Suicide - Duty of Care

bcole

Part two:


Better regulation of bailiffs
The Ministry of Justice has developed guidance on this issue for enforcement officers but it is not enough. The Government needs to build on the enactment of the new Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 by regulating bailiffs to ensure effective safeguards for people with mental health problems.
County Court Bailiffs are bound by the public authority Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) duty to have due regard to disability issues, including those pertinent to people with mental health conditions. The statutory guidance that accompanies the DDA suggests the following as ways to fulfil this duty:
• taking steps to take account of a disabled person’s disabilities, where that involves treating disabled people more favourably than other persons
• elimination of harassment of disabled people that relates to their disability
• promotion of positive attitudes towards disabled people.
Mind urges all statutory agencies that use bailiffs to include disability equality duty specifications in their procurement contracts.
Improved access to affordable sources of credit
Mind calls for better promotion of, and accessibility to, the affordable sources of credit open to people with experience of mental distress.
Mind calls for the following developments and changes to enable the credit union movement to increase capacity and coverage to make their services easily accessible to people with experience of mental distress:
• Legislation allowing credit unions to reach out to new areas and make the most of partnerships with housing associations and employers, increasing access to credit union services.
• Local authorities and other community organisations to assist credit unions in increasing accessibility and credibility by helping with accommodation, developing partnerships and, where possible, providing funding to support the development of credit unions.
• Community organisations and private sector organisations such as banks and major employers to assist by seconding staff to credit unions, mentoring and participating in governance.
Customers with mental health problems should be able to ask their bank to flag their current account and monitor it for unusual spending patterns
Mind calls for banks to allow customers to put flags on their current accounts to question erratic spending in specified time periods. Mind would like to see this adopted as common practice for people who would like to protect their finances when they are unwell and may be at risk of making unwise financial decisions.
Mind also calls for a safeguard system whereby customers either have to give a predetermined period of notice or joint authorisation from a designated
friend or support worker before a flag can be removed from their account.
Banks to respond appropriately to missed payments by customers with mental health problems
Mind calls for banks to have procedures in place to respond appropriately to customers who have disclosed their mental health problems and have missed payments.
If a customer has been unwell and unable to manage their finances then the banks should waive penalties for missed payments. The missed payment should be viewed as an indicator that the customer is experiencing difficulty and the case should be referred to a specialist mental health team within the bank. If the bank lacks resources for this, there should be a sufficient level of training for staff to ensure they can deal appropriately with customers with mental health problems.
Adherence to the new Money Advice Liaison Group’s good practice guidelines
Mind calls for all organisations within the financial industry to adopt and build the good practice guidelines into their policies and procedures. Organisations should also commit to reviewing how well the guidelines have been implemented.
The MALG guidelines on debt and mental health represent the first ever detailed UK recommendations on what creditors should do when a person has debt and mental health problems. These guidelines aim to supplement existing industry codes for banking, leasing, and credit service organisations. The Money Advice Liaison Group is a non-policy making body, so cannot impose the guidelines on the creditor sector. The review of the Lending Code offers an opportunity to enshrine the MALG guidelines in an enforceable Code.
Creditors should have procedures in place to ensure that people with mental health problems who are in debt are treated fairly and appropriately
Mind calls for all creditors to have procedures in place that ensure people with mental health problems who are in debt are treated fairly and appropriately.
Collection action by creditors should be proportionate to all the circumstances, including customers’ likely longer-term ability to repay. Creditors should consider writing off unsecured debts when mental health problems are long term, hold out little likelihood of improvement and make it unlikely that the debtor will be able to repay outstanding debts.
Creditors that outsource debt should ensure that third parties comply with the MALG Guidelines and relevant codes of practice. Creditors should only pursue enforcement through the courts as a last resort and when appropriate.
Creditors should consider writing off debts where a person’s mental health means they did not have capacity to contract. Currently the law states that a contract is void where the other party (the lender) was aware of the incapacity. However, in Scotland debts can be struck off where there is incapacity without the other party having notice. Mind welcomes the Office of Fair Trading’s ongoing work around mental capacity.
Creditors should also establish whether the mental health problem will affect a customer’s ability to deal with telephone, written or face-to-face communication.
Where a creditor has been notified of a mental health problem they should allow a reasonable period for relevant evidence regarding the influence of mental health problems on a customers’ ability to manage their debt.
The collection of appropriate evidence on how a person’s mental health problems affect their ability to manage or repay their debt should be undertaken using a common form that all parties – creditors, money advisers, health professionals and people with personal experience of debt and mental distress – recognise. MALG has developed the Debt and Mental Health Evidence Form to meet this need.
Specialist mental health training for bank, debt-collection agency and debt purchasing company staff
Mind calls for banks, debt-collection agencies and debt-purchasing companies to ensure a basic general standard of relevant mental health awareness training across the staff cohort.
The advisers within the specialist debt-collection units at Royal Bank of Scotland receive mental health awareness training and use this to work more effectively with the customer who is experiencing problem debt. This good practice should be adopted across the sector.
If it becomes clear that because of a person’s mental health problem standard processes are not appropriate, the person should be referred to a specialist team within the organisation trained to help customers with more complex issues. The cost benefit of specialist teams may well work in organisations’ favour, as such teams would have the skills and experience to process cases more efficiently and effectively. If organisations are unable to support a specialist team they should ensure that members of staff who have relevant training are able to assist customers.
Energy and water companies to improve their service to people with mental health problems
Mind calls for energy and water companies to provide a better service to people with mental health problems – one which is more flexible and responsive to the needs of the individual. Energy and water companies currently offer a number of services for disadvantaged customers. This usually involves the customer being placed on a Priority Services or Vulnerable Customers register, which ensures that the person can speak to the same contact every time. They may also be entitled to a reduction in charges if they are in receipt of certain benefits, they can ask for help understanding bills and they can apply for money from the company’s hardship fund.
Advisers who are able to provide information about debt and welfare benefits to be based at GP surgeries
Mind calls for primary care trusts (PCTs) in England and local health boards (LHBs) in Wales to further commit to funding debt and welfare advice services in primary healthcare settings. Some advice is already delivered in such settings but provision is patchy.
Improved access to money and debt advice services
Mind calls for banks to work with the Government to improve access to independent debt advice services for people with mental health problems.
Mind welcomes the initiative by the Government to produce a framework for delivery of a generic financial advice service for the United Kingdom. Mind also acknowledges that banks already provide funding to support debt advice and related activities but calls for banks to contribute more through the disbursement of their corporate social responsibility funds.
Existing and future debt advice services need to be better targeted at people with mental health problems and services need to take account of the gaps in provision raised in this report.
10 November 2011
[1] B eing in debt can negatively affect a person's mental health, while living with a mental health problem increases the likelihood of falling into debt . From Mind (2008) In the red: debt and mental health .
[2] The survey was developed in partnership with the Royal College of Psychiatrists and administered online and offline and targeted at people with experience of mental health and debt problems. Data for the original survey was collected during December 2007 and January 2008, and for the second survey during February and March 2011.
[3] We would be willing to share the complete survey data with the committee if requested.
[4] ‘Good Practice Awareness Guidelines For Consumers with Mental Health Problems and Debt’ http://www.malg.org.uk/documents/MentalHealthGuidelinesEd2Final2009.pdf
[5] 'Debt collection and Mental Health: ten steps to improve recovery'
[5] http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/Debt%20collection%20and%20mental%20health%20-%20ten%20steps%20to%20improve%20recovery%20(10_11_17).pdf
[6] ‘In the red: debt and mental health’, 2008, Mind
[7] This research involved an online survey of people with experience of mental health problems and contact with bailiffs. Data was collected during December 2009 and January 2010 .

kingstreet

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The majority of people who obtained together mortgages already had unsecured debt. The additional debt remained unsecured. So the mortgages were not actually 125% LTV

Thank you for mentioning that. It's worth noting there's no difference between a Together product and a mortgage and equivalent unsecured credit with several lenders. They still need to be advised upon and taken up sensibly.

As with most things, it was abused by SOME of those selling it and by SOME of those applying for it.

Anyway, let's not take bcole's thread further off topic.

kingstreet

bcole wrote: »

Banks to respond appropriately to missed payments by customers with mental health problems
Mind calls for banks to have procedures in place to respond appropriately to customers who have disclosed their mental health problems and have missed payments.
If a customer has been unwell and unable to manage their finances then the banks should waive penalties for missed payments. The missed payment should be viewed as an indicator that the customer is experiencing difficulty and the case should be referred to a specialist mental health team within the bank. If the bank lacks resources for this, there should be a sufficient level of training for staff to ensure they can deal appropriately with customers with mental health problems.

That's not a million miles away from what I was musing over in my post on Wednesday.

Whether the lender is entitled to assume a lack of response indicates acceptance or should draw an inference from the silence that there is a further problem, is one question we simply can't answer.

We have to ask ourselves if it's reasonable for the lender to assume everything is alright unless told otherwise or to ask "are you alright?" when a communication goes unanswered.

bcole

Well done Kingstreet, you are definately one for the people, should have just used your thread......am off to read with interest. Thank you