(Leeds North East)
(Lab)
I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about
Lasting Powers of Attorney; to place duties on banks in respect
of Lasting Powers of Attorney; to make provision about the powers
of the Office of the Public Guardian to investigate the actions
of an attorney; to require the Secretary of State to review the
effectiveness of the powers of the Office of the Public Guardian
to investigate the actions of an attorney and of its use of those
powers; to make provision about the duties of care homes in
respect of Lasting Powers of Attorney; to require an attorney to
notify the Office of the Public Guardian of the death of a donor;
to require the Office of the Public Guardian to take steps to
promote the facility to request a search of its registers of
powers of attorney; and for connected purposes.
Six years ago, I moved the Marriage and Civil Partnership
(Consent) Bill under the ten-minute rule. This was the first
legislative attempt to stop the practice of predatory marriage—a
cruel form of abuse in which a person marries an elderly or
vulnerable person exclusively for the purpose of gaining access
to their estate upon death. In the years since, it has become
clear that there are other ways in which unscrupulous individuals
may target the elderly and vulnerable. Today, I ask the House to
try to close one of these procedural gaps that harm so many
people.
The simplification of lasting power of attorney processes in
recent years was, I believe, short-sighted, and I will explain
why. If I were to describe all the instances of abuse that have
been shared with me in recent months, I would need far more than
my allotted 10 minutes. Owing to the time constraints, I will
therefore share the testimonies of just four people who have
consented to be named and are not subject to current legal
proceedings.
The first is Carolyn Stephens, whose elderly, widowed father met
a woman in 2012. At first, Carolyn was pleased that her father
had found a new companion, but she grew concerned when this woman
began answering her father's phone. Over the next few years,
Carolyn found herself systematically removed from her father's
life. First, her father was taken to a registry office, where the
woman tried to marry him, but the registrar refused, saying that
Carolyn's father did not have the capacity because he could not
even answer basic questions such as to provide his home address.
A week later, a solicitor signed a piece of paper that gave the
woman LPA over his finances, property, health and welfare, and
the power to completely remove his daughter, Carolyn, from his
life altogether.
After having had no contact for years, having suffered from
emotional distress, accusations of abuse and harassment, and
having no knowledge of where her father lived, Carolyn finally
had a breakthrough. In December 2022, she found him on the
electoral roll in a care home. The visiting log showed that her
father was left alone for 346 days in 2022, without any visitors,
not even on his birthday. Even after she found her father, the
ordeal continued for several months. Eventually, the authorities
acted and Carolyn was able to spend the last six months of her
father's life by his side.
Another victim-survivor is Ann Berry. Without discussion or
notice, Ann was removed from both her partner's LPAs because the
Office of the Public Guardian had received two partial deeds of
revocation apparently signed by him. However, because he had
Parkinson's disease and Lewy body dementia, he had been unable
even to sign a cheque for at least the previous year. That was
reported to the Office of the Public Guardian, but Ann was denied
access to a screenshot of her partner's signature to verify. For
two years, the Office of the Public Guardian was unhelpful and
consistently slow to respond to Ann. Her testimony shows how such
protective bodies often prove to be toothless to those who need
them most.
Another case is the story of Sareeta McLachlan, who has sadly not
had the same resolution. Within two months of her mother being
placed in a care home, her brother stopped Sareeta and other
family members from taking her out for social and leisure
activities. Five months later, he banned them from seeing her
altogether, and the care home accepted his instructions as he had
LPA. Her brother claims Sareeta was distressing their mother by
trying to make her discuss financial affairs, and that their
mother no longer wanted to see her. Nine years later, Sareeta's
nightmare continues, with no explanation given as to why certain
family members cannot visit, other than her brother alleging that
is their mother's wish.
My final case history is that of my constituent Juliette Hirst.
Juliette's mother was proposed to by a man after having been in a
relationship for just 17 days. Over the following 20 years,
Juliette's mother was coerced into only being allowed to speak on
the phone if it was on loudspeaker, not being permitted to attend
appointments alone, and not being allowed to decide which clothes
she could buy or even wear. This culminated in the inheritance
from her mother's late sister being transferred into a joint
account, then into an ISA in only the man's name. He spent it all
on new cars and on a much more expensive house, far away from the
rest of the family.
Then Juliette's mother received a terminal diagnosis. At her
mother's request, Juliette and her family arranged for a
solicitor to visit to get her mum's affairs in order. However,
the husband would not allow the visit without him being present.
He stopped feeding or bathing Juliette's mother, and would not
even help her to get to the toilet. When Juliette's mother lay
dying in St Gemma's hospice, in my constituency, the husband
bought another new car for £12,500 and transferred £50,000 into
his bank account from their joint account while she was bed
bound.
Almost as soon as Juliette's mother had died, the husband
immediately moved a new woman into their flat, dumping Juliette's
mother's possessions outside in a bin liner. Juliette wrote to me
and said:
“It is a repeating pattern of behaviour and there needs to be
more help out there, especially for the families of these
victims. Banks can't talk to family members if they don't have a
Power of Attorney, but coercive controllers don't allow any
family members to get Power Of Attorney, as they want full
control. There need to be changes with banks, otherwise there is
no way of protecting the victims.”
She is absolutely right.
I have been made aware of a shocking case involving a lodger
gaining LPA over their landlord, providing that individual with
access to thousands of pounds in savings and the ability to
remortgage, and of a man who could not even sign his own name,
whose LPA was signed away using just his finger print. The scale
of the abuse is already alarming and the simplification of
obtaining lasting power of attorney is proving to be fuelling the
fire. I am sure there are more, as yet unknown,
victim-survivors.
My Bill is focused on prevention, removing the incentive for
unscrupulous individuals to take advantage of vulnerable older
people. Between 2019 and 2024, some 1,066 cases were received
involving victim-survivors and lasting power of attorney by the
Hourglass helpline. Between the same dates, casework interactions
where powers of attorney were mentioned totalled 3,436. Some
2,251 of those cases were related to economic abuse. Of the 7,973
risk-assessed safeguarding concerns raised in 2022-23, some
7,175—or 90%—resulted in no action by the Office of the Public
Guardian.
Family court data shows that over 50% of donors are over 75 years
old at the point of the registration of their LPA. That means
that, since 2008, over 4.5 million people were over 75 when they
registered their LPA. They are vulnerable to this type of abuse.
My Bill calls for the implementation of Government-regulated
safeguarding procedures for all banks over the way they deal with
LPAs and the accounts of donors. That would include contacting
the donor or a GP before an LPA is activated, and monitoring
spending prior to and after the LPA is activated.
There must be new powers for the relevant authorities to hold the
Office of the Public Guardian to account on dealing with
potential cases of abuse, including oversight of freezing orders
that are rarely, if ever, used. Immediate freezing orders should
be used for those under investigation, so they cannot pay their
own legal fees with the donor's funds, as has happened on many
occasions.
The Office of the Public Guardian needs to remove its financial
sustainability mission statement in favour of a mission about the
safeguarding of vulnerable people. There should be more effort to
publicise the OPG100, which enables the public to find out
whether someone has a lasting power of attorney. That should
include the introduction of online notices after the signing of
an LPA and before the registration of such an agreement.
Care homes have a duty to protect new residents who lack capacity
and where an attorney produces power of attorney. A care home, or
other provider, should have an obligation to update the register
with the Office of the Public Guardian.
Finally, I am grateful to Andrew Bishop of Rothley Law for the
help he has given me in this campaign, as well as the four
courageous people whose cases I have mentioned. The abuse I have
described is clearly widespread. Cases from up and down the
country are becoming more evident every day. I believe it is time
we act to prevent such appalling injustice, and I commend this
Bill to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Ordered,
That , , Mr , , , , , , and present the Bill.
accordingly presented the
Bill.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 17
January 2025, and to be printed (Bill 126).
