Can dementia lead to lack of mental capacity?

[nitram]

Have you any evidence that the attorneys currently are not acting in the donor's best interests?

If so as a damage limitation exercise you could inform the OPG.

If your complaint is upheld and considered serious by the OPG they would be removed and, assuming incapacity of the donor, a deputy appointed.

 

[Norfolkgirl]

Have you any evidence that the attorneys currently are not acting in the donor's best interests?

If so as a damage limitation exercise you could inform the OPG.

If your complaint is upheld and considered serious by the OPG they would be removed and, assuming incapacity of the donor, a deputy appointed.

Well that's the trouble, getting the evidence since the LPA was registered. I was a joint account holder of the donor so have the evidence up until registration. The account was then closed (without any notification to me) and I discovered a letter was sent, supposedly from the donor, to the bank to close the account. She had thousands which have obviously been moved to another account elsewhere so that I couldn't monitor further activities. That is where the Police should come in, to investigate "further" evidence but so far they won't touch it.

The solicitor I am using said that he will assess the donor first of all to see if she has capacity. If she does, then he can get her to revoke the LPA and appoint me but if not, then it's a matter of advising the OPG she doesn't have capacity and then of the allegations. Either way I'm hoping to get closure.

All I wanted in the meantime was to get advice from TP posters for their opinion which would validate my hope that the solicitor would deem the donor as NOT having capacity and this would then prove SS and Police were wrong all along and that corruption is at play for them denying the donor is incapacitated.

 

[Dagne]

I have no expertise here, just thinking aloud. Capacity is hard enough to prove, more so in retrospect. Can you register her with a new GP (or re-register her with the old one), and then get either them or another independent consultant to assess her capacity? Can you find a more understanding consultant who could assess her in the absence of her medical records?

While I understand you would like to establish that the police and SS were wrong in treating her as if she had capacity, surely the point - especially for SS - is that this was a safeguarding issue, which would equally be the case if someone has capacity but is vulnerable. If for the sake of argument she had capacity, but was vulnerable, they have still badly let her down, and neglected their duty of care. They may have been limited in what they could do, but they still could have made efforts as far as they were able to under law.

I hope your solicitor manages to get justice for her.

 

[Feline]

Who would A & B be?

Yes but there is also the added complication that the witness or certificate provider is close with the fraudulent attorneys (one of attorneys is retired solicitor/cousin of donor whose own daughter was sent to prison for fraud!) would be involved and therefore manipulation/undue influence, being subtly coerced deeming the act as fraud by abuse of position etc. makes the whole thing a sham. In any event, the donor expects me to be one of attorneys and has no idea I am not! There is tons of evidence in this regard.[/QUOTE

Sounds to me that when the solicitor is on board, he/she will have to prove attorneys have not been acting in the best interest of the donor. Also it seems that the donor does lack capacity. Good luck with it all, it is obviously going to take some time and money to sort it all out. I,m sorry that I can't help more,but the solicitor should know how to advise you.

 

[Norfolkgirl]

I have no expertise here, just thinking aloud. Capacity is hard enough to prove, more so in retrospect. Can you register her with a new GP (or re-register her with the old one), and then get either them or another independent consultant to assess her capacity? Can you find a more understanding consultant who could assess her in the absence of her medical records?

While I understand you would like to establish that the police and SS were wrong in treating her as if she had capacity, surely the point - especially for SS - is that this was a safeguarding issue, which would equally be the case if someone has capacity but is vulnerable. If for the sake of argument she had capacity, but was vulnerable, they have still badly let her down, and neglected their duty of care. They may have been limited in what they could do, but they still could have made efforts as far as they were able to under law.

I hope your solicitor manages to get justice for her.

Thanks and you are exactly right about SS not showing a duty of care to protect the vulnerable donor. Their argument, all the way down the line is that she has capacity which is why they won't do anything. I personally think this is a cover up as they ****** up in verifying that one of the attorneys was "looking out for her" before he was appointed, along with the donor's abuser (both family members). I warned SS of suspicions and when I could prove it the social worker who assessed the donor had since left (when I decided to report her) and has since moved from the area altogether. SS denied their failure and the Police are taking their side as if they do a deal with each other to avoid being exposed for wrongdoing.

I can't use any different GP because her abusers have got the care home acting as look out if I do anything. They also watch for any unexpected visitors to put them off. Care home are colluding with abusers and have written to me saying I'm not allowed to visit in her room privately and have to make advance notice to see her so that staff can watch over me (the Police also condone this!!). The private investigators (two independent retired fraud squad Police Detectives) have seen correspondence from care home and agree they are suspicious and wouldn't rule out possibility of profiting from acts of theft themselves - they have hundreds of vulnerable residents at their disposal.

I think and hope the solicitor's view of capacity assessment would be enough and get some kind of order to have her medically assessed.

 

[Norfolkgirl]

Thank you to all those TP posters who have responded which seems most of you agree that SS/Police should be doing more, whether or not mental capacity is the issue. This adds credibility to my argument they want to avoid exposure of their own failures/wrongdoing. The Police won't take my report as a crime, which they say (can you believe) has to be reported by the donor and not me! which means no crime reference number has been allocated which means they can't investigate leading me to smell corruption. They too argue she has capacity despite being vulnerable and deny any crime - which I was witness to and have all evidence to prove it!

If this was a courtroom situation and the jury was made up of members of the public with reasonable heads on their shoulders i.e. TP Posters, then your replies give me confidence to believe that I was right all along and I'm not imagining things as there's every potential that SS/Police are using the mental capacity as a cop out to avoid exposure. In fact I have spoken to solicitors on the phone explaining the scenarios of the fraud and they all consider it a criminal act and therefore a Police matter.

 

[Dagne]

Best of luck, Norfolk Girl. The CH has no right to ban you from visiting, and whether it's **** up or collusion, the police and SS are clearly not looking out for her best interests. I hope you have a solicitor who can really fight her corner.

Just another thought, it's good practice for CHs to accept visitors with no advance notice (obviously at reasonable hours). Maybe report the CH to the CQC for this?

 

[Norfolkgirl]

Best of luck, Norfolk Girl. The CH has no right to ban you from visiting, and whether it's **** up or collusion, the police and SS are clearly not looking out for her best interests. I hope you have a solicitor who can really fight her corner.

Just another thought, it's good practice for CHs to accept visitors with no advance notice (obviously at reasonable hours). Maybe report the CH to the CQC for this?

Well I did try reporting the incidents to CQC (before their scandal) about this before I discovered the CH may be implicated and before they imposed restrictions. They said they don't deal with individual cases. In any event they said if CH recognise suspicion they should report the matter themselves to CQC which of course they didn't. I honestly don't trust any supposed safeguarding institutions.

The Police and CH argue that CH are not actually stopping me seeing her (cleverly worded) but I have to abide by their rules (which nobody else has to!). In fact though I now ignore these rules and have gone to see her privately with a witness and secret camera in case they allege I'm distressing her which were all lies to frighten me away. They have used the same Police to serve a harassment warning notice on me at one time. Wouldn't surprise me if CH are paying bribe money to Police.

Have reported to IPCC all suspicions of the way Police are acting which the Private Detective urged me to do without delay and have had reply they received it. It's all I can do while waiting for the very slow solicitor.

 

[stanleypj]

I'm really glad you're in touch with a solicitor Norfolkgirl. The more you tell us, the more complex and disturbing the situation appears to be.

 

[Norfolkgirl]

I'm really glad you're in touch with a solicitor Norfolkgirl. The more you tell us, the more complex and disturbing the situation appears to be.

Thanks for your support - it is mind-blowingly disturbing as there's so much more that's gone on that I haven't already posted such as being branded as mentally ill by the abuser and CH staff, being threatened with defamation of character by the abuser several times when I tried reporting him to the authorities (he took no action of course as that would expose him). It actually makes me realise, writing it down for TP, how bad it really is because when you're in the middle of it, it's a drip drip feed of such scenarios and must be shocking to someone else reading it. There's so many people involved in the cover up. Will update if I hear anything of use.

 

[Wirralson]

Best of luck, Norfolk Girl. The CH has no right to ban you from visiting, and whether it's **** up or collusion, the police and SS are clearly not looking out for her best interests. I hope you have a solicitor who can really fight her corner.

Just another thought, it's good practice for CHs to accept visitors with no advance notice (obviously at reasonable hours). Maybe report the CH to the CQC for this?

A minor point. Legally a care home does have the right to refuse access. It may be possible to argue that doing so against a relative is a breach of the Human Rights Act, but that is a long haul. As Norfolkgirl has involved a solicitor, she will receive appropriate advice.

 

[Norfolkgirl]

A minor point. Legally a care home does have the right to refuse access. It may be possible to argue that doing so against a relative is a breach of the Human Rights Act, but that is a long haul. As Norfolkgirl has involved a solicitor, she will receive appropriate advice.

Thanks Wirralson.

I have footage on the phone and other instances of my mother encouraging me to see her and is shocked to hear I'm not allowed in her room etc. that then would prove the home have no rights over my mother's wishes wouldn't it?

It therefore begs the question why CH would be acting against her (I already have suspicions why) but one would hope it will all come out in the "dirty laundry" if Police did their job like they should have done in first place.

 

[Wirralson]

Thanks Wirralson.

I have footage on the phone and other instances of my mother encouraging me to see her and is shocked to hear I'm not allowed in her room etc. that then would prove the home have no rights over my mother's wishes wouldn't it?

It therefore begs the question why CH would be acting against her (I already have suspicions why) but one would hope it will all come out in the "dirty laundry" if Police did their job like they should have done in first place.

Not quite. The home is obliged to act in your mother's best interests. While the Mental Capacity Act and its associated code of practice mean that weight has to be given to your mother's wishes, it is a balancing test. As you already have professional advice on the issues here, I will leave it at that.