SQ (Administration)

[2014] TASGAB 2

GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION BOARD
HOBART

SQ – Application for the appointment of an administrator by Veranto Lifestyle Assistance

SQ (Administration) [2014] TASGAB 2

REASONS FOR DECISION

Anita Smith (President)

Date of hearing: 30 January 2014

Administration – evidence of reasonable judgments about the proposed represented person’s estate – reasonable decision to seek assistance from an agent, being a residential service

1. On 18 September 2013 Veranto Lifestyle Assistance (Veranto) submitted an application for the appointment of an administrator for SQ.  Veranto is a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee and a registered charitable organisation which operates services for people living with a disability providing both residential support and day support services for around 80 people.  SQ is a resident of XXXX which is the major residential facility operated by Veranto.  This application formed part of a service-wide policy shift within Veranto towards having residents’ funds managed under the authority of administrators. 

2. The Board must assess an application for the appointment of an administrator in accordance with the tests in section 51(1) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 which are that the person to whom the application relates:

(a) is a person with a disability, and

(b) is unable by reason of the disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of matters relating to all or any part of his or her estate, and

(c) is in need of an administrator of his or her estate.

3. The application was heard on 30 January 2013 and the following persons attended:

SQ – proposed represented person
DQ– mother
NQ – father
UQJ – Veranto
QC – CEO Veranto
Anne Griffin – The Public Trustee

4. Dr. Simon Benham completed a pro forma Health Care Professional Report with respect to this application.  Dr. Benham reported that SQ has autism and this was not contested. 

5. With respect to the impact that SQ’s disability has upon his ability to manage finances, Dr. Benham’s report was equivocal.  He noted that:

“[Russell] is quite bright but does not fully understand the value of his money.”

“He seems quite intelligent and answers questions relevantly, but has in the past been quite reckless with money.  It is impossible to have an in depth conversation with him.”

“Absence of [an administrator] would not be a catastrophe at the moment – his parents keep an eye on his affairs.”

Dr. Benham noted that SQ’s understanding of the nature and extent of his property appears limited and noted impairments in his ability to manage day to day financial requirements or major financial decisions. 

6. SQ’s parents disagreed with the notion that SQ lacks the ability to make reasonable judgements about his finances.  They noted that before living at Veranto he would make poor choices about the management of his finances, but with the appropriate supports at Veranto, he has since made sensible choices about his estate, evidenced by the fact that he has accumulating savings. 

7. SQ stated that he was happy with arrangements at Veranto at present and he would not alter the present arrangements where Veranto staff members assist him to budget his fortnightly income and accumulate savings towards purchases he wishes to make. 

8. Veranto staff members at the hearing agreed that SQ is higher functioning than most other persons for whom they have recently made administration applications.  They also confirmed that current support for budgeting and finance offered by their service will remain available to SQ with or without an administration order. 

9. The Board was satisfied that, although when he was not accessing financial support services he had difficulty managing his funds, with the support of Veranto he is now making reasonable judgments about his estate and he has capacity to lawfully instruct Veranto to give him that assistance. 

10. The Board was satisfied that SQ’s best interests are served by current arrangements.  The Board is also satisfied that continuing with the support from Veranto to budget his income is a less restrictive alternative than the appointment of an administrator.  In relation to this application, the Board was not satisfied of the test in section 51(1)(b) that SQ is unable by reason of his disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of matters relating to his estate. Accordingly, the application was dismissed.

Anita Smith
PRESIDENT

Date of decision: 4 March 2014.