Unpaid Nursing Home fees after death - who is liable?

ratty67

First of all apologies to all for having been away this long.

anmarj wrote: »

I can understand what you are say but unless the DWP are aware that the customer is unable to handle the affairs then they cannot arrange for somebody to be appointee, which would of happended in a visit with local office and if it was shown that the daughter was not appropirate person, then an alternative would of been arrnaged. A customer in hospital does not mean they are unable to handle their affairs. Crystal balls are not provided and I wish that they were it would make the job a lot easier. (yes I work for DWP)

And yes, I would like to do something to the daughter as well.

I shall start with a question. Where does this leave the estate in relation to the fact that the late lady was NOT receiving her pension for 3 years and 3 months? I understand what you are saying but the pension was not paid TO HER. It is owed is it not?

In any case, DH is still persuing them and rightly so IMHO.

In regards to NatWest the Financial Ombidsman has now become involved. They still have not responded to any questions, the person who is supposed to be dealing with the matter is never there so DH was left with no other option. The F.O's position is that DH should receive a full explaination as to why online banking was allowed on the account against their customers expressed wishes and a full refund of all monies lost due to this happening.

Would it be unreasonable for my DH to also claim compensation? The vast majority of expenses being claimed to the estate by him are related to NatWest, should the estate really have to foot the bill for their incompitence?

The NS&I have finally (this morning) sent the forms required to close the account. They've been filled in and posted back.

The solicitor phoned this morning wondering why she'd been sent a set of bank statements to her office addressed to the daughter! DH rang NatWest, they don't know what's happened, they alledge they didn't send them!!! The fairies must have done it then... *sigh*

I'm sure there's more. Will update again if I remember!

sloughflint

I didn't understand much of post 231 but :

ratty67 wrote: »

The DWP state they have paid the lady's state pension and winter fuel payments to her up until she died but the bank statements show no record of this happening after 24/10/2005.

The DWP have now confirmed via telephone that an instruction was received in October 2005 to change bank account details. The bank account number they have on file does not match any of the three accounts the lady held (yep, we already knew that one!!)

Most places ask for sighting of an original bank statement indicating address and name of account holder. I can't see how they have a leg to stand on here.

What's going on with the daughter though? Are you hoping that by giving the various institutions a hard time they'll in turn put the pressure on the daughter?

Errata

Good to see a post from you again

Would it be unreasonable for my DH to also claim compensation? The vast majority of expenses being claimed to the estate by him are related to NatWest, should the estate really have to foot the bill for their incompitence?

If you don't ask, you don't get. Must be worth a try.

anmarj

sloughflint wrote: »

Most places ask for sighting of an original bank statement indicating address and name of account holder. I can't see how they have a leg to stand on here.

Bank details for change of benefit payments can be done in three ways, by phone but the advisor has to be satisfied that the person says who they are and they answer security questions, by letter from the customer requesting a change or a form is sent to the customer. The form has a declartion at the bottom which in effects states that they are agreeing to the details being changed and they authorise it.

In this case if the daughter was not appointee and the customer not able to speak on the phone to answer questions, then a form could of been sent out or the department recevied a letter with signature stating new details, which in effect is agreeing to the change being made. As the customer was unable to understand things the only thing I can assume that the daughter put the paper under the lady's hand and made her sign without her knowing what she was signing. There is no record of customer's signature kept on the processing systems, casepapers would have to be requested everytime, this would then delay changing any account details and if you had a customer in need of money then the department is then causing them hardship becasue of it.

The next step I would suggest is that you write to the Data Protection Officer at the Pension Service that dealt with the benefits and ask to see the information that was used to change the account, I would also ask them to double check that the daughter was not indeed appointee, this information is held on two systems, and when the persons die, it removes it from one system, but information would be held elsewhere. If the daughter was indeed made appointee then she could authorise any change to where money was paid to. If they come back and state that there is a form/letter with a signature which idicates that it is the customer (yes I know what you are going to say about not able to handle things) then again the department have taken the instruction according to letter. The only way that it would not of been changed is if the daughter signed the letter herself and she was not appointee, this would of been rejected as the daughter was not authorised to change anything. There is also the possiblity that the daughter forged her mother's signature which is fraud.

A customer can have their money paid into an account of their choice, either to their own account or third party.

ratty67

anmarj wrote: »

In this case if the daughter was not appointee and the customer not able to speak on the phone to answer questions, then a form could of been sent out or the department recevied a letter with signature stating new details, which in effect is agreeing to the change being made. As the customer was unable to understand things the only thing I can assume that the daughter put the paper under the lady's hand and made her sign without her knowing what she was signing. There is no record of customer's signature kept on the processing systems, casepapers would have to be requested everytime, this would then delay changing any account details and if you had a customer in need of money then the department is then causing them hardship becasue of it.

But this in turn could be used as an arguement that the depatment didn't take due care and attention. Let's be honest here, anyone could request the form, fill it in and send it back (provided you knew the claiments basic details) and as long as the name (signature) was of the correct name the dept would change bank account details. It's not rocket science to fiddle that system is it?

anmarj wrote: »

The next step I would suggest is that you write to the Data Protection Officer at the Pension Service that dealt with the benefits and ask to see the information that was used to change the account, I would also ask them to double check that the daughter was not indeed appointee, this information is held on two systems, and when the persons die, it removes it from one system, but information would be held elsewhere.

DH certainly will be writing to them. In one way it would be nice if the daughter did turn out to be the appointee. She'd then get
a) stuck the the final bill from the LA and
b) in serious trouble I should imagine for misusing her mother's funds

Win win!

We're very curious to know how this was done. I'm not entirely sure at the point this was done the lady even knew her daughter 'was' her daughter IYSWIM?

Thanks for your input. It's been very helpful

I have another question for you. DH's enquiries so far with the pension service have revealed they were not informed the lady had gone into a Nursing Home. This fact will have lead to her Heating Allowance being overpaid. Is there going to be a liability on this? If so will the estate be expected to cough up for monies never received?

sloughflint

Oh how priceless!

So on the one hand the department has to be satisfied that the person is who they say they are:

anmarj wrote: »

by phone but the advisor has to be satisfied that the person says who they are and they answer security questions,

but you then later go on to say:

anmarj wrote: »

There is no record of customer's signature kept on the processing systems,

and infer that thorough checks are not done as this causes delays:

anmarj wrote: »

this would then delay changing any account details and if you had a customer in need of money then the department is then causing them hardship becasue of it.

ratty67

sloughflint - DH has already come up against this anomoly. He was told, by a person over the phone that he had failed a security question (the lady's DOB); incidentally he gave the correct date... But, he's written to them and they write back answering his questions! He could be anyone!

TBH I would rather my State Pension (when I receive it) was delayed whilst checks were made to verify my identity than risk some low life making off with what is rightfully mine.

There is very clearly a 'lack of care and attention' if signatures on forms are not verified. I still say the lady's estate has a darned good case.

anmarj

[QUOTE=ratty67;2416122

I have another question for you. DH's enquiries so far with the pension service have revealed they were not informed the lady had gone into a Nursing Home. This fact will have lead to her Heating Allowance being overpaid. Is there going to be a liability on this? If so will the estate be expected to cough up for monies never received?[/QUOTE]

Heating allowance - depends, if she got state pension only and no pension credit being in a care home means she should get half the amount, if she was in receipt of Pension Credit then she would not be entitlted to any winter fuel payment. Attendance allowance would not be payable if the local authority were funding her stay as well. Any overpayment is referred to the debt management centre, they look at the facts of the case and take a decsion about recoverablity. I think (not sure) they will look at the estate of the lady to pay back as in theory it was paid to her (although it went into the daughters account), and I have heard that they take their time in deciding this.

JuneBow

Annmarj, it is very interesting to see how things have tightened up since I was working in retirement pensions. If you have look at the story I related to help Ratty, it shows how lax things were. If I recall, the clerk simply got a letter supposedly from the beneficiary asking for the bank account to be changed. The neighbour had inserted their own bank account details.
There was quite a bit of fuss about it at the time, and I personally think that because the daughter knew exactly how the system worked, she knew that nobody would check if it was indeed from the person who they said they were.
The case went as far as Whitehall, and the department caved in because they knew that they had not taken sufficient care. It is unfortunate for Ratty that it never got to court, because there was no precedent upon which they could rely.
It was generally thought that because the department had not checked the signature on the letter with the one held that they had been negligent. Similarly with banks, they should check the signature with the one they hold. (whether or not they do is another matter)
From what I remember, a person have sufficient capacity to appoint an appointee, otherwise the court of protection would have to appoint someone.
My own opinion based on what I saw from this case, is that regardless of the delays that may or may not have occurred in checking signatures etc, the department should ensure that the letter was valid.
If it was a telephone call, then a contemporaneous note should have been made with details of how the identity of the caller was checked.
If this was me, and I was dealing with this I would ask for details of how the clerk took sufficient care to ensure that they were paying the money into the correct bank account.
From what you are saying, even though the systems have been tightened up somewhat, I do think that the department is still open to a negligence claim, which is what was feared when I worked there.
Please Ratty let us know how the department are responding to this one, it is most interesting.

trimovate

If this saga is ever made into a play or a book please remember the title,
"Catch 22" has already been used.
Good luck with this nightmare.