A relative is spending far beyond their income, disposing of property or repeatedly giving away money. That can be alarming, particularly where dependants rely on them. It does not automatically entitle the family to take control of their accounts. The first question is what risk exists and which legal basis, if any, permits intervention.
Hugh Raichlin Attorneys can assess the evidence, the person’s financial arrangements and the available legal routes. The aim is to identify a proportionate response, not to treat disagreement with an adult’s choices as proof that their independence should be removed.
Distinguish spending concerns from capacity concerns
The original Law DotNews article describes a prodigality application: a request for court intervention in the financial affairs of a person alleged to be dissipating resources recklessly. It stresses the seriousness of the remedy and the need for a clear factual case. That question must not be conflated with a diagnosis or assumed mental incapacity.
Where illness or an inability to understand decisions is suspected, appropriate professional assessment and a different legal process may be required. Age, an unconventional relationship, generosity or a family member’s opinion are not substitutes for evidence. Describe observed events rather than assigning a medical or moral label.
Define the threatened harm
Record the person’s income, essential living costs, assets, debts and dependants as far as you can lawfully establish them. Identify the specific transactions causing concern and explain how they threaten financial security. Spending more in one month, without context about savings or purpose, is not a complete picture.
A court asked to restrict control over financial affairs must consider substantial consequences for dignity, privacy and autonomy. Prepare to explain why ordinary assistance or a less intrusive arrangement would not adequately address the demonstrated risk. Litigation should not be used as leverage in a separate inheritance or relationship dispute.
Prepare facts rather than accusations
- A dated chronology of material payments, sales or new debts and how you learned about them.
- Lawfully obtained financial records, with recurring commitments and genuine living expenses identified.
- Evidence of unmet essential needs or support obligations, rather than an assumed future inheritance loss.
- Details of consented assistance already offered and the response, without rewriting disagreements as incapacity.
- Any relevant professional assessments, existing court appointments, mandates or powers of attorney.
Do not impersonate the person, use their passwords without authority, intercept private communications or pressure a bank to disclose protected records. Explain gaps in your evidence honestly so that a lawful way of obtaining relevant information can be considered.
Check existing arrangements before changing anything
A joint account, family trust, marital-property regime or co-owned asset may raise issues different from management of the person’s own estate. Establish who owns each asset and who is authorised to act. A power of attorney is not a blanket permission to disregard the person’s interests or assume authority continues regardless of their condition.
Where the immediate problem is another person’s threatened disposal of jointly disputed property, advice about that property or preservation relief may be needed. Do not assume an application to control someone’s entire financial life is the only way to protect a narrower right.
A failed application also has consequences
The source case illustrates that serious allegations can still fail where the necessary facts are not proved. Proceedings may expose private family information, damage relationships and create costs. Assess the strength of the evidence and the practical result sought before committing to the process.
Can I act simply because I expect to inherit?
An expected inheritance is not ownership of the person’s present assets. A legal assessment must identify an existing right, the relevant protective jurisdiction and evidence supporting the relief sought.
Should the family cancel access to accounts immediately?
Do not take that step without authority. Where fraud or immediate danger is suspected, contact the appropriate institution or emergency authority and obtain advice on lawful protective steps, preserving the factual record.
Start with a focused preliminary discussion
Tell HRA what has changed, which concrete transactions concern you and whether there is an imminent sale or payment. The firm can then identify the appropriate documents and professionals. An initial enquiry is not a finding of incapacity or confirmation that a court application will succeed.