LPA / pushy solicitor

[Badger72]

Thanks in advance...

I have a relative approaching their later years who is considering setting up LPA (not sure which, maybe both). Immediate family members are either a) abroad b) of a similar age. So, it's possible the relative may ask a local friend or not so immediate family members (including myself) to act as attorneys

That's fine, I'm very fond of relative and would be happy to help in any way I can, however, I live on the other side of the country. I think it would be very sensible for there to be multiple attorneys - more than one relative, a local friend, a solicitor etc.

The relative is in the early stages of talking to a local solicitor who is unknown to them. There is no previous relationship here. To my utter astonishment, I've been told that the local solicitor has said he would "refuse to act in conjunction with lay people". Either does the whole thing himself or not at all. He is getting pushy - seeking a pen on paper (will / and LPA).

Really? I'm astounded that a solicitor would behave like this, however, before I go off the deep end and start looking for redress am I right in thinking this is completely unacceptable? Or is it actually common practise? I find it simply astonishing that this person would seek to assume e.g., LPA for health and care decisions when there is absolutely zero history of any relationship between him and my relative.

Of course, my initial instinct is to advise my relative to run a mile and to ask them if they'd like me to turn up with the proverbial baseball bat. However, I'd be interested to find out if there's an alternative view here that I'm unaware of.

[ostell]

Of course the solicitor wants it all to himself, it's the money you know. How much per hour for handling?

Does your relative not have any local friends willing to take on the LPA? I ask because my wife and I had an LPA to a non relative friend. The LPA was drawn up by a solicitor.

[Badger72]

Thanks.

Yes, I understand that the solicitor would want to maximise his income, however, I was absolutely astounded that this was even suggested. Surely it's unethical? But it seems as though this must be commonplace?

Yes, I agree - it would be much better if there was a local friend who might agree to act as attorney either in conjunction with a relative and/or a sympathetic solicitor. It's certainly not going to be this guy though.

Will see how it pans out.

[ostell]

There's no reason to get a solicitor involved, other than to set it all in place.

[Peridot]

Hi Badger72,

I think you are correct in suggesting more than one attorney be appointed in case one is unable to deal with matters, for whatever reason, there is still then someone who can deal with the issue.

As a bit of background which you are probably already aware of but to help others reading this, a donor (the person making the LPA) can also stipulate whether the attorney's act independently of each other (joint and several), or whether everything has to be dealt with by both attorneys (jointly). This can cause some issues when attorneys are not local to each other or the donor, as any documents would need signing by both and agreement would have to be reached together on ever aspect of decision making. Needless to say this is not always practical. If attorneys are acting jointly and severally they each still have to act in the donor's best interest at all times and attorneys have to try to ascertain what the donor would want, allowing them to make their own decisions as far as they are able to.

I would say that IF a solicitor were appointed it can cause some issues. It honestly isn't always about the money although of course using a solicitor as an attorney will be more costly in the long run as they will charge for their time whereas a friend or relative can only claim their reasonable expenses incurred, such as travel costs. The amount of time it would take and therefore the associated increase in costs to the Donor, of appointing a lawyer and a relative to act jointly does make things more difficult. If the attorneys are expected to act jointly (or even if the aren't reports still need to be provided when the lawyer has taken an action and thus again an increase in time spent dealing and the associated costs involved). This is similar to when solicitors are appointed as executors, it can be difficult and far more costly if a lot of people have to be involved in the decision process, before action can be taken. In addition most solicitors would not wish to be involved in a health and welfare LPA, unless there is no other option. This if far more personal than dealing with the finances and property of a person.

I wonder whether the best option would be for your relative to appoint 2 attorneys (friends or relatives) and maybe consider a substitute attorney (maybe this could be a solicitor, if there is no one else), so that if there was any issue preventing the first attorneys from acting, then there is still a back stop person, rather than ending up in the situation of having to apply to the Court of Protection for a deputy to be appointed, which is costly, as will a solicitor be, if they end up acting.

I feel there are legitimate reasons for the solicitor to say they would only be happy to act alone as I have pointed out above, but I would also say that it is always better to appoint people who know you and who you trust to be your attorney, particularly when dealing with health and welfare issues.

If your relative has other options then it would be sensible to explore these and see if there are a couple of people that would be willing to assist her.

Hopefully the LPA's will never be needed, but it is sensible to get them in place while you can.

I hope this helps, do post again if you have any queries.

[Badger72]

Hi Peridot,

Thanks very much for your lengthy reply.

No; this is all new territory for me and all of that is extremely helpful.

I'm beginning to wonder if I've been given a bum steer. E.g., the solicitor in question hasn't touched upon health and welfare. It just doesn't seem plausible.

I think the fundamental problem here is: the relative has no immediate family or a younger local friend who can assist. Hence the need for a less practical solution.

I'll give it some thought.

Thanks again for your time. Very much appreciated.