A Power of Attorney is a very powerful legal document that is entered into for the purpose of allowing another person (the attorney) to have full authority to handle affairs on behalf of the donor.
The case below is fortunately quite rare. An Attorney is usually a trusted friend or family member, it is actually quite rare that a professional is appointed as an Attorney because they would be entitled to charge their hourly rate for any work or assistance undertaken.
The Attorney in the case below, abused the powers she was given by the donor and as a result, very easily withdrew over £100k from the donor’s account. As a result of that abuse of power, the Attorney has been jailed.
The courts will not hesitate to punish an Attorney because it is a position of trust. The Power of Attorney principle is based on trust and that trust has to be protected by the court’s when abused.
It may seem tempting to choose a loved one to manage your affairs if you lose the ability to make decisions for yourself. However, one case in which a woman was jailed for fleecing a 100-year-old relative of her savings showed that it is often wiser to trust a professional.
The woman had been appointed to supervise her step-grandmother’s finances under a lasting power of attorney. The law required her to perform that role selflessly for the pensioner’s benefit. However, whilst the old lady was in a nursing home, the woman transferred £105,000 from her accounts, part of which she spent on herself. She was convicted of fraud following a three-week trial and jailed for 18 months.
The facts of the case emerged as the woman challenged her conviction before the Court of Appeal. Acting in person, she argued that all her dealings with her relative’s money had been with the latter’s knowledge and consent. Although she had perhaps been disorganised, she insisted that she had not been dishonest.
Dismissing her appeal, however, the Court rejected arguments that the trial judge had failed to properly sum up the case to the jury or that she been let down by her defence lawyers. Although the woman profoundly disagreed with the jury’s verdict, that could not be a valid ground of appeal.
