Upheld: service failure in handling Lasting Power of Attorney; failure to follow explicit instructions; mishandling of vulnerable customer complaint against HSBC UK Bank plc trading as First Direct

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S, as attorney under a Lasting Power of Attorney for his mother Mrs B, requested online banking access and explicitly instructed First Direct not to contact Mrs B as it would cause confusion and distress due to her dementia. Despite accepting the LPA and having no documented concerns, First Direct called Mrs B anyway, causing her distress and confusion. First Direct also failed to clearly explain initially that Mrs B's access would need to be revoked for Mr S to have attorney access. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding First Direct should have followed the attorney's explicit instructions and explored alternative methods to establish capacity, and ordered £150 compensation to the estate to acknowledge the distress caused to Mrs B.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although a Lasting Power of Attorney grants an attorney legal authority, the donor retains rights to their accounts and communication with the bank. First Direct accepted the LPA without documented concerns about Mr S's actions, and therefore should have followed his explicit instruction not to contact Mrs B. While First Direct has a responsibility to protect the donor and establish capacity, alternative methods such as requesting a mental capacity assessment from Mrs B's GP or contacting the Office of Public Guardian could have been explored. The call to Mrs B, despite her explicit instruction not to be contacted and her documented dementia, caused unnecessary distress and confusion. First Direct also failed to clearly explain initially that Mrs B's online access would need to be revoked for Mr S to have attorney access.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website