NNS (Review Administration)

Case

[2012] TASGAB 16

5 July 2012


GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION BOARD
HOBART

NNS on the application for review of administration by The Public Trustee.

Neutral citation: NNS (Review Administration) [2012] TASGAB 16

REASONS FOR DECISION

Kim Barker (Member)

Date of hearing: 5 July 2012

Review of administration order – initial order was a limited order, a change in circumstances indicated greater powers were required to protect the best interests of the represented person
Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 s. 67, 68

  1. On 5 August 2011 the Guardianship and Administration Board (the Board) heard an application by EJS for the appointment of an administrator in respect of NNS.  The Board appointed The Public Trustee as administrator for a period of three years, with powers and duties limited as follows: 

1.    That The Public Trustee is appointed as administrator of the estate of the represented person.

2.    That the powers and duties of the administrator are limited to:

(i)taking all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure that the represented person’s property situated at 8 Montrose Road, Montrose is protected from any improper or imprudent dealings,

(ii)managing the represented person’s Commonwealth Bank Investment Account, and

(iii)making a one-off $5000.00 withdrawal from the represented person’s Commonwealth Bank Savings Account and investing it with the funds from her Commonwealth Bank Investment Account.

3.    That the represented person is to be responsible for that part of her estate consisting of her income from her Centrelink pension and her existing Commonwealth Bank savings account including any matters relating to the management or expenditure of those funds.

4.    That the order remains in effect until 4 August 2014.

  1. On 30 May 2012 the Board received an application from The Public Trustee to review that order, to determine whether an amendment would be appropriate.  The application was submitted following significant changes to the represented person’s circumstances, in that she had been admitted to a nursing home and it was not expected that she would return to live in her own home.

  2. Section 68 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 (the Act) allows the Board to vary or amend an order upon review, as follows:

    “(1) On a review under section 67, the Board may vary or continue a guardianship order or administration order subject to any conditions or requirements it considers necessary or the Board may revoke the order.

    (2) The Board may make such further orders as it considers necessary in order to give effect to an order made under subsection (1).”

  3. The Board held a hearing into the matter on 5 July 2012.  In attendance were: Ms Carol Whitehead of The Public Trustee; XB, daughter of the represented person; UB, grandson of the represented person; and Mr Lee Perry, Compliance Officer, with the Board. 

  4. NNS has dementia.  A letter dated 20 June 2012 received by Dr Janina Skelton, Specialist Geriatrician at the Royal Hobart Hospital, indicated that her dementia had recently become more pronounced and she was unable to understand complex information, struggles with simple information, and does not have the capacity to manage her finances, including even simple cash transactions. Dr Skelton’s evidence in relation to NNS’s ongoing, and increasing, disability and incapacity was not disputed.

  5. At the time the original order was made the Board considered that NNS was capable of managing her day to day finances.  The powers of the administrator were subsequently limited to taking appropriate measures to ensure that her property at Hobart is protected from any improper dealings, and managing her Commonwealth Bank Investment Account after making a one-off $5000 withdrawal from her savings account and depositing this into her investment account.

  6. The Board heard that NNS was admitted to the Repatriation Hospital on 31 May 2012 following a fall in which she fractured her hip, and that she has subsequently been assessed as requiring high-level residential care.  She is currently residing in XXXX nursing home and waiting a placement at Aged Care Facility.

  7. As a result of these changes, it was common ground that the following new needs have arisen: a Centrelink assets assessment will need to be completed to facilitate her move to residential aged care; NNS’s home in Hobart is unoccupied and will need to be rented or, more likely, sold; arrangements will need to be made for the payment of a nursing home bond (if applicable) and fees; and, if sold, the proceeds of the sale of the property (or the residual, after any nursing home bond is paid) will need to be invested.

  8. EJS, son of the represented person, attended after the completion of the hearing.  He was advised of the decision of the Board and invited to comment, and expressed no objection.

  9. EJS expressed some concern as to how The Public Trustee would go about making decisions as to what maintenance and repair work ought to be undertaken prior to placing the house on the market, and how the Public Trustee would sort out the rubbish from material that might be useable, from the “65 years of property accumulation”.  XB also expressed concern that there are some personal effects remaining in the house that are intended to be  gifted by her mother to various family members.  Assurances were made that The Public Trustee would engage a valuer to seek an opinion regarding what repairs, restorations and redecorations would be of value prior to sale of the property; would consult family members before engaging contractors to remove rubbish; and would consult the represented person and family members regarding the disposal of personal effects.

  10. I was satisfied that there are, since the original order was made, additional needs in the appropriate management of the represented person’s estate which require the formal authority of an administrator.  I have decided to amend that order, to give The Public Trustee full powers in order that those needs are attended to in the best interests of NNS.

THE ORDER:

  1. That The Public Trustee continue as administrator of the estate of the represented person.
  2. That the powers and duties of the administrator be those conferred by Division 4 of Part 7 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1995.
  3. That the order remains in effect until 4 August 2014.

K BARKER
Date of Decision
30 July 2012

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0