That Solicitor's Statement.

As previously mentioned on August 17th I received a copy of the witness statement the solicitor, David White, submitted to the Court of Protection in accordance with the direction order made by senior Judge Lush. I've delayed commenting on it before because as always with the law the use of language is precise and nuanced. Therefore if I did not explain it fully it could lead to more confusion then it solves. Take the opening sentence as an example;

"I am a solicitor specialising in elderly client work and a member of Solicitors for the Elderly."

The solicitor is hoping that this sentence will be interpreted as such;

"Look your honour. You're a member of the legal profession. I'm a member of the legal profession. The troublemaker who brought this case isn't. So let's say no more about it."

However it could also be interpreted as;

"I'm not a very good solicitor. In fact the only way I can maintain a small practice above a shop is by tricking old people out of their life savings. If this case goes against me I won't be a member of the legal profession for much longer."

In the next sentence;

"I saw [name] on 26th November 2009 to assess her capacity to make lasting powers of attorney for property and financial affairs and health and welfare."

The solicitor is simply trying to state a fact. Unfortunately he incorrectly states the fact- something that is normally associated with liars. The purpose of his visit was actually to assess my grandmother's capacity to make a lasting power of attorney (LPA) for property and financial affairs, a service that costs £250. As soon as he's entered the home and before carrying out a mental capacity assessment he sold my grandmother on also drawing up a LPA for health and welfare, a service that costs another £250. Therefore it would be difficult for a credible Judge not to get the impression that the solicitor walked into the property already prepared to issue a certificate of mental capacity just so long as he got paid.

The solicitor then goes on to state;

"I spent more then 30 minutes with [name]."

Here he is trying to give the impression that he spent a reasonable amount of time assessing my grandmother's mental capacity. The fact that he spent more then 30 minutes with my grandmother is most certainly true. He actually spent closer to 120 minutes (2hrs) with my grandmother, my father and myself. The private session occurred in the final 30 minutes of his visit. You will note that he makes no reference to the other 90 minutes of his visit or what occurred during it.

The rest of the paragraph goes on;

"I asked her, name, her address, date of birth and relatives all of which she was able to give me. I asked her to explain in her own words what she understood lasting powers of attorney to be. Although [name] found this difficult at first in the end she was able to tell me, unprompted, what lasting powers of attorney for health and welfare and property and affairs are and I was satisfied that she understood the meaning of such documents."

Here the solicitor is trying to demonstrate that, in his opinion, my grandmother had passed legally defined tests of mental capacity. Unfortunately it also reveals why he made no reference to the first 90 minutes of his visit. During this time my grandmother was unable to recognise me as her grandson. She was also unable to remember her age, date of birth, address or the number of grandchildren she had let alone their names and genders. This caused both me and my father to repeatedly re-state these facts to my grandmother and the solicitor who wrote these details down. This should be interpreted as coaching which is strictly forbidden because you can train a parrot to recite a series of statements.

In the third paragraph the solicitor writes;

"I also asked [name] the extent of her property. She told me that she owned her house and had some bank and building society accounts. I was satisfied that she knew in broad terms what her assets were."

Again here he is trying to demonstrate that he applied a mental capacity test and, in his opinion my grandmother passed it. However it is the details that he has left out that could mis-lead the Court as to how broad my grandmother's understanding of her assets was at the time. Apart from the house, bank and building society accounts my grandmother was also under the impression that she owned another house in London and a farm in Wales. She was particularly keen on the idea of the LPA because she thought it would prevent a distant and long dead relative stealing that farm from her. It is also revealing that the solicitor refers to my grandmother's assets in the past tense as if he somehow thinks she's signed them away to someone else.

The fourth paragraph starts with the sentence;

"I further questioned [name] as to who she wished to appoint as attorney. She said she wanted to appoint her son, [name]."

Again this just demonstrates the question was asked and answered. The next part of the paragraph is where things get interesting;

"I asked if she would like to appoint her grandson [name] but she was very opposed to this. She said [name] "has never worked" and doesn't get out of bed until the afternoon and that she doesn't want him to have anything to do with her affairs."

This paragraph serves no legal purpose and the solicitor only included it in an attempt to undermine my credibility. He thinks this will build on the relationship he established with the Judge in his opening sentence. Although what my grandmother said is untrue the fact she said it is. The problem is the way that the solicitor presents this fact. He gives the impression that it was made freely in a calm, private conversation between him and my grandmother. It wasn't. It was made in front of myself and my father when my grandmother was under a degree of duress. In fact it was right around the time that I, in my usual blunt fashion, explained to the solicitor that I was disgusted with his conduct and if he insisted on issuing a certificate of mental capacity to someone, who hours earlier, had the be detained by the police after wandering off suffering from hallucinations I would be taking the matter up with the Office of the Public Guardian. Given this extra level of detail a Judge would find it hard not to conclude that there was a level of animosity between me and the solicitor and that solicitor had a vested interest in making sure that my concerns were not considered by the Office of the Public Guardian.

In the fifth paragraph the solicitor writes;

"I asked [name] if she understood that [name] would have the right to sell property on he behalf, including her house. She said that she didn't think he would do this if she herself had not wanted it to happen and was content to rely on his judgement."

Although this should have been the point in the conversation where the solicitor explained to my grandmother that LPA's can be written to include specific clauses that specifically define what the attorney is able to do under what circumstances this again has been included to demonstrate that, in the solicitor's opinion, my grandmother understood the process. However the main reason for its inclusion was to further undermine my character by portraying my father in a positive light.

The sixth paragraph is something of a summary of the rest of the previous text.;

"I was satisfied that [name] was able to sufficiently retain all the relevant information as, when I went back over matters discussed some minutes before, she had retained basic elements of what had been discussed then. I was also satisfied that [name] was able to weigh the information as part of the process of making the decision to create the LPA's. She was aware that she needed help in dealing with her financial affairs and was able to consider this in relation to her decision to make the LPA's."

This is just the solicitor restating that he has applied defined tests of mental capacity and, in his opinion my grandmother passed them. This is unsurprising and lacks credibility. After all it was hardly going to be the moment where the solicitor admits that he's fraudulently issued certificates of mental capacity and asks the Judge to punish him.

The statement ends with the paragraph;

"[name] communicated her decisions to me verbally. She had difficulty signing her lasting powers of attorney but this was due to physical factors. She told me that she suffers from arthritis in her hands. Although she appeared to me to be exhibiting some early signs of dementia and, for example was very chatty and easily went off subject I was satisfied that she had sufficient mental capacity to make lasting powers of attorney."

Again this restates that the solicitor believed my grandmother had sufficient mental capacity. The main purpose though is to add human colour to the story in order to portray his visit as a pleasant conversation between two old friends. For example by writing; my grandmother "was very chatty and easily went off topic" paints a picture of a delightfully dotty old lady being helped by her diligent solicitor. However if he had written; my grandmother "was suffering from pressure of speech and a flight of ideas" it paints a picture of a corrupt solicitor exploiting someone who was showing clear symptoms of significant psychological distress.

In response to the solicitors statement I submitted another statement to the Court of Protection. In it I very diplomatically highlighted the inconsistencies between the solicitors statement and my recollection of the events. Specifically the purpose of his visit, the apparent coaching, my grandmother's understanding of her assets and the argument I had with the solicitor. I also informed the Court of Protection of the matter in front of Croydon Magistrates Court. I explained, in the broadest possible terms, what the problem was and that is affected my grandmother. I then stated which Court the application had been made to and the date it was made. I also pointed out that the attorney, my father had taken no action to resolve the situation.

While he is under no obligation to do so my father has also decided to submit his own statement to the Court of Protection. He is treating this statement as a closely guarded secret so it would be wrong for me to read it. However if it is written in the tone in which he speaks about the subject it is going to read like the rantings of a lunatic. I suspect he will begin by listing all the people who he believes to agree with him. The vast majority of these people have not had contact with my grandmother is years. The others have brief contact with her outside of the home every two to three months under the supervision of my father. He will then probably try and make a lot of the fact that I take anti-depressants and anti-anxiety medication. The hope here is the jury will here the words "mental health problems" and disregarded everything I've said. The problem is there isn't a jury. The case is being heard by a single Judge at the Court of Protection. This Court deals almost exclusively with issues of mental capacity. In fact this entire proceeding is being brought under The Mental Capacity Act 2005. Therefore the Court has no excuse for not knowing that if I was so ill I'd hallucinated all this I wouldn't be functioning as a human being and certainly wouldn't be able to bring the matter before the Court.

The most damaging thing my father's statement could possibly do to my case is give the Court an excuse to further delay proceedings while it investigates the names on my father list and request a medical report from my doctor. Neither of these should actually happen because they have nothing to do with the specific question brought before the Court. However if they do I'll just draw the Courts attention to the fact that my father is stalling for time and request that the LPA's be suspended for the duration of the investigation.


Today I along with most everyone else on the street, received a letter from the local MP regarding the petition we've all signed against the residents of number 50 Beechwood avenue. Obviously if I explain this in the same level of detail this will become the longest post in the history of the Internet. However the MP's letter reads simply;

"Further to my letter of July 27th please find attached a response I have received from Croydon Council. I do hope the action taken leads to an improvement in your situation.
If I can be of anymore assistance with this or any other matter please do not hesitate to contact me."

Basically he's just trying to re-assure his voters that he's doing something and ask me what's going on. Croydon Council's letter to the MP is more interesting.

The first part, written in normal paragraphs, explains what action Croydon Council and CAYSH have taken which brought disturbances at number 50 to a sudden end on July 10th 2010. The second part, written in bullet points (how civil servants normally try to explain things to MP's) gives a brief and inaccurate background to the situation. It then offers the MP a series of compromises that should limit the problem while allowing CAYSH and the landlord to continue to profit from keeping the property occupied. None of these will be acceptable to me.

The timing of the letters arrival. On a Friday when the risk of disturbance from number 50 is at its highest is the Crown attempting to light the blue touch paper and wait for the fireworks to start.