TYD

[2019] NSWCATGD 23

NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	TYD [2019] NSWCATGD 23
Hearing dates:	13 December 2019
Date of orders:	13 December 2019
Decision date:	13 December 2019
Jurisdiction:	Guardianship Division
Before:	B Adamovich, Senior Member (Legal)
Decision:	The financial management order made on 17 June 2019 is revoked from 13 December 2019. The person appointed as manager of the estate is to pay over or hand over the estate to: TYD
Catchwords:	FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT – review of financial management order – review of reviewable financial management order – whether financial management order should be revoked – where the subject person remains incapable of managing their affairs – whether it is otherwise in the subject person’s best interests that the financial management order be revoked – where the subject person’s affairs are capable of being managed informally without a financial management order – order revoked.
Legislation Cited:	Nil
Cases Cited:	Nil
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	002: Review of Reviewable Financial Management Order   TYD (the person) JUD (appointed financial manager) NSW Trustee and Guardian
Representation:	Nil
File Number(s):	NCAT 2019/00086627
Publication restriction:	Decisions of the Guardianship Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal have been anonymised to remove any information that may identify any person involved in the Tribunal’s proceedings (s 65, Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)).

REASONS FOR DECISION

REVIEW OF REVIEWABLE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ORDER

1. These are the reasons for the decision of the Tribunal as set out above.

2. In all matters before the Tribunal the welfare and interests of the subject person are paramount.

Background

3. TYD is a 62-year-old woman who is a permanent resident at an aged care facility at Northwest Sydney. TYD has a brother, JUD, who lives in another suburb at Northwest Sydney. TYD has a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (early onset) and Down Syndrome.

4. On 17 June 2019, JUD was appointed as his sister’s financial manager. This order was to be reviewed within six months.

5. This is the review of the reviewable financial management order of 17 June 2019. These Reasons for Decision should be read in conjunction with the previous Reasons for Decision of the Tribunal in respect of TYD.

The hearing

6. At the end of these Reasons for Decision are lists of the parties to the application and the witnesses who attended the hearing. [Appendix removed for publication.]

What did the Tribunal have to decide?

7. On reviewing the financial management order the Tribunal must confirm, confirm and vary or revoke the financial management order.

8. The reasons for the decision of the Tribunal of 17 June 2019 record that the order was needed to enable JUD to consolidate TYD’s accounts and to ensure that he could become a signatory on one established account to which he did not have access. Once this had occurred JUD could continue to manage TYD’s affairs on a more informal basis.

9. The Tribunal may revoke the financial management order only if:

1. it is satisfied that TYD is capable of managing her affairs; or

2. it considers that it is in the best interests of TYD that the order be revoked.

10. The Tribunal may also review the appointment of the manager if it considers it appropriate to do so.

Should the order be revoked because the person has regained the capability to manage her affairs?

11. The Tribunal has previously accepted that as a result of early onset Alzheimer’s disease and Down Syndrome, TYD is incapable of managing her affairs. There is no new evidence in this regard.

12. The Tribunal accepted that TYD was unable to participate in the hearing or provide a view either at the previous hearing or at this one.

13. The Tribunal was therefore not satisfied that TYD has regained the ability to manage her financial affairs. The financial management order cannot be revoked on this basis.

Should the order be revoked because it is in the best interests of the person?

14. JUD attended the hearing in person. He told the Tribunal that before he was appointed as financial manager TYD held two accounts with Bank AA. JUD is a signatory on these accounts. There was a third account held with Bank ZZ and JUD was not a signatory on that account. JUD needed to be appointed as financial manager in order to consolidate the three accounts to Bank AA to simplify the informal management of TYD’s affairs. His appointment as financial manager enabled this to occur. JUD is his sister’s Centrelink Nominee.

15. I spoke with staff at the aged care facility who confirmed that JUD is doing a wonderful job in looking after his sister’s affairs and ensuring that her bills are paid, and her needs are met. He is his sister’s person responsible and the facility find him easy to contact and communicate with. There was no objection to the order being revoked.

16. The NSW Trustee and Guardian provided a report dated 20 November 2019 and Ms Anna Picart, Senior Client Officer, participated in the hearing. JUD has complied with the requirements of the NSW Trustee and Guardian. Ms Picart had no objection to the revocation of the order on the basis that it is in TYD’s best interests.

17. I was satisfied that TYD’s affairs are able to be managed informally by JUD without the intrusion of a financial management order. I was satisfied that the order should be revoked on the basis that it was in TYD’s best interests to do so.

**********

I hereby certify that this is a true and accurate record of the reasons for decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales.

Registrar

Decision last updated: 25 February 2020