Page 22 - Hunstanton Town & Around - February 2016
P. 22
22 Hunstanton Town & Around February 2016 Tel: 01485 533422 email: editor@townandaround.net
The Regency Act 1937 and restrictions
on the use of LPAs
Written by Miranda Marshall – Director at Hayes + Storr
The case of XY v Public
Guardian (2015) involved a very
wealthy individual who in
Financial Advice Payroll Taxation VAT Pensions Investments making his Lasting Power of
Attorney (“LPA”) wished to
A personal, professional accountancy service for
impose detailed guidance and
sole traders, partnerships and limited companies. tight restrictions upon his
Attorneys.
annual accounts preparation The case was brought by the
partnership and limited company accounts Public Guardian (“PG”), the head
self assessment tax returns of the administrative arm of the
capital gains tax computation Court of Protection, who refused
tax dispute insurance to register the LPA because of the
conditions. XY was a high-worth
VAT advice
individual who owned assets in
PAYE & payroll services
numerous countries and wanted
full range bookkeeping services
to include additional safeguards.
2015 p11d deadline for filing -19/07/2016 The conditions were intricate and new-style LPA, as follows: “Be
Company accounts with year end 31/03/15 aimed to ensure that decisions careful – this can make your LPA
......last day for filing - 31/12/2016 could only be made on his behalf a lot less useful. Your attorney
2016 Self assessment.online filing-31/01/2017 when he clearly lacked capacity might be asked to prove you do
Are you RTI compliant for PAYE? – call 01485 534948 and there was a genuine financial not have mental capacity each
........or email: james@jamesjohnsonltd.co.uk need for a decision to be made. time they try to use this LPA”.
The provisions were lengthy (5 The question therefore is does “a
Accountancy at a local level sheets) and required 2 lot less useful” mean the same as
psychiatrists’ opinions and the “ineffective”?
James Johnson (Accountancy) Ltd
opinion of a ‘Protector’. The role The Senior Judge who decided
7 Peddars Drive, Hunstanton PE36 6HF the case told the PG that “it is not
Company Reg: 5981654 • AAT Licence No: 126130 of the Protector was to review the
medical evidence before the LPA part of his statutory duties to
could be used. These provisions police the practicality or utility of
individual aspects of an LPA.”
Unique Hair Design were similar to the Regency Act This was a polite rebuff to the PG
1937 (the law that governs how
decisions would be made in the not to involve himself in such
Incorporating Toni Fox Nails matters. The conditions in the
event of the monarch lacking
01485 532826 capacity). The Protector was a LPA were difficult and complex
third- party who had to agree with but did not make it ineffective.
the medical evidence before the The case makes it clear that
powers conferred on the there is a distinction between a
Attorneys by the LPA could be Protector who confirms
used. incapacity (allowed) and third
The PG objected on the basis parties sanctioning decisions of
that most of the conditions attorneys (not allowed).
imposed were an unreasonable
fetter on the Attorneys’ power to “This article aims to supply
act and were therefore ineffective general information, but it is not
under the Mental Capacity Act. intended to constitute advice.
One of the main concerns was Every effort is made to ensure
that the ‘Protector’ was not an that the law referred to is correct
Attorney, yet was in a position to at the date of publication and to
interfere with the Attorneys’ duty avoid any statement which may
to act in the best interests of XY. mislead. However no duty of care
The Protector was not bound in is assumed to any person and no
law by the same duties as the liability is accepted for any
Attorneys. omission or inaccuracy. Always
Even though this case is very seek our specific advice”.
specific to the facts and concerns
an extremely rich person, If you require advice on this
essentially it is about the question matter please contact Miranda on
of whether the LPA is effective 01328 710210. If you require
“only when I don’t have advice on any other legal matter
capacity” in accordance with the please telephone our Hunstanton
28 St Edmund’s Avenue prescribed form of an LPA, or office on 01485 524166 or email
Hunstanton law.hunstanton@hayes-
not. There is something akin to a
government health warning in the storr.com.
