Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) can be extremely powerful documents in terms of enabling others to deal with your affairs when you have lost the capacity to do so for yourself. The legislation seeks to strike a balance between the regulated oversight of the attorney’s actions by the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) whilst imposing some checks and balances to try and prevent abuse of vulnerable individuals.
The current regime of LPAs, therefore, requires a certificate provider to countersign the document to confirm that the donor has the mental capacity to make the document and give the power. Once completed, a power of attorney also has to be registered with the OPG before any attorney can begin to exercise their powers.
The legislation and accompanying regulations contain various rules and restrictions about who may act as certificate provider or witness to the donor’s and the attorney’s signatures. Once again these are designed to try and prevent abuse of vulnerable individuals. Unfortunately, however, they can often catch out the unwary with significant implications.
The recent case of the Office of the Public Guardian and PGO, MAB and MJD ([2019] EWCOP13) is a case in point. BGO executed both a finance and a health and welfare lasting power of attorney in which she appointed her husband and two solicitors as her attorneys with authority to act jointly and severally. Both of the LPAs were registered by the OPG, and it was only sometime later that a financial institution noticed that the donor’s signature had been witnessed by one of the attorneys – it would seem by one of the solicitors.
The current version of the LPA document makes it clear that an attorney and a replacement attorney must not witness the signature of the donor. As a result of this error (which was not picked up by the OPG), the court confirmed that the legislation renders the document invalid and incapable of rectification. As a result, the only way forward was either to complete fresh lasting powers of attorney if the donor still had capacity or to apply to the Court of Protection for the appointment of a deputy because the donor had lost capacity.
Whilst the Court of Protection will appoint a deputy in relation to an individual’s financial affairs in almost all cases, it is far less willing to grant a health and welfare power of attorney – especially with the same wide scope of a health and welfare lasting power of attorney. In this case, the donor had lost capacity so that it was not possible to create fresh lasting powers of attorney. The costs and regulatory regime for Deputyships are more expensive and time-consuming than LPAs highlighting the need to observe the regulations carefully.
Further information
For further information about any of the issues raised in this ebriefings, please contact Clare Burke.
Latest news
Anthony Collins advised B3Living on strategic acquisition of 250 social homes
The social housing team at Anthony Collins advised Hertfordshire-based B3Living on the successful acquisition of 250 social homes from Orbit Group.
Tuesday 19 November 2024
Read moreAnthony Collins promotes and appoints 19
19 promotions and appointments have been announced including two partners, two legal directors, two senior associates and four associates, as well as a number of appointments within the central management […]
Monday 4 November 2024
Read moreLatest webinars and podcasts
Podcast: Who gets the microwave? Episode 2 – Non-court dispute resolution
Listen to the second in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team where Tom Gregory, Chris Lloyd-Smith and Maria Ramon put down their litigation weapons and discuss the importance of […]
Friday 22 November 2024
Read morePODCAST: Who gets the microwave?
The first in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team begins with the team discussing what happens to pets during divorce and separation.
Friday 16 August 2024
Read more