Appointeeship and Deputyship FAQs

No, DWP appointees do not have the legal authority to access a person’s private bank account unless they have been specifically granted that authority by the person or by a court order.

Where the person has consented for their appointee to access their personal bank account, then it must be clear, that the person has the ‘decision specific’ capacity to be able to weigh up and understand this decision.

It may be appropriate to have this decision-specific understanding documented in a separate mental capacity assessment as best practice to avoid any challenges about the persons ability to consent to someone accessing their personal bank account by banks or other organisations.

View this video on the Money Carer YouTube channel

The primary power for appointeeship is in the Social Security Administration Act 1992, detailed in section 5. This forms the basis for how appointees are legally and procedurally administered.

This gives the power to make the appointee regulations. Regulation 33 of the  Social Security Claims and Payments Regulations 1987 is for older, legacy benefits. For the new style benefits, that is, Employment Support Allowance, Job Seekers Allowance, Personal Independence Payments, and Universal Credits, it is regulation 57 of the Claims and Payments Regulations 2013

Appointeeship is not governed by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. That was deliberate because the DWP wanted to retain control of the appointeeship process and detail. However, the Act’s five underpinning principles are built into the appointeeship process.

For further information about becoming a DWP appointee, please download our appointee guide for family members.

View this video on the Money Carer YouTube channel

An appointee has to be aged 18 plus and can be a family member or trusted friend or a specialist organisation whom the DWP can authorise to become the person’s corporate appointee.

The local council can also act as the appointee, although there can be conflicts of interest when local authorities become appointees. As such, many local authorities are choosing to partner with organisations such as Money Carer. Many local authorities do not have enough resources to provide an appointeeship service, which is another reason they cannot take on the role.

Some care providers also still act as appointees however, again, due to the conflicts of interest, these arrangements are increasingly being discouraged by local authorities and the care services regulator as not reflecting best practice.

For further information about becoming a DWP appointee, please download our appointee guide for family members.

The rationale behind making someone an appointee is that they will have regular contact with the service user and their circle of care. This may become problematic when the appointee lives overseas.

If a client with an existing appointee moves overseas and the appointee who is staying in the UK indicates that they wish to retain the role, the DWP will discuss the position with the appointee.  Unless there is someone near to where the client is moving or an organisation that is able to take on the role, then it is possible for the existing appointee can remain in place.

If the appointee wishes to remain the appointee but moves abroad with the customer remaining in the UK then it may be more suitable to consider involving a new appointee or a Corporate Appointee service such as The Money Carer Foundation to resume responsibility for the required appointeeship.

When a person with an appointee passes away, the appointee must notify the Department for Work & Pensions to inform them of the passing at the earliest opportunity. The DWP may require a copy of the official death certificate also.

No. Unlike Lasting Power of Attorney agreements or Court of Protection deputyship orders, there can be only one legal appointee.

For further information about becoming a DWP appointee, please download our appointee guide for family members.

Yes.

If the DWP are satisfied that the family member is suitable to undertake the duties of an appointee they can be appointed to undertake the legal responsibilities. Family members should actually be the first people approached to take on the role where possible as they are most likely to know the person requiring an appointee best.

For further information about becoming a DWP appointee, please download our appointee guide for family members.

View this video on the Money Carer YouTube channel

The appointee can be nominated for a temporary period, for example following an accident or a short-term illness. In fact, many appointeeships are temporary in so much as the service user may simply need assistance for an interim period.

Yes.

A GP can make a referral to social services and ask that an assessment is made to determine if the client requires an appointee.

View this video on the Money Carer YouTube channel

The decision to have an appointee or a general power of attorney depends on the individual’s specific needs and circumstances.

An appointee is someone authorised by the DWP to manage an individual’s welfare benefit responsibilities when they are deemed incapable of managing their own affairs due to a mental or physical disability. If the individual has the capacity to choose their own representative, an appointee may not be necessary.

On the other hand, a general power of attorney is a legal document that allows an individual to appoint someone they trust to manage their affairs on their behalf. This could include managing finances or handling legal matters.

If the individual has the capacity to choose their own representative and wants someone they trust to manage their affairs, an general power of attorney may be more suitable.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are both legal frameworks that address issues related to decision-making and the rights of individuals with impaired or diminished capacity. However, they have key differences in scope, principles, and approach. Here are the main differences between the two:

1. International vs. National:
   • CRPD: The CRPD is an international treaty adopted by the United Nations in 2006. It sets out a comprehensive framework for protecting the rights of persons with disabilities globally. It is not specific to any country and serves as a guideline for countries to develop their disability rights laws and policies.
   • MCA 2005: The Mental Capacity Act 2005 is a national law enacted in England and Wales. It is specific to these two jurisdictions and provides a legal framework for decision-making for individuals who lack the capacity to make decisions about their affairs.
2. Scope:
   • CRPD: The CRPD is a broad human rights treaty that covers a wide range of rights and issues related to persons with disabilities, including but not limited to decision-making capacity. It addresses accessibility, education, employment, and social inclusion.
   • MCA 2005: The MCA 2005 is primarily focused on issues related to mental capacity and decision-making. It provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of individuals who lack capacity, including decisions about healthcare, finances, and living arrangements.
3. Principles:
   • CRPD: The CRPD is based on a social model of disability, which emphasizes the importance of inclusion, equality, and non-discrimination. It promotes the idea that disability results from societal barriers and attitudes, rather than inherent limitations of individuals.
   • MCA 2005: The MCA 2005 is more focused on a functional assessment of capacity. It provides a legal framework for making decisions in the best interests of individuals who lack capacity, with a primary emphasis on their welfare and protection.
4. Decision-Making Process:
   • CRPD: The CRPD encourages supported decision-making, where individuals with disabilities are provided with the necessary support to make decisions to the fullest extent possible. It also recognizes the right to legal capacity for all persons with disabilities, meaning that their will and preferences should be respected in all matters, and any substitute decision-making should be a last resort.
   • MCA 2005: The MCA 2005 allows for substituted decision-making, where others make decisions on behalf of individuals who lack capacity when it is in their best interests. It emphasizes a process of assessing capacity and determining what is in the individual’s best interests, often with input from family members, healthcare professionals, or legal representatives.

In summary, the CRPD is an international human rights treaty that covers a wide range of disability rights, including decision-making, and promotes a social model of disability and supported decision-making. In contrast, the MCA 2005 is a specific national law focused on decision-making for individuals lacking capacity in England and Wales, with an emphasis on functional capacity assessment and substituted decision-making in the individual’s best interests. The two frameworks have different scopes, principles, and approaches, reflecting their different purposes and contexts.

A deputy for property and finances may be needed for individuals who are unable to manage their financial and property affairs due to various reasons such as age-related mental decline, illness, or disability. This could include:

1. Elderly individuals who may have difficulty managing their finances and property due to declining mental and physical health.
2. Individuals who have suffered a brain injury, stroke or other cognitive impairment which has affected their ability to make decisions about their financial and property matters.
3. People with mental illnesses or disabilities which prevent them from managing their finances and property.
4. Individuals with developmental disabilities who may require assistance in managing their finances and property.

In these situations, a deputy may be appointed by the court of protection to make decisions on behalf of the individual in relation to their property and finances.

View this video on the Money Carer YouTube channel

In general, anyone who is over the age of 18 and has the capacity to manage financial and property affairs can be appointed as a deputy for property and finances. However, it is important to note that being a deputy is a significant responsibility and requires a high level of trust and competence.

Here are some common types of individuals who may be appointed as a deputy for property and finances:

1. Family members or close friends: Often, family members or close friends of the person who needs assistance are appointed as deputies. They may have a good understanding of the person’s wishes and preferences and can act in their best interests.
2. Professional deputies: If there are no suitable family members or friends, a professional deputy may be appointed. This could be a solicitor, accountant or other professional with experience in managing financial and property affairs.
3. Local authorities: In some cases, a local authority may be appointed as a deputy for property and finances, particularly if there are concerns about abuse or neglect.

It is important to note that being a deputy for property and finances is a serious responsibility and requires a high level of trust and competence. Therefore, anyone who is appointed as a deputy should be able to demonstrate that they have the necessary skills and experience to manage the person’s affairs effectively and in their best interests.

Yes, the Court of Protection can recommend a deputy for property and finances.

When an application is made to the Court of Protection to appoint a deputy, the court will consider whether it is necessary to appoint a deputy and who is best placed to act in the person’s best interests.

In some cases, the court may recommend a particular person or professional as a suitable deputy for property and finances. However, the final decision on who to appoint as a deputy will be made by the court after considering all the evidence and taking into account the person’s best interests.

It is important to note that the Court of Protection is a specialist court that deals with issues related to mental capacity and decision-making. It has the power to make decisions and appoint deputies on behalf of individuals who lack the capacity to make decisions for themselves.

The court’s overriding concern is always the best interests of the person who is the subject of the proceedings.

Yes, a social worker can recommend a deputy for property and finances in certain circumstances. Social services may become involved in a person’s affairs if they are vulnerable or at risk of harm and do not have anyone to act on their behalf.

If social services identify that a person is unable to manage their own finances and property, they may make an application to the Court of Protection for the appointment of a deputy. Social services can also provide information to the court about suitable individuals or professionals who may be suitable to act as a deputy for property and finances.

However, it is important to note that the final decision on who to appoint as a deputy will be made by the court after considering all the evidence and taking into account the person’s best interests. The court will also consider any recommendations made by social services and other relevant parties before making a decision on who to appoint as a deputy.

When appointed as a deputy for property and finances, the deputy has a range of responsibilities that they must fulfil in order to act in the best interests of the person they are representing. These responsibilities include:

1. Managing finances: The deputy is responsible for managing the person’s finances, which includes paying bills, managing bank accounts, investing funds, and ensuring that the person’s financial affairs are in order.
2. Making decisions: The deputy must make decisions on behalf of the person in relation to their finances and property, taking into account the person’s wishes, beliefs, and values. The deputy must act in the person’s best interests and ensure that any decisions made are in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
3. Keeping records: The deputy must keep accurate and up-to-date records of all financial transactions and decisions made on behalf of the person. This includes keeping receipts, invoices, bank statements, and other financial documents.
4. Reporting to the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG): The deputy must submit an annual report to the OPG, which provides details of all financial transactions and decisions made on behalf of the person. The report must be reviewed by a solicitor or other professional, and any discrepancies or concerns must be addressed.
5. Consulting with others: The deputy should consult with the person’s family, friends, and carers to ensure that decisions made are in line with the person’s wishes and preferences.
6. Seeking professional advice: The deputy should seek professional advice when needed, such as from a solicitor or accountant, to ensure that they are fulfilling their responsibilities effectively.

Yes, a deputyship can be temporary. In the UK, the Court of Protection can appoint a deputy for a fixed period of time if it is deemed necessary. This is known as a “limited deputyship” and may be appropriate in situations where the person is expected to regain capacity in the near future.

For example, if an individual is undergoing medical treatment or therapy that is expected to improve their mental capacity within a set period of time, a limited deputyship may be appropriate. In this case, the deputy would be appointed for a fixed period of time and would have the authority to make decisions on behalf of the person during that period.

It is important to note that a limited deputyship may not be appropriate in all cases, and the court will consider all the evidence before making a decision on whether to grant a limited deputyship or a permanent deputyship.

In general, a permanent deputyship is more commonly granted when the person’s capacity is unlikely to improve, or if there are ongoing concerns about their ability to manage their financial and property affairs.

View this video in the Money Carer YouTube channel

If you are applying to be a Deputy for Property and Affairs for someone who lacks the capacity to manage their own finances, there are several costs involved, which may include:

The Application fee:
There is a one-time application fee to become a deputy, which is currently £371 in England and Wales. This fee covers the cost of processing your application.

An Assessment fee:
In addition to the application fee, you may also need to pay an assessment fee for a medical professional to assess the capacity of the person you wish to become a deputy for. This fee can vary depending on the healthcare professional you choose.

The Security Bond fee:
If you are appointed as a deputy, you may be required to pay a bond fee. The bond fee is a type of insurance that ensures the person’s finances are protected from any misuse or mishandling by the deputy. The cost of the bond fee can vary depending on the size of the person’s estate and the level of risk involved.

Ongoing fees:
Once appointed as a deputy, there may be ongoing fees to pay for things like annual supervision and filing annual reports with the Court of Protection. These fees can vary depending on the complexity of the person’s estate and the level of supervision required.

It’s worth noting that if the person you wish to become a deputy for is on a low income, they may be eligible for help with the application fee and assessment fee.

View this video on the Money Carer YouTube channel

A mental capacity assessment to ascertain if a deputyship application to the court of protection will be needed, is a formal evaluation conducted to determine an individual’s ability to make decisions for themselves and understand the implications and consequences of those decisions.

A capacity assessment for deputyship is typically carried out when there are concerns about a person’s capacity to make decisions about their financial affairs and understanding of everyday money management.

The assessment is usually conducted by health or social care professionals, such as doctors, psychologists, or psychiatrists, or social workers who are trained in assessing mental capacity.

They will assess the individual’s cognitive abilities, understanding, memory, reasoning, and communication skills to determine whether they have the capacity to make informed decisions.

The assessment process may involve interviews, discussions, and standardised tests, such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment.

The professionals conducting the assessment will consider various factors, such as the person’s ability to understand and retain information, weigh the pros and cons of different options, and communicate their decisions clearly.

The purpose of a mental capacity assessment is to determine whether an individual has the capacity to make decisions independently or whether they require assistance or support provided by a deputy, appointee or advocate, to make decisions in their best interests.

The assessment aims to respect and uphold the person’s autonomy while ensuring their well-being and protection when they lack the capacity to make decisions that may significantly impact their life.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) are both legal frameworks that address issues related to decision-making and the rights of individuals with impaired or diminished capacity. However, they have key differences in scope, principles, and approach. Here are the main differences between the two:

1. International vs. National:
   • CRPD: The CRPD is an international treaty adopted by the United Nations in 2006. It sets out a comprehensive framework for protecting the rights of persons with disabilities globally. It is not specific to any country and serves as a guideline for countries to develop their disability rights laws and policies.
   • MCA 2005: The Mental Capacity Act 2005 is a national law enacted in England and Wales. It is specific to these two jurisdictions and provides a legal framework for decision-making for individuals who lack the capacity to make decisions about their affairs.
2. Scope:
   • CRPD: The CRPD is a broad human rights treaty that covers a wide range of rights and issues related to persons with disabilities, including but not limited to decision-making capacity. It addresses accessibility, education, employment, and social inclusion.
   • MCA 2005: The MCA 2005 is primarily focused on issues related to mental capacity and decision-making. It provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of individuals who lack capacity, including decisions about healthcare, finances, and living arrangements.
3. Principles:
   • CRPD: The CRPD is based on a social model of disability, which emphasizes the importance of inclusion, equality, and non-discrimination. It promotes the idea that disability results from societal barriers and attitudes, rather than inherent limitations of individuals.
   • MCA 2005: The MCA 2005 is more focused on a functional assessment of capacity. It provides a legal framework for making decisions in the best interests of individuals who lack capacity, with a primary emphasis on their welfare and protection.
4. Decision-Making Process:
   • CRPD: The CRPD encourages supported decision-making, where individuals with disabilities are provided with the necessary support to make decisions to the fullest extent possible. It also recognizes the right to legal capacity for all persons with disabilities, meaning that their will and preferences should be respected in all matters, and any substitute decision-making should be a last resort.
   • MCA 2005: The MCA 2005 allows for substituted decision-making, where others make decisions on behalf of individuals who lack capacity when it is in their best interests. It emphasizes a process of assessing capacity and determining what is in the individual’s best interests, often with input from family members, healthcare professionals, or legal representatives.

In summary, the CRPD is an international human rights treaty that covers a wide range of disability rights, including decision-making, and promotes a social model of disability and supported decision-making. In contrast, the MCA 2005 is a specific national law focused on decision-making for individuals lacking capacity in England and Wales, with an emphasis on functional capacity assessment and substituted decision-making in the individual’s best interests. The two frameworks have different scopes, principles, and approaches, reflecting their different purposes and contexts.

The decision to have an appointee or a general power of attorney depends on the individual’s specific needs and circumstances.

An appointee is someone authorised by the DWP to manage an individual’s welfare benefit responsibilities when they are deemed incapable of managing their own affairs due to a mental or physical disability. If the individual has the capacity to choose their own representative, an appointee may not be necessary.

On the other hand, a general power of attorney is a legal document that allows an individual to appoint someone they trust to manage their affairs on their behalf. This could include managing finances or handling legal matters.

If the individual has the capacity to choose their own representative and wants someone they trust to manage their affairs, an general power of attorney may be more suitable.

In the UK, LPA stands for Lasting Power of Attorney, and GPA stands for General Power of Attorney.

The main difference between the two is that an LPA is a legal document that allows an individual (the donor) to appoint one or more people (the attorneys) to make decisions on their behalf in case they lose mental capacity. An LPA can cover decisions about health and welfare, as well as property and financial affairs.

On the other hand, a GPA is a legal document that allows an individual (the donor) to appoint an attorney to make decisions on their behalf for a specific period of time, such as when they are out of the country or physically unable to manage their affairs. An GPA only covers decisions about property and financial affairs.

Another difference is that an LPA must be registered with the Office of the Public Guardian before it can be used, while an GPA does not need to be registered.