The Mail on Sunday holds out the delicious prospect that we may yet see some ‘naked’ civil servants. Whilst I have lambasted them previously for their inaccurate reporting, they have taken another bite of the Court of Protection cherry, presided over by the aptly named ‘Masters of Lunacy’, and come up with a surprising result.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw has pledged to re-examine the workings of the secretive Court of Protection after a Mail on Sunday investigation exposed huge flaws in the system designed to look after some of Britain’s most vulnerable people.

I have been ‘hammering away’ at this iniquitous and secretive system for 20 years now, I know that my nearest and dearest, to say nothing of my readers, have been known to roll their eyes in the past and say ‘not again’. People find it very hard to grasp the venality of this system until it grips them round the throat, at which point it is too late to say or do anything. One of my closest friends has listened to me on probably a weekly basis telling her to get an enduring power of attorney for her Mother becasue it was clear that her Mother’s condition was leading her gently towards the door of the secretive Court of Protection. Finally she rang me one Sunday and told me that she needed my help; a Doctor had judged that her Mother was no longer of sound mind – so what was it I had said about how to get an Enduring Power of Attorney?

What I had said, and will go on saying until I am blue in the face, is that when you need an Enduring Power of Attorney – it is too late to get one. Like a Will, it is something that must be drawn up in advance of the situation when it is needed. Whislt you have to pay to register such a Power when it is needed, you do not have to pay to download the form and have it signed and ready for use. DO IT NOW!

The Court of Protection, which does not admit the media or the public to scrutinise its affairs, which will only ‘examine’ complaints of its handling of cases on payment of several hundred pounds, which has received almost 900 complaints in the last six months alone, 4,000 since its last Liberace like repaint and reupholster, is the same court which this week ruled (unusually in public) on whether Baby RB should continue to be kept alive, it is the same court which decided that Baby T should not receive any more life giving treatment.

It is the same court which will make the decisions on how long YOUR life will be. It is the same court that will decide whether you are looking after your children or your husband or wife in a manner currently approved of. They can and will make decisions on everything, ranging from the clothes you buy, to where you live. They can and do, send officials to your home with the power to poke into your cupboards, inspect your clothing, and write secret reports to the court which will be taken as ‘evidence’.

It is scarcely surprising that Nu-Labour wished to extend the powers of the Court two years ago, for it is the ultimate Stasi mechanism. Total control of every facet of your life. It can happen to YOU.

What is surprising is that so few bloggers have shown any great interest in the subject. Perhaps they believe that blogging is some sort of protection in itself. It isn’t. The Mail on Sunday contains some remarkable true life accounts, the first time to my memory that real people have been photographed and interviewed in this way. Do read it. It finally puts to bed the lie that the Court of Protection is all about little old ladies who have no relatives. They are people just like you and me. Even Solicitors who thought they would get around to an Enduring Power of Attorney ‘one day’ – and then it was too late.

None of this would really matter if the Court was an effective and competent instrument to handle the few ‘bad apples’ who would take advantage of a vulnerable family member.

They are not. When presented with fraud, they rarely do more than (after the further appropriate fees have been paid, naturally) appoint yet another even more expensive intermediary to deal with day to day affairs. The Mail on Sunday quote one unfortunate recipient of their attentions who had to pay £4,100 in legal bills in order to withdraw £5,800 of her own money from the ‘bank’ of CoP. I am not surprised, I have heard many similar tales.

When the Father of one child died unexpectedly, the Court charged her Mother £42,000 to take over as her official ‘carer’. It is unspeakable.

The system does have some benefits.

It benefits the Doctors who wish to withdraw life saving treatment and fear that they may bear the brunt of legal action by the families concerned. A decision by the Court protects them from this.

It protects Professional Financial Advisers from claims of maladministration of funds – they request an order from the court, and are then ‘acting on legal orders’.

It hires its staff locally along designated ‘diversity’ and ‘equal opportunity’ lines – in Archway, North London this results in a particular mix of newly arrived and not necessarily fluently English speaking staff. Their colour is utterly irrelevant, the fact that they cannot communicate successfully with claimants either by phone or illegible badly written letters is – the claimants have no choice other than to communicate by letter or phone, there is no other way. The guidelines for hiring of staff do not reflect the best interests of the claimants, but some ideological fetish of Nu-Labour.

They insist that money is deposited with them at 0 .5% interest. They claim that for money to be left in High Street banks at up to 3.0% represents a ‘risk’ – a risk that the rest of us are already underwriting.

The Mail on Sunday has chalked up a success of sorts. They have extracted a promise from Jack Straw to ‘examine the rules’ governing the Court of Protection. It is but a tiny chink of light shinning into the bowels of Archway Towers. What is needed is for the very existence of the Court of Protection to be examined, not justified by scare stories of what ‘could happen’ to vulnerable people if it didn’t exist, but forced to produce evidence of the good it actually does. Let us see where it has traced money that has been squandered, let us see where it has protected vulnerable people, let us judge for ourselves whether this intrusive Stasi control of human beings should be allowed to continue in its present form or its much quoted usefulness in paying care home bills for ‘old ladies’ left to the banks to carry out by standing order.

Bloggers can help, they can continue to shine their torches into the murky depths and keep up the pressure to make this court efficient, transparently naked, and accountable – or non-existent.

Leonard Lawrence
November 20, 2009 at 11:32

To Sir Mark Potter,

Google search: Leonard Lawrence Pilot

Held for 17 month as a captive mental patient by Helen Clift Medical/Family Lawyer, Official Solicitors Office and never registered with the Court of Protection. REF: LNF41919/OS

Mr Lawrence signiture was obtained on legal aid forms, the legal department Legal Services Commission then granted legal aid to solicitors even when Mr Lawrence was Three Hundred and Thirty One Thousand Pounds over the eligibilty limit to avoid an application to the Court of Protection.

Why? To reduce the number of case before the Court of Protection?

Jabba the Cat
November 16, 2009 at 00:54

Thanks for the answer Anna.

My curiosity stems from the fact that previously the power of attorney was wrapped up for fifty quid solely round at the solicitors and now you get charged five hundred by the solicitor plus a court fee of one hundred and twenty quid. On top of that you have to wait up to twelve weeks whereas before it was done whilst you wait.

Andy
November 15, 2009 at 23:34

After a friends wife died in her care home on the night of New years eve after months of being sedated. I fear for my aging family and my eldest niece who is under constant care by them..

In WW2 the nazis (national socialists) had places for the economically inactive. They were work camps with warders and Koshes. Under this Gov’t. (International socialists) We have the NHS for the inactive and the koshes are chemical.

Thank you for the heads up. This will save lives. I will send this to my parents right away.

Jabba the Cat
November 15, 2009 at 22:29

I’m told that the granting of power of attorney is now done by a court. Would this be the same Court of Protection referred to above and in the Daily Mail?

Anna Raccoon
November 15, 2009 at 22:44

Jabba,

Enduring Powers of Attorney are theoretically overseen by the Court of Protection, in so far as, if any outside agency reports suspicions of a problem, the Court has authority to look into the matter, but they do not directly supervise, as in look at accounts, ask how much money is involved, check on the holders of such power, or even check that the signature of the asignee is actually theirs! – It was always intended as a ‘hands off’ approach.

The Court doesn’t ‘grant’ Lasting Power of Attorney (Enduring Power of Attorney was ended when the new Act came into force, so the term is no longer applicable) The person concerned ‘grants’ the power to whoever they wish, whilst they have mental capacity. The person they grant it to has the ability to do whatever the person involved would have done, buy and sell assets, and if it is a Lasting Power of Attorney, to make decisions regarding their welfare.

If you don’t grant such power, then the Court has the ability, and in deed will, grant a ‘Deputyship’ to whom ever the Court chooses, with a preference for a Professional (Solicitor or Accountant) Deputy, and that will be supervised. A ‘Deputyship’ is restricted and each individual act must be sanctioned by the Court. The Deputyship must be renewed (at extra cost) every three years, in addition to the annual fees, which can be extensive.

WitteringsfromWitney
November 15, 2009 at 19:50

Oops – to continue,

And the state can squabble over the 3s and 4p that will be left!

WitteringsfromWitney
November 15, 2009 at 19:49

Anna,

As for wives – got the ‘T’ Shirt, three in fact and definitely not looking for a fourth ‘T’ Shirt!

As for myself, not needed as when the time comes have the bottle and valium. (and the state can s

john ward
November 15, 2009 at 17:26

I’ve just been for a long walk on the beach in howling winds and bright sunshine. Nothing like it to clear your mind. And Sir Henry Morgan above helped.
First off, I’m sure one of the reasons the Raccoonites (Raccoon-hats?) keep coming back here is that the site is a sort of high-IQ, cut-the-bull place where logic, reason, decency, ironic humour and common sense still prevail. It reminds me a bit of our University common room in 1969, only with a generous twist of lemon added during forty years of disillusionment.
All this is meant as a compliment, by the way. But it’s not what the blogosphere on the whole is about; in fact, it’s not what the internet is about. Anna Raccoon is a great site because it doesn’t conform: rather, it targets a niche perfectly. And as we all like being in this niche, we all like coming here. Forty years on, it’s a boozer called The Hobbes & Bentham, or perhaps The Truth & Light.
Take Sir Henry Morgan above there. The way he ploughs across a feezing Channel while blogging with his other leg tells you what real British grit is about; but above all, it’s obvious he isn’t in it for the money.
None of us are, I suspect….except (increasingly) Guido. This doesn’t make us holy, but in Cruel Britannia it sure as Hell makes us very, very unusual. Poverty is for wimps. Nice guys come last. Show me a good loser, and I’ll show you a loser (Arsene Wenger). You only get once round the track. Do what you have to but don’t get caught. I had to do it for the shareholders. We all know the excuses: we hear them every day.
Anyway, back on Branscombe beach, I managed to boil all this down to one word: exploitation. Give somebody the power of attorney, or gagging orders – or anything really – and they’ll exploit it in various anti-social ways.
That’s why we need Anna-en-niche (and others like her) to rise above the yelling, swearing blogosphere and remind those who can think and argue and plan that all is not lost. We must keep but one aim in mind: to destroy the cockeyed culture that got us here. The barricade days are gone forever: DNA, surveillance and satnav spoy technology have made them impossible. From here on, the thinking internet is the contemporary equivalent of the eightenth century pamphlet. It’s the only uncompomising weapon we’ve got left.
YM x

Jabba the Cat
November 15, 2009 at 16:23

What is the difference between a Joint Power of Attorney and Enduring Power of Attorney?