HBOS - Power of Attorny

Just add them as a signatory on the account. If they won't allow someone else to be added as a signatory, find a real bank.

I've never added another signatory to a personal account, but the many times I've done so with various business accounts at both RBS and Lloyds have been a matter of filling in a single form and identifying the new signatory with the bank.

I don't see why it would be any different with a personal account.

Close the account.

Open a joint account.

Does Halifax mean Ordinary Power of Attorney, or Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA)? Neither have to be drawn up by a solicitor, any more than did the LPA's predecessor, the Enduring Power of Attorney. It's possible that Halifax has had a bad experience in the past when someone has tried to sneak an improper EPA past them, so they've made a house rule designed to combat this.

In any case I'm sure that you could get a solicitor to do one for less that

1,500. That's outrageous. Who told you it would costs that much?

Rob Graham

Bitstring , from the wonderful person robgraham said

Well the rules have changed recently, but an EPA was previously a £50-ish sort of job, one form (one or 2 pages iirc) and a stamp and countersign by a solicitor. 10 minutes work.

But a joint account is a much neater solution, unless there are income tax and inheritance issues (joint account WILL go to any survivor, unless explicit instructions to the contrary exist, and interest WILL be assumed to be 50/50, unless you tell the tax man differently).

An EPA gives the second party the ability to do all sorts of things on your behalf, not just operate one account.

Oh, and afaik 'power of attorney' is not subject to HBOS deciding whether they like it or not - they may ask for original or for notarised copy or something, but if properly drawn up it doesn't matter whether it was a solicitor, the lord chief justice, or the legal council of the UN, who drafted and witnessed it.

That could make a difference if they have enough savings and one of them

goes into care. Depending on the circumstances, that might be good or ba d.

It could also make a difference if they are on different marginal rates of tax.

Also, they should seriously consider creating a Lasting Power of Attorney, which will cover all their financial affairs. There is a standard form for this, so a solicitor isn't required to draft it, unless they want to restrict the powers of the attorney, in which case it is important that the restrictions are very clear and that they understand them.

It does have to be certified by someone who has known them well for at least two years, or is a member of certain professions (including a GP, as well as solicitor), to say that they understand what they are doing and are not under undue influence. It might well be safest to have a solicitor perform the certification. The certifier cannot be an attorney or related to one.

A Lasting Power of Attorney has to be registered and there is £150 fee

for this. There is also a sort of Lasting Power of Attorney that relates to non-financial matters, e.g. care and medical treatment, which

has a separate registration fee, but one wouldn't normally need to register until the person really could not make those decisions.

The key point of a Lasting Power of Attorney is that it remains valid even if the person ceases to be able to revoke it, e.g. because of a stroke or dementia. A normal power of attorney ceases to be valid then.

It is rather more complicated than this. The rules applying to the original Enduring power of Attorney (EPA), and the replacement Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) are quite different. EPA's can now longer be made though those already made can continue in use unless of course it has been revoked. A crucial difference is that the EPA can be used before the person loses their mental capacity. Bothe the EPA and LPA have to be registered with the Court of Protection if the person has lost their mental capacity and they are to be used. This subject to various fees and more detail can be found here

Subject to the caveats already mentioned about income and inheritance issues a joint account which either party can operate is a much simpler solution in the case of married couples. If the account holder still has mental capacity any decent solicitor can draw up a power of attorney to cover the specific needs of the situation described but it would also be prudent to get an LPA drawn up as well if one has not already been prepared. This should not cost more than a 300 or so.

As has been correctly stated the bank has no option but to accept a properly drawn up POA subject of course to the law. The problem is that the OP has probably dealt with a low level employee who is just working from a script but in my experience even managers get it wrong on occasions.

Peter Crosland

As I read it, LPAs cannot be used before they are registered, whereas an EPA can be used before it is registered, if the donor is still mentally capable. However the property and affairs (financial) type of LPA can be registered, by the donor, whilst they still have capacity, whilst an EPA can only be registered after they lose capacity.

However, my parents have EPAs, so that is what I've researched in anger.

The person on the Help Desk - when I said I thought one could get a Power of Attorney without a solicitor much more cheaply - they said they would not accept it.

Well, they should accept it, but even if they don't I see no reason at all why you should have to pay 1,500 to a solicitor!

Rob

It's an order of magnitude too high.

What they were probably misinterpreting are the rules for certified copies of powers of attorney, i.e. that if you didn't provide the original, they would require a solicitor to certify the copy was true (but typically a bank could do this as well).

I had a look at Lloyds' conditions, and they also allow a "third party mandate", which seems to be a bank form, to be used. They don't say anything about solicitors, except as the sort of person they would accept for certifying a copy. Don't they now own HBOS?

Follow-up.

The Halifax have now sent a form to make the account joint. Unfortunately (and as I told them at the time) the particular account is an ISA so it can't be.

I/we have complained about them giving duff gen - it appears the only way out of the unsatisfactory situation would be as suggested by others here - a Power of Attorney (probably using a standard "do it yourself pack" - which I will now look at)

I asked the supervisor today if she would listen to the conversation I had had originally last week - as I was misinformed on two matters - and there was obviously a training opportunity.

I was gob-smacked when she told me that the call was not recorded - and who ever had dealt with me had not made a note of the conversation

- so there was nothing she could do.

I pressed her on this - as I did not believe it - and she then said that she could find out who had last accessed the account details last week - so she could find out who had given the duff gen and re-educate.

BUT - she said that the conversation had not been recorded - despite the fact that at the time I was told that it was being.

I asked he if I could record my next conversation with the Help Desk - she said that legally I must tell the other party of the conversation (I disagree) - and that their HelpDesk operators can refuse to take calls if the caller says that they are recording the conversation!!!

I think from now on when dealing with them I will always say that I am recording the conversation for training purposes - and see what then happens!

We have EPAs drawn up in Scotland. Will they still be valid in England please?

< snip >

Simply say you're recording when your call is first answered - i.e. before you get a real human bean at the other end. None of the banks checks if a human bean hears their announcement and, of course, you will have a recording of you telling them, should it be needed.

To be extra smart, you could omit the "... for training and quality purposes..." bit and replace with "... to catch out downright liars and incompetents."

When you hear their announcement "calls may be recorded...", you can interpret this as giving you permission to record. Not that you need it, of course.

You will then be unable to provide a copy to a third party. The law is clear. You must advise the person being recorded, or gain their consent afterwards to make this available to a third party.

The call yes. A transcript no. If you had a perfect memory you could write the transcript from memory. In the event of a dispute it is a transcript that will be used in court, not a recording. Only in the event of there being a dispute about the transcript would the recording become important and the judge would listen to the recording and decide whose version was correct.

Tim.

Out of interest, what is the penalty for making a recording without permission, and relying on it in the subsequent court case? If Harry Wales allows his mate to video his fake telecon with his mum, does that allow the mate to sell it to the press?

I'd be interested to hear about a court case where a bank employee gave duff info, and subsequently the judge declines to accept the customer's audio evidence...!

You cannot rely on it. It would be inadmissible as evidence.

No penalty for making a recording. You don't rely on it. You rely on the transcript. In the event that the other party disputed that your transcript was accurate a judge would probably listen to the recording to confirm your transcript. If the other party disputed your transcript but refused to allow the judge to listen to the recording then the judge is probably going to take a dim view of their argument that the transcript is not accurate. Note that you would have to swear on the penalty of perjury that the transcript was accurate and in almost all cases the penalty for perjury will be much stiffer than any penalty you'll get due to being in court arguing over a telephone call so it would never make sense to make a false transcript.

But a recorded telephone call is NEVER admissible as evidence, even if both parties record the call with the pre-agreement that it can be used in court. The only thing that is admissible is a transcript of a telephone call.

Tim.