• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

suing someone that has given LPA to someone else

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • suing someone that has given LPA to someone else

    Dorris has gave LPA (lasting power of attorney)*to her children Fred and Freda, not sure if Freda still has it or if it has been revoked. If both children still have it they can act independently of each other.
    Dorris is in hospital.
    Solicitor sends "court papers" to Dorris's home address
    Fred lives with Dorris.
    Freda cannot act for Dorris as conflict of interest.
    If Freda was to act for Dorris the agreement would mean Dorris is not taken to court but Fred would be effected


    Two questions

    As Dorris is in hospital does LPA automatically come into force?

    If it does and Fred does nothing or decides to fight in court and in both cases court rules against Dorris/Fred and awards costs to other party, does Dorris pay or does Fred pay?

    If court rules against Dorris/Fred then Fred again is effected in the same way as above but now may also have a court injunction against him.

    thank you


    sealeysb21
    Tags: None

  • #2
    It sounds like there's more to this than the overview you gave. If the holder of a LPA (the attorney) acts on behalf of the donor, it's still the donor that's being subjected to legal action, not the attorney, and any judgement is against the donor not the attorney. So in your example, it's still Dorris who pays if the case is lost. It's no different to engaging a conventional solicitor to fight a case on your behalf, if they lose, you're still the one who pays, not the solicitor! Similarly any judgement (or injunction as you describe it) would be against Dorris, not Freda or Fred.
    In the case of LPA's, the attorney's responsibility is simply to act in the donors best interests by doing what they believe the donor would have wanted. Provided they don't act according to their own beliefs and at odds with what the donor would have wished (if they had mental capacity), there shouldn't be a problem.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ukcommando View Post
      It sounds like there's more to this than the overview you gave. If the holder of a LPA (the attorney) acts on behalf of the donor, it's still the donor that's being subjected to legal action, not the attorney, and any judgement is against the donor not the attorney. So in your example, it's still Dorris who pays if the case is lost. It's no different to engaging a conventional solicitor to fight a case on your behalf, if they lose, you're still the one who pays, not the solicitor! Similarly any judgement (or injunction as you describe it) would be against Dorris, not Freda or Fred.
      In the case of LPA's, the attorney's responsibility is simply to act in the donors best interests by doing what they believe the donor would have wanted. Provided they don't act according to their own beliefs and at odds with what the donor would have wished (if they had mental capacity), there shouldn't be a problem.
      Thank you for the reply

      Fred has LPA, Dorris is in hospital. Dorris may never get to know about court if fred does not open her post and if he does, does nothing or decides to fight onbehalf of Dorris but does not tell her.

      Fred is the son of Dorris.

      from what you say above, Dorris would still have to pay, is that right?

      Fred may act for his own interests and not that of Dorris. How would that effect things?

      If case goes against dorris an injunction against fred would be sought as well as perhaps dorris.

      Freda is not the target of court proceedings and has clean hands, no axe to grind with Freda.

      who would decide if fred has the mental capacity to act? if fred does not what happens, Freda cant act as conflict of interest

      sealeysb21




      no idea why the A* appears



      Comment

      View our Terms and Conditions

      LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

      If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


      If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

      Announcement

      Collapse

      Support LegalBeagles


      Donate with PayPal button

      LegalBeagles is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

      See more
      See less

      Court Claim ?

      Guides and Letters
      Loading...



      Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

      Find a Law Firm


      Working...
      X