British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
Home]
[
Databases]
[
World Law]
[
Multidatabase Search]
[
Help]
[
Feedback]
Scottish Sheriff Court Decisions
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Sheriff Court Decisions >>
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF MH [2013] ScotSC 21 (28 February 2013)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotSC/2013/21.html
Cite as:
[2013] ScotSC 21
[
New search]
[
Help]
AW
399/12
Opinion
of
John A
Baird, Esq., Advocate
Sheriff
of Glasgow and Strathkelvin at Glasgow
In the
case of
Application
on behalf of MH
28 February 2013
Background
- This is an
application for the grant of Welfare Guardianship under the provisions of
the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 and for the grant of an
Intervention Order under the provisions of section 53 of that Act, on
behalf of an adult who was born with profound learning disabilities and is
now 44 years old.
- The
application in respect of Welfare Guardianship raises no new issues, but
that for the Intervention Order is an example of a growing trend of practitioners
bringing forward applications which seek to regulate the affairs of an
adult with incapacity in a way which does more than simply authorise the
general management of their property and financial affairs, but which seek
to make particular provisions which include the making of Deeds of
Variation or of Family Arrangement.
The Adult's
Circumstances
- These are of a
relatively familiar nature. She was born with cerebral palsy, and has in
fact never possessed capacity to deal with her own affairs. She remains
unable to communicate in any meaningful way. As is common in many such
situations, the responsibility for her care was discharged by her own
mother, who faithfully attended to all of her needs until her own health
deteriorated. The adult then required to be accommodated in supported
accommodation, and at present lives in a unit managed by Quarriers,
recognised as leading operators in this field. It is sufficient to narrate
that her present living circumstances are as satisfactory as can be
achieved for her, that her family, who are her siblings, are extremely
appreciative of the level of care and support afforded to her, and are
anxious that she be maintained there, or at least at an equivalent level,
for the foreseeable future. For the avoidance of doubt, she is plainly an
adult with incapacity as defined, and it is plainly necessary that a
Guardian be appointed to be responsible for her future welfare, all the
requirements of the basic principles of the Act being satisfied.
- The adult's
income consists of benefits, principally Income Support, Housing Benefit
and Disability Living Allowance. Quarriers are the corporate appointees
for the management of those benefits, which are paid into an account in
the adult's name to which only Quarriers have access. The balance on the
account is modest, and the sums at credit used to pay the adult's utility
bills, and for general expenses to make her life as comfortable as
possible. The funding for her care package comes from the Local
Authority's Social Work Department and amounts to just over £88,000 per
annum. There is a monthly client charge for this, and that is deducted
from her capital and paid on her behalf to the Local Authority.
- Sadly, the
adult's devoted mother died in January 2011. She left an estate, and the
effect of the law on intestacy is that the adult is due to inherit the sum
of approximately £22,000.
- All other
beneficiaries have had their entitlement to the estate satisfied, but the
question remained as to the effect that paying the adult's share over to
her and placing it simply in her account would have on her financial
status and on her entitlement to continue to receive the benefits she
currently enjoys and is entitled to receive. There is a further issue
surrounding certain aspects of medical treatment including surgical
intervention to which the adult was subject in the past, and in respect of
which questions have arisen as to the standard of care received, questions
which may potentially lead to the raising of litigation.
The Proposed
Intervention
- As a result, the
applicant, who is the adult's eldest sister, consulted Mr Martin Monaghan
of Caesar and Howie Solicitors, who have considerable experience in these
matters, and it was proposed on the adult's behalf that authority be given
to grant an Intervention Order authorising the signing of an appropriate
discharge of the adult's legal rights in her late mother's estate, to have
a modest amount of that entitlement paid into her existing account, and to
authorise the signing of a Deed of Variation or Family Arrangement which
would create a Discretionary Trust with the applicant, her brother, and a
firm of professional corporate trustees as trustees, and the balance of
her entitlement being paid into that Discretionary Trust.
The Need for
a Safeguarder
- The proposed
creation of a trust would have the effect of diverting funds from the
adult's account (controlled as it is by others) and effectively placing
them beyond the control of the adult (or those who have access to her
funds) and I expressed concern as to whether that intervention ought to be
authorised. One of the issues which concerned me was that the application disclosed
the possibility of litigation on behalf of the adult and of a kind which
is well known to be potentially expensive. The adult's existing capital
resources are below the threshold for a contribution in the event that an
application was made for the assistance of Legal Aid, but if her whole
entitlement was simply to be paid into her account, her capital resources
would be above that threshold, and would, at least potentially, be taken
into account by the relevant authority in assessing her means for the
purposes of an application to fund litigation. The court has the status of
a Public Authority in these matters, and I was concerned that authorising
this particular intervention might result in another Public Authority or
authorities incurring a financial liability in a situation where such
could be avoided or at least limited.
- The vast
majority of applications for interventions in the affairs of adults with
incapacity proceed without a contradictor, but section 3(4) of the Act
obliges the court to consider in every case whether a person should be
appointed to act to safeguard the interests of the person who is the
subject of the application. In fact, that is only necessary in a very
small minority of cases, but the application here was of such a nature
that I was quite satisfied that I required the input of an independent
solicitor to act here, and that I should appoint a practitioner with
considerable experience of private client work, in order that I could be
fully advised of the potential implications for the adult in granting, or
in refusing to grant, this application. I accordingly appointed Mrs
Gillian Campbell of DWF Biggart Baillie, Solicitors, to fulfil that
function in the case. She duly reported, and I am grateful to Mrs Campbell
and to Mr Monaghan for their most helpful submissions on the issues
disclosed.
The Issues
involved in Approving the Proposed Scheme
- It was of
particular importance to the applicant and her brother that there was to
be a firm of professional trustees involved in the proposed arrangement.
The adult lives in a flat rented from a Housing Association, which of
course means there is an obligation to pay rent for her accommodation.
Having regard to her situation and available means, which are known to all
relevant authorities, her obligation to pay rent is discharged by way of
the receipt of Housing Benefit from the Local Authority. If the balance in
the adult's account rises by an amount more than it is proposed to pay
into it under the terms of the proposed scheme, the appointees will
acquire a legal obligation to disclose that to the Department of Work and
Pensions, who of course pay to the adult her principal benefits. If the
whole of the adult's due entitlement were to be paid into her account,
that would be declared to the DWP and in consequence she would lose her
entitlement to Income Support. The consequential effect of that would be
that she would no longer be entitled to receive Housing Benefit and that
would be withdrawn also. The consequences for the adult in losing her
entitlement to both of those benefits would be nothing short of
catastrophic.
- The
information as to the care package in place, currently some £88,000, was
that there was no present risk of that being reduced, even if all of the
money due to the adult in terms of her inheritance was paid directly into
her account and she became responsible for paying for all of her own care.
What would happen is that her assessed monthly contribution would
increase. Both the Social Work Department, in respect of the care package,
and the DWP, in respect of payable benefits, approach each case on its own
merits and it is known that they may take into account in reaching
assessments funds which have been re-directed into a Discretionary Trust,
and may notionally include them in any financial assessment. That however,
is a matter for them.
- One further
area which was highlighted as a matter from which the adult would benefit
from the proposed arrangement is in the taking of day trips and holidays.
For a person such as this adult, who needs to be accompanied by at least
two other persons for such purposes, such outings have an obvious
additional expense, but they have also an obvious benefit for her. Prior
to the medical interventions which have been mentioned, she used to have
such excursions more often than now, but it is hoped that as her health
gradually improves, the funds to be placed in the Trust would clearly be
capable of being used to fund such outings, and that would benefit the
adult. Conversely, if placed simply in her account, with the effects on
her entitlement to receive her existing benefits as already set out, she
would in all likelihood derive no benefit at all, and indeed lose benefit.
- Dealing then
with the submissions as to the legal position with regard to all of these
matters, using a Deed of Variation to create a Discretionary Trust to
protect funds from means tested benefits may still be subject to attack on
the grounds of deliberate deprivation of capital. If the proposed order
was granted, then the advice was that the inheritance should still be
disclosed both to the Local Authority and the DWP. They would then have
discretion as to whether to disregard them or take them into account. The
same consideration may apply to the Local Authority's Social Care Charging
Policy, though, as I have said, the understanding is that the level of the
current care package will not be reduced albeit the client's monthly
contribution may increase.
- Finally,
attention was drawn to the Legal Aid Regulations and the possibility that
litigation might ensue involving an application for assistance from public
funding. The relevant regulations do specify what is to be included in
the computation of available capital and do include an interest in an
estate. As with the other authorities mentioned, the Scottish Legal Aid
Board does have discretion to disregard capital if it sees fit. Equally,
those regulations make specific provision to the powers of the Board if it
takes the view that there has been deprivation of resources with intent to
reduce disposable capital for the purposes of making a person eligible for
civil legal aid or reducing that person's liability to make a contribution
towards it.
- The ultimate
position would therefore appear to be that all relevant public authorities
which may be affected by the proposal in this case have discretion given
to them to have regard to the placing of some of the adult's entitlement
in a Discretionary Trust, or to disregard that, and the proposed trustees
are well aware of the obligation to disclose.
Decision
- In this
situation then, the submission on behalf of the applicant, supported by
the Safeguarder, was that the court should approve the proposed scheme, as
it complied with the general principles of the Act and would be to the
benefit of the adult. As has been highlighted, refusing to approve it
would be to the adult's detriment, in a number of most significant ways.
- A number of
other important matters also emerged.
- Care has to be
taken with the appropriate wording of such a clause asking the court for
authority with regard to legal rights on intestacy. All that should be
discharged is the adult's actual rights to the estate, not her entitlement
under the provisions of intestacy, as such wording might imply a
renunciation of all rights on intestacy, with the effect of transferring
the adult's rights to the Crown as ultimus haeres. Further, any
funds received on behalf of an adult as a result of litigation in respect
of personal injuries ought to be paid into a separate personal Injuries
Trust established for that purpose, and not into the Discretionary Trust.
- It should be
noted that funds held in a trust do not have the protection of supervision
by the Office of the Public Guardian, or of a Bond of Caution.
Consideration has to be given to the potential conflict of interest in
having two siblings of the adult as trustees, but in the present proposal
there will also be a professional and independent third trustee, so
protection is afforded by the taking of that step. I was also advised that
the set up and administration fees chargeable by that professional firm of
trustees would be less than that charged by a professional financial
Guardian.
- I am therefore
able to distinguish the circumstances here from those disclosed in the
case Applications
by the Guardian of P (Scottish Courts Website 23
November 2012), and in a number of ways, not least on account of the
points just made but also principally because in that case the court had
knowledge of the specific intentions of the adult, made in her will only 3
years earlier, whereas here the adult has unhappily never been in a
position to communicate, let alone express a view. In the present case I
am assured that the whole intention of setting up the Trust is to benefit
the adult, and I accept that.
- Accordingly, I
accept that what is proposed here will be to the benefit of the adult, and
I will approve and authorise it. Neither the applicant nor her brother
were willing to take on the responsibility of being a financial Guardian,
and accordingly what is now proposed does constitute the least restrictive
option in relation to the freedom of the adult, consistent with the
purpose of the intervention (S1(3)).