I have altered the details somewhat, but imagine you are acting for a vulnerable person, injured in a road accident, who is a patient of the Court of Protection (CoP). She is also a recovered alcoholic with a small child and wonderful new partner who she relies on.

   Imagine that you apply to the CoP for the discharge of that person from the CoP on the basis of up-to-date medical reports:

•  The patient is duly discharged. All the paperwork is finalised and the matter is closed as far as the CoP and the client are concerned. So far so good. Unfortunately the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) don’t appear to agree;
• The OPG send you any number of letters over the next several months referring to the continuing deputyship. They are reminded of the facts of the case on several occasions. ‘There is no deputyship anymore…’ Some of the letters from the OPG also carry the client reference of another patient. They are advised of this also;
• The OPG then suddenly write to you noting that your ex-patient has now died and that her estate owes a £116 ‘transaction fee’. You are shocked by this sad news and consider sending flowers to her bereaved partner along with the (sensitively timed) OPG fee note; and,
• Fortunately you are ‘wise’ to this type of correspondence from the OPG and you call the ex-patient instead. She answers the phone. She confirms that her death is news to her (though she does have a terrible cold at present) and that she is still (relatively) fit and healthy.

The difficulty is that this type of administrative blunder on the part of the OPG is repeated practically on a daily basis, as any busy administration team and solicitor working on these matters can relate. And it wastes our firm’s time and money to correct it. I also quote from Amanda Bright’s recent post on the Solicitors for the Elderly forum (the forum is a mine of information):

 “I received a letter this morning from the OPG with what I thought was my client’s registered EPA – but it was not my client’s EPA at all but someone else’s! In addition behind the letter to me was a further letter addressed to another firm of solicitors relating to yet another person’s EPA registration, and also enclosing that person’s EPA. I wonder where my EPA is?”

 Indeed.

   Another solicitor, Patrick Purves, added that we are also still often enduring “near-glacial” timescales and “stinging £400 court fees”. He spoke for many professionals in stating bluntly that many are:

 “…sick to death of making excuses on behalf of the Royal Court to clients who, like me, cannot understand why it seems to be under-resourced and poorly managed. We would not get away with it… ”

 It is true, we would not.

   It is deeply frustrating that, while the big picture at the OPG is now being addressed by Martin John and his managers (which it certainly is), the ordinary type of muddled correspondence we receive so frequently is still hampering us all. It’s so basic and so important. That is why I think we all feel so upset by it.

   At the OPG they do all care about the people we are all seeking to help, but they also need to help us understand that they care by taking the time to check the things they send out to us. It can only be a resources issue. For so much to look so rushed, while the general service is often just so slow, what else could it be?

   I am advised by the OPG that they are aware of the problem and want to reassure Elderly Client Adviser readers of this. It would be hard not to be aware, given the deluge of letters and calls they must receive on the subject.

   So they have put a “complete business process review” underway and are going to “build in quality-control measures”. There will also be extra staff training on how to carry out day-to-day work with an eye on what the recipient needs and how to reduce the number of annoying glitches. Senior managers are also to be “made accountable” for implementing recommendations. The review will be completed over the summer, but early implementation of key parts should happen sooner. So, that’s potentially very good news.

   In defence of the OPG, there is still fairly widespread lack of understanding of the ‘new’ processes arising under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 on the part of practitioners. That can also hinder due process. I would urge us all to learn as much as we can. And the OPG has made some positive progress:

• In appropriate cases, newly executed parts B and C of lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are being accepted in spite of errors. This saves on a new part A and a further fee;
• The statutory notices are being issued even if errors and omissions exist. This reduces waiting time and registration may occur shortly after any new parts B and C are received;
• All LPA applications are being processed on receipt, even if no fee is attached; and,
• The website is being updated with useful information.

The ironic message of some of these changes is actually that lots of practitioners appear to be rushed and under-resourced to the OPG. Perish the thought – Cinderella services at both ends just ending up talking to themselves!

   The CoP itself, as opposed to the OPG, seems to be chronically understaffed at the time of writing. But again, we have some positive progress:

•  There is a fast track application process with accompanying guidance available on the OPG website;
• There is a dedicated Court section being piloted within the OPG contact centre. The mysteries of the forms can be discussed there; and,
• The forms are now available in downloadable and electronic completion format. A CD will be available soon (please e-mail me with suggestions for suitable accompanying music).

Moving on to wider issues, every firm has been hit by the financial crisis and meltdown in so many sectors, notably property. The Law Society Gazette (12 March 2009) reported that most solicitors consider estate agents to be their friends. I wonder who carried out that survey and why? Nobody asked me. I have noticed that our local estate agents have recently stopped gazing blankly out of their windows every morning. I assume this is because:

•  They need something to do in the afternoon; and,
• They were boarded up last week.

I saw an interesting property-related graph (Moneyweek – also 12 March 2009, a good day for columnists in search of info) and being a lover of graphics have obtained permission from its compiler, Nick Laird of www.sharelynx.com, to reproduce it here. I am afraid it’s a little depressing. But it’s depressing in an interesting way.

   You will see that it links the FTSE index and house prices. It’s an oddly angled way of saying that houses are still quite literally ‘relatively’ overpriced unless the stock market surges ahead – inexplicably bearing in mind profits and dividends are plummeting. Prior to 1971, you will see that the ratio between the two asset classes was fairly stable. But then it suddenly goes crazy with houses becoming relatively much more expensive than shares. But, as they say, ‘everything eventually reverts to the mean’.

   If you follow this logic, a fall from 40 to 15 or even 10 would be likely and a very large slide in house prices that would be – as even an innumerate like me can work out. Why 1971? A bit like 2009 really. Someone decided to disengage from accepted monetary policy and instead engage in the printing of an awful lot of money – in that case to pay for Vietnam. Hmm...

   So, maybe it’s not worth hanging on to that empty probate property after all – especially if the infamous ‘Prescott power’ of local authorities to seize unoccupied properties for Council tenants (after six months of unoccupancy) is given a new lease of life by all those vacancies arising through repossession. Maybe just off-load it as fast as possible and buy some cheap bank shares instead? Probably not...

   As for cash with zero interest rates – get a tin box and a bed with more ground clearance than an average Chihuahua and you might have secured the best possible investment home there is – short of Bertie the burglar popping round. Grandma was probably right after all.

David Coldrick is a member of the editorial board and a partner at Wrigleys Solicitors LLP. He can be contacted at david.coldrick@wrigleys.co.uk