A woman in Buckinghamshire has questioned whether her sister's monthly £150 withdrawals from their elderly mother's bank account amount to fraud, prompting consumer champion Sarah Davidson to clarify the rules around lasting power of attorney (LPA) expenses and payments for care.
Sophie, 53, told Metro that after their father died last year, their 86-year-old mother's health deteriorated over nine months. Because she is not computer or phone savvy and struggles with hearing issues, Sophie and her sister decided to obtain power of attorney over their mother's bank accounts and health. Following the father's probate, the mother now has about £55,000 in the shared account and about £40,000 in her personal one.
Sophie noticed her sister has been taking out exactly £150 from one account each month since the LPA went through at the start of the year. When asked by text, her sister said it covered cleaning their mother's clothes, petrol for trips to her house, occasionally bringing food, and buying her favourite chocolate bars. Sophie called this "hugely out of order," arguing such acts should be done out of love without payment, and said she may have to suggest fraud.
What the rules say about attorney expenses
Sarah Davidson, Metro's consumer champion, advised against calling it fraud just yet. She explained that the Office of the Public Guardian recognises family members often provide unpaid care, but in some cases payment can be in the person's best interests because it enables care to continue. The key issue, she said, is whether the sister has authority to pay herself and whether the payments are transparent, necessary, and properly recorded.
At £150 a month, that amounts to £1,800 a year. The mother has around £95,000 in capital, which could become very important if her care needs increase. Davidson stressed that every pound must be spent for the mother's benefit, not treated as an informal family allowance.
She advised Sophie to read the actual lasting powers of attorney to establish whether they were appointed to act jointly or jointly and severally. If acting jointly, every decision must be made together. If jointly and severally, the sister can make some decisions alone but still must act in the mother's best interests and keep records.
When payment for care becomes a conflict of interest
Government guidance states an attorney can claim genuine expenses incurred in carrying out the role, such as travel, postage, or phone calls, and should keep receipts and invoice the person whose money they manage. A fixed £150 transfer covering travel, food, laundry, and chocolate is much harder to justify without a written breakdown.
Davidson highlighted an important distinction: if the sister is being paid for the care she personally gives, she has a conflict of interest. The Office of the Public Guardian's guidance says that where an attorney provides care and takes payment, they should seek authorisation from the Court of Protection. It is not enough to decide the amount alone and transfer it from the donor's account.
The mother does not need to have dementia for this to matter. Mental capacity is decision-specific. If she can understand, retain, weigh up, and communicate a decision about the monthly payment, she should be involved. With her hearing difficulties, that may mean a calm face-to-face conversation, a written explanation in plain English, and enough time to consider it.
Next steps for Sophie and her sister
Davidson recommended a proper meeting rather than another text exchange. Sophie should ask her sister to pause any further self-payments while they review the arrangement, and request receipts, a log of hours and tasks, and an explanation of whether the £150 is expense reimbursement or payment for care.
They should agree on a simple system: the mother's accounts should have a shared record of major spending, and genuine expenses should be claimed at cost, supported by receipts. If ongoing care is needed, they should seek advice before setting a rate and consider a care needs assessment through the local authority to determine what support the mother actually needs.
If the sister refuses to provide records, continues taking money without agreement, or appears to be benefiting at the mother's expense, Sophie can report her concern to the Office of the Public Guardian. Anyone can report a concern, and the OPG can investigate where the person lacks capacity, request information, take legal action, and apply to the Court of Protection.
The best outcome, Davidson concluded, is to put clear rules around the mother's money now while there is still enough trust left to protect both her finances and the family.
