I was told to obtain a guardianship order for my wife. I don't have time with all of her care. Is there a way around this?

Read More
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Find Care & Housing


1 2 3 4 5
Colin, how will any of those links help Mary in real life? I wish you both all the best.
Helpful Answer (0)

pstiegman hi, wow. Where did you read that, are you sure you are on the right thread.
Helpful Answer (0)

Countrymouse, did you say you would not put your mother into residential care unless she chooses it. Well it all depends does she own her own property especially if it is a big one.

Well Countrymouse, I will have to beg to differ to your views. I believe my marriage laws plays a role in this matter, before any of us heard of the Court of protection or the mental capacity act 2005 we have managed to get on pretty well without it, and the controversy it has caused brings it into question, and I also wonder where did we get this idea from, could it have been the USA?

I wonder why do we pounce on their corrupted laws, but choose to ignore some of their very best.

Can you find any common law stating that a husband does not have any right to his wife's affairs if she is incapacitated, well I have been looking for this law but I cannot see it in writing?

Well I have a saying, let the thieves steal from their own, and leave others alone.
Helpful Answer (0)

If I read this right, you removed her from hospital Against Medical Advice? You conducted a campaign for justice on social media? And now you wonder why solicitors drop you in short order? And you wonder why she is a Ward of the State? Is there a sibling of hers or an adult child who can serve as her Guardian to satisfy the courts?
Helpful Answer (0)

Well Countrymouse, I would like to say from the beginning, that I belong to every brain injury group on LinkedIn and many others, including conversing with brain injury victims some of them I consider now as friends, I know all of the latest findings on brain injury some of them threw lawyers some of them from consultants on brain injury.

Well I had to take my wife to Fore Street Edmonton every month to see a psychiatrist, I was told by experts on brain injury that it's pathetic, she should be going to rehabilitation, anyway one month they had a psychologist and a neuropsychologist there to make a report on my wife, the neuropsychologist sent us to Queens Square London to see another neuropsychologist I take it she must be her superior to verify her findings, that is when this neuropsychologist told me the whole scenario was disgraceful.

I believe you wanted to know about her admittance, she was flown by air ambulance to the Royal London and finally discharge to Barts Hospital as an outpatient, I must say the parking for these hospitals is £4 an hour a night mare, every day I had to obtain £20 in pound coins, you have to be pretty rich to be hit by falling washing machine these days.

Well you have asked a very interesting question, yes who was coordinating my wife's post discharge care? I presume it must be the neurosurgeon that was in charge of her case, and also the expert witness who works at Harley Street for huge corporations. If you take a look at her discharge papers from the Royal London you can see that nobody wanted to be responsible for her discharge, it is totally incomprehensible.

Countrymouse, another good question (her rehab) well when the solicitor and his buddy, The Official Solicitor ended the case in 2006 about several weeks later we had an appointment from Edgware Road hospital, saying due to your wife's recent accident, well I phone the hospital to say it wasn't a recent accident, it took place on 5 April 2003, she said there was nothing about it on the records she thought my wife had just recently had the accident. I must add they were wonderful psychologists that we saw extremely understanding and bewildered about our case.

We decided that my wife was not going to stay there for 6 weeks, we can no longer trust whom ever is in charge of her case, I probably would end up with a dead wife.

Countrymouse, I ran a business involving building and maintenance for 23 years, and specialise in plumbing and electrical, I do not claim to know the workings of a hospital or how solicitors should orchestrate themselves, you must remember in 1 second my life turned into a turmoil, I had agreed contracts that had been waiting for a year, thank God a lot of my customers are also my friends, some of the work had to go, I had to employ an extra person to help me clear what I had already started and close the business.

Countrymouse, by the way as a boiler engineer at the time with full qualifications, I personally would not fit a boiler that has been tampered with, for the reason I could have spent a couple of hours on it and decided I could not guarantee its full duration, would it be fair to the customer I have too asked myself, so my policy is I would only fit a new system if I took it out the box myself, therefore the customer and my insurers would have a fair deal.
Helpful Answer (0)

Well said Country Mouse you deserve sip of sherry for that. You have put a lot of time and effort into researching this for Colin I hope he appreciates it.
Helpful Answer (0)

Colin, your wife's becoming essentially a Ward of Court is not the same thing as her becoming - as you put it - a non-person. Try seeing it on the contrary as her entitlement to additional protection in view of her vulnerability, protection which will among other things prevent her funds being used for any purpose other than her own welfare. In all of the bureaucracy that has been making your life hell, at the core of it is Mary's best interests. That's what it's for. A mighty messy job they can make of it sometimes, but nevertheless at the end of the day they want the same outcome that you want: Mary's welfare.

If you feel that this is personally insulting to you, I can understand that: it would hurt my pride too, if I were in your shoes. However, presumably, the aim of suggesting that you apply for guardianship is that you would then take charge of spending on her behalf and thus become more fully involved in managing her affairs. In that case, everything you do would be closely supervised, and would have to be accurately accounted for. Of course. What else would you expect?

You've spent the last ten years annoying and alienating the various authorities; now you're hoping there will be some way for you just to get on with looking after Mary unchallenged, in your own way? Not. A. Chance.

Listen. Costco has settled. The court is satisfied that your wife has been adequately compensated for her injuries. That is the court's decision to make, not yours. So far so good.

Costco has paid the compensation. The money was paid and taken into trust by the court. At that point, the story ceases to have anything at all to do with Costco. They owned up, they paid damages, end of story as far as they're concerned.

I expect it does baffle you that various officials would not discuss with you what is happening with the money. The stark reality is that this is none of your business, because it is not your money, it is your wife's money; and not having POA, which she couldn't give you because she allegedly lacked capacity, you have no right to act on her behalf. I know she's your wife, but that's how it works. Her compensation is her compensation, and nothing to do with you in the eyes of the law.

This "for instance" might make it easier to accept their attitude: suppose, just suppose, that instead of being you, you were a completely different type of husband, a really nasty piece of work. Suppose your wife had always lived in fear of you, and now was suffering from a disability, and had received a large lump sum from the people who had injured her. And suppose then that the court cheerfully gave you complete control of her affairs, saying "there you go - look after her, mind." What would you think of a court that would do that to a helpless, injured person? And even if the hypothetical wife said to the court that she agreed to her husband's taking charge, would you just take her word for it?

There are many less good husbands and wives than you and Mary out there. The courts have to assume the worst, or they will be taking terrible risks with people who desperately need their protection. And how are they to know what kind of husband you are? They can't tell by looking, you know.

So you either learn to play nice, and co-operate with the people whose duty is to protect your wife, or you give up and let them take over altogether. Nothing in law obliges you to stay with your wife unless you choose to, actually - you could leave tomorrow and the state in all its glory would step in to care for her (if you can call what they do caring). But the law definitely is obliged to make very sure that anybody, including you, who goes anywhere near your wife's money is monitored closely. That's their duty.

Lastly, maybe you don't see why all this has to happen. I agree that it's very possible that none of this safeguarding rigmarole has any relevance to the reality of your and Mary's relationship. But what does that change? What difference does it make if you or Mary or I think it's a good system? It changes nothing. You play the game by the rules, or you don't play.
Helpful Answer (2)

Countrymouse, after the case if you could call it that, remember that this case was (settled out of court) The Official Solicitor left the money in court funds. Bearing in mind that our solicitor did not have the right to introduce an official Solicitor, he was breaking his fiduciary duty.

We went to court believing that our solicitor was applying to be removed of the records, and certainly not to remove us from having any say in the matter, that is what the court hearing was suppose to be all about. Well the more I talk about this case the more pathetic it becomes.

We did not want to push it any further because I realize we were playing with something far greater than we could begin to believe, we went to the court a week later to ask for Mary's compensation. The Court manager looked into his computer on our case, and said that you have been awarded judgment, but extremely unusual I have never seen this before they had not entered the amount awarded, haven't you received the money, well I can only advise you to go to the court funds office.

Remembering this is all in the city, I took my wife home and return to the court funds office in another part of the city the following week, the manager told us we can't tell you anything about the case we are instructed not to. Well that was another wasted journey to the city considering my wife has a spinal injury having to walk to all these places.

Cutting the story short we went to see the official Solicitor even though we believe she had no right to be there, to asked her about the money, but she was not there, she phoned me later and she said that we require a report on Mary's capacity, a little bit ironic when everyone now has been paid except the person with the severe injury.

Well by now an expert on LinkedIn, said to me you're fighting a lost battle when a large corporation is involved they will destroy you both just worry about your wife. Well that is what I decided to do, all the money in the world is not as important as my wife and I left it there. To your answer now my wife has not received anything at all of her compensation, actually it has cost us thousands for dismissing the 1st 2 solicitors all we had in return was £5000 at the end of this so call case.

Well Countrymouse, first of all we both believe that no one has the right to remove our identity turning us into a nonperson, so to people like us is there a way to obtain help without declaring my spouse as a nonperson, that is what I was trying to get at.

I do not see why the state requires or demand that a person has to become a nonperson before receiving any help, especially if that person has a spouse, and a spouse who is willing to take care of his spouse but require a guardianship order to do so, because at the end of the day the spouse is going to have to do the job anyway.
Helpful Answer (0)

Look. Let's take this paragraph as an example. You say:

"Well I was totally ignorant to the whole scenario of brain injury, after listening to the neuropsychologist I started to read all about civil procedure rules by Lord Woolf he warned solicitors on their behaviour."

Ok. So:

Who referred your wife to the neuropsychologist? Barts? Your GP? Who?
This referral resulted in an appointment one year following the injury, correct?
So, between your wife's discharge from Barts and the appointment with UCH, what happened with regard to her rehab? Nothing? Or something? Who was co-ordinating your wife's post-discharge care?

This is the type of important information that is missing. This is what people need to know if they are to understand your profound sense of grievance.

But in any case, leaving that to one side: your consultant is concerned about the delay and tells you that your wife should have been referred immediately for rehabilitation. And - seriously? - your first thought is to look at the Woolf Report? Why? What's that got to do with your wife's medical care? What solicitor are you holding responsible for a failure to refer your wife promptly WITHIN the NHS?

Mate, seriously, you're all over the place.

But to use your own analogy, if you discover that the engineer who fitted your new gas boiler was not CORGI registered, no you don't rip it out and get a new one. You get an engineer who definitely is CORGI registered to check the work and see if there was anything wrong with it.

In your case I suspect the second, third, fourth engineers told you the boiler was fine, once they'd had a chance to look at it properly, and you didn't like what they told you. And then someone else whose completely different boiler in a completely different context had blown a hole in his kitchen wall told you they were all out to make sure you die of carbon monoxide poisoning…

But this is too important for all that kind of argy-bargy. What do you want to achieve?
Helpful Answer (2)

Colin, you posted asking if anyone knew a way round having to obtain guardianship on your wife's behalf. I assume you are trying to ACHIEVE something. What is it?
Helpful Answer (0)

1 2 3 4 5
This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.