Am I the only person a bit concerned that no one is representing the mother in all this?
No, not at all, I'm not even saying that it's morally right to take this course of action. But at all times we all have to conduct ourselves within the law, there are punishments if we don't even, if we're not aware what the law actually is. This applies to not just you and me but it applies to the LA too.
I believe there is a case to be made that the LA may well not be acting legally and that can be challenged.
In some ways making a house a joint tenancy could be seen as a way of depriving the surviving spouse of their share of a house, as they then don't get the total ownership.
I understood when we took out a mortgage that if I went first my wife got the house and vice versa, it is our house not an inheritance, but apparently it's OK to give someone with no capacity a letter to change the tenancy so my half never pays for her care, morally I think that stinks, I may be the only one who does. It's taking money that she may need for her care and leaving the taxpayer to pick up the bill.
The mother here has no need of the money and the father is self funding so he does, it's quite likely that the net beneficiaries of both wills will be the same people so the mother's beneficiaries are probably not losing out.
I guess it just boils down to the LA will never give you anything you're not legally entitled to so why shouldn't we not do the same?
K