crime can happen in any walk of life and shouldn't (in my opinion) be held up as a reason for discouraging POA.

I've just checked on the Age Concern website and it says an LPA for financial affairs comes into force either when you lose capacity or if you decide that you want it to - I guess an example might be if you had capacity but were very ill and wanted your attorney to take over

Yes, my siblings and I were told to make what was then Enduring Power of Attorney ' jointly and severally', explaining that if it is only done jointly, everyone has to agree when it's needed and that can cause problems if, for example, there are no current contact details for one of the holders.

maryeliza54 That is what one of my uncles did. He suffered from depression and when he decided to move into a care home he handed the handling of all his affairs to me through a POA.

At first I would always consult with him about anything major and I gave him copies of my accounts but he showed no interest in either, just made it clear I was to deal with everything and not bother him with them. So I did.

I think they're giving a ridiculous amount of publicity to the views of one man. He evidently doesn't have anyone he can trust to take on this responsibility for him, but many of us do trust our close family members and would far rather empower them to take decisions on our behalf than some stranger. Getting some one appointed by the courts is a slow and expensive procedure - and who's going to arrange it? Who's going to pay for it?
He also failed to mention the Health and Welfare LPA, which is separate from the Finance and Property one . I trust my DDs, who love me and know me so well, to make decisions about my care and treatment, as they know my views and wishes, just as I trust them with my money and my property.

I agree with grannyticktock.

In fact, what I get out of all this man's hoopla about poa, is that one should think carefully about who one chooses for that.

As for me, I totally trust my dd, so this man's cautions don't apply to me.

What a stupid man. Of course there will be the odd case like this, but most people are very careful about signing over PoA to people they trust.

If you haven't given PoA to a trusted person then you could be at the mercy of a SW when it comes to your Health and Welfare in your old age and they can overrule your family's wishes.

I think the judge is well meaning, but probably has no idea of the stress and hassle it can be to manage the affairs of someone who isn't capable any more, especially if dementia is involved. Going via the court of protection is expensive and takes a long time, and what do you do in the meantime?

It can be hard enough anyway to get P of A in place if the person has dementia and fails to understand that there's anything wrong with them - quite common - or starts to think that relatives are only out to steal their money.

My mother had sensibly put an old style P of A in place long before she developed dementia, but by the time we needed to activate it - a cheque for a large amount had already gone missing and been cashed by God knows whom - she was very anti handing over control and had no idea that she wasn't remotely capable any more. My brother had to get very tough to get her to sign.

Having said that, I know there are cases - sadly not all that uncommon - where relatives have used the person's money to fund their own lifestyle, and there need to be far stricter controls or comeback when other relatives know or suspect that this is going on.

However the idea of it being mandatory for solicitors to manage a person's affairs horrifies me - the cost of their fees would make a significant hole in most people's funds, which would very likely be needed for care costs. And if it were mandatory, what's the betting that fees would rise anyway?