CAMPYLOBACTER: Anyone else had it?

[chickenanne2]

Try approaching the Law Society for further advice. They are the governing body for lawyers, and are likely to look into things for you; I'm not a lawyer but other professional bodies are pretty hot on professional ethics and I can't imagine the Law Society are any different.

Make clear the specific facts and ignore the family dynamics.

[Egluntyne]

Perhaps the additional costs reflect the revoked POA and the other two wills. I imagine that they would be entitled to expect payment for the work done. I would seek further advice from the Law Society, or whatever it's equivalent is in Scotland.

[Bramble]

I know you are in Scotland where things may well be different, but I'd be VERY surprised if the Legal Ombudsman (England and Wales) would uphold a bill of £2,500 when there was an estimate of 10% of that unless there was VERY clear evidence that Mum was alerted to the costs rising. Hard to advise you though when I don't know the drill in Scotland.

[Ain't Nobody Here]

Try approaching the Law Society for further advice.

They tell you to contact the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission - that is who has ruled my complaint "without merit". The fee has also been assessed by law accountants who say it was fair. I'm not saying the fee isn't fair (although it is astronomical), I'm saying they shouldn't have undertaken the work in the first place. That has been impossible to prove.

 

Perhaps the additional costs reflect the revoked POA and the other two wills.

No, the PoAs and other wills were all charged separately and were settled.

 

I know you are in Scotland where things may well be different, but I'd be VERY surprised if the Legal Ombudsman (England and Wales) would uphold a bill of £2,500 when there was an estimate of 10% of that unless there was VERY clear evidence that Mum was alerted to the costs rising.

I'll certainly be asking for proof of that.

 

My brother's financial abuse and manipulation of our mum just hasn't been taken into account at all, which is what is making it so difficult to prove my case.

[chickenanne2]

H'mmm - sorry, but I think a unfair and horrid as it is, you might be best off paying the bill (or rather, suggesting your brother does so) as proving financial abuse is going to be a horrific process that may well boil down to his word v yours, as well a a permanent family rift and month of misery/stress.

 

It's not unusual for people to gift money to relatives to dodge inheritance tax... though yr brother should have declared it on his tax return...? If he didn't do so then the prospect of paying the tax on the income (gifted to him) might help him see that he would be better to pay the £2,500 bill.

[Ain't Nobody Here]

I know we'll have to pay it (but hopefully very slowly!). I've already suggested to my brother that he pays it but he never responds to any emails/texts. I gave up months ago. The lawyer also said it's my mum's bill so she has to pay it.

 

She had less than the nil band rate for inheritance tax purposes but my brother told her she should spend her money to avoid tax.

 

I do have 7 years of mum's bank statements that show all the money that went to my brother - unfortunately, he was very sneaky and got mum to write cheques for £700 every month to pay off his credit card over a 4 year period. She also paid for his council tax and a couple of new (second hand) cars . He also used to take her to the supermarket every 3 weeks when he visited and used her card to pay for his shopping (usually about £100) then £200-300 from the cash machine and a full tank of petrol. He would say that mum offered and perhaps she did, but I'm sure she had no idea how much it was all adding up to and that she was being left with barely any savings.

 

I wonder if the Tax Office would be interested in his "unearned income" (which I estimate to be over £230,000 over a number of years). It would be difficult to prove, sadly, as it's only obvious to me the money that has gone to him - ie she always spends less than £20 at the supermarket so a £100 supermarket shop on a weekend he visited must be him (as must the cashline withdrawals). She has no car, so the petrol must be him. The chequebook stubs show his name often enough on the £700 cheques to suggest that's him. And so on.

 

The important thing is that he can't do that any more so what little money she has left is now safe and can pay for the ever increasing cost of her care.

[Bramble]

The "gifts" mum made to your brother (I use that term VERY loosely) might be sufficient to push her over the nil rate band if she were to die within seven years of making them, so that is something you need to bear in mind.

 

I would hope the Ombudsman looked at the costs info that was given to your mum, though I do wonder, particularly as I think they would need to show extra care was taken as mum is "vulnerable" - just by virtue of her age and memory problems, regardless of the issues with your brother.

[Charlottechicken]

I

I wonder if the Tax Office would be interested in his "unearned income" (which I estimate to be over £230,000 over a number of years). It would be difficult to prove, sadly, as it's only obvious to me the money that has gone to him - ie she always spends less than £20 at the supermarket so a £100 supermarket shop on a weekend he visited must be him (as must the cashline withdrawals). She has no car, so the petrol must be him. The chequebook stubs show his name often enough on the £700 cheques to suggest that's him. And so on.

 

 

After all he's put you through it would be really tempting to give the info to HMRC. Maybe, just maybe, they would look into his bank account history, a lot of it must have gone through his bank. Not a nice thing to do, obviously, but your mum's situation isn't nice now either.

[Ain't Nobody Here]

I phoned the Tax Office but although she was very sympathetic, she said it's not a tax matter. She suggested trying Crimestoppers ("that's theft", she said indignantly ) but they weren't interested.

 

I also emailed mum's solicitor to ask if my brother could be forced to give some of the money back but he said it would be a costly affair, involving a litigation solicitor, and if I lost I'd be stuck with the costs.

 

So it looks like I'll just have to settle for scowling at him if ever our paths cross again .

[JellyBean2605]

That's a *rude word*joke! They are more than happy to take your hard, earned money off you but as soon as you embezzle some it's "that's ok, you can keep it"

I'm so sorry this has happened, I encounter a lot of vulnerable people in my line of work who would be wide open to stuff like this and it makes my blood boil! I'd sooner lie in front of traffic than treat my nan like that!

My mum had a situation with the council where she owed them a couple of grand and said she'd pay them back a fiver a month, maybe you could come to some arrangement with the solicitors to pay it back in tiny amounts so it's kept at bay but your mum isn't bereft.