LPA Abuse: What the “My Sister Stole Millions” Story Really Teaches Families
An LPA is built on trust.
That is its strength.
It is also the risk.
In August 2026, the Sunday Times reported the story of a woman it called “Sarah”. That was not her real name. According to the report, Sarah’s father handed financial control to one daughter after retiring and gave her lasting power of attorney in case he later became unable to make decisions himself.
After his death, his multimillion-pound estate allegedly passed almost entirely to that daughter. Sarah said hundreds of thousands of pounds had been taken from her parents’ accounts and that their wills had been changed so the other siblings were almost disinherited.
Those are serious allegations.
They are not a published court finding.
The people are anonymous, the underlying documents are not public, and the sister’s full account cannot be tested from the newspaper extract. So this article does not decide what happened in Sarah’s family.
It asks a more useful question.
What should another family learn from it?
First, separate three different disputes
The words “power of attorney abuse” can hide several legal problems. A suspicious bank transfer, a gift supposedly approved by a parent and a new will are not the same dispute.
Question | The legal issue | Why the distinction matters |
|---|---|---|
Did the attorney misuse money while the donor was alive? | The LPA’s scope, best interests, record-keeping, conflicts and restrictions on gifts | OPG and the Court of Protection may become involved while the donor is alive, alongside possible civil, safeguarding or criminal routes |
Did the donor personally approve a payment or gift? | Decision-specific capacity, genuine consent, pressure, undue influence and the transaction itself | A donor does not lose all decision-making power because an LPA exists, but an attorney cannot invent consent |
Is a later will valid? | Execution, testamentary capacity, knowledge and approval, undue influence, fraud or forgery | An attorney cannot use an LPA to rewrite a will. A donor can make a new will if they have capacity and act freely |
That third point matters in Sarah’s story. Saying that an attorney “ensured” a parent changed a will may raise questions about pressure, access to advice and capacity. It does not mean the LPA itself authorised the change.
It did not.
A will dispute follows a separate route.
What an LPA actually allows
There are two types of lasting power of attorney in England and Wales:
Property and financial affairs, covering matters such as bank accounts, bills, investments and property.
Health and welfare, covering matters such as care, treatment and living arrangements.
A health and welfare attorney can only make a particular decision when the donor lacks capacity to make that decision. A registered property and financial affairs LPA can be drafted for use with the donor’s permission while the donor still has capacity, or only after capacity has been lost.
Capacity is decision-specific.
It can also change.
Someone may be able to decide what to spend on groceries but not understand a complex property transfer. A diagnosis, old age or an unwise choice does not automatically prove incapacity.
An attorney must support the donor to decide where possible. When the attorney does have to decide, they must act within the LPA and follow the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They must consider the donor’s best interests, avoid conflicts, keep money separate and retain proper records.
The money never becomes theirs.
Gifts, loans and “early inheritance” are danger areas
An attorney’s gift power is deliberately narrow. Reasonable gifts may sometimes be made on customary occasions, such as birthdays, weddings or religious festivals, to people who would normally receive them. Reasonable charitable gifts may also be possible.
But “reasonable” depends on the donor’s assets, income, care needs, previous pattern and expected future costs.
Large gifts are different. So are loans, property transfers, below-market sales, school fees, paying someone else’s bills and investing in the attorney’s business. Court of Protection authority may be needed before the transaction happens.
Good intentions do not fix missing authority.
Neither does a label.
Calling money a “temporary loan”, “family agreement” or “early inheritance” does not take it outside the rules.
Four cases that explain where the lines sit
Case | What happened | Practical lesson |
|---|---|---|
Chandler v Lombardi [2022] EWHC 22 (Ch) | A daughter acting under an LPA transferred half of her mother’s property to herself. After the mother died, the executor challenged it. The unauthorised gift was void and the register could be corrected | Expected inheritance is not permission to take property early. Death ends the LPA, but it does not necessarily erase the estate’s civil claim |
Rea v Rea [2024] EWCA Civ 169 | A mother left her home to the daughter who cared for her. The High Court found undue influence, but the Court of Appeal reversed that decision and admitted the will to probate | Vulnerability, opportunity and an unequal will can look suspicious but do not themselves prove coercion |
Public Guardian v JM [2014] EWCOP 7 | An attorney put house-sale proceeds into an account in his name. He also paid himself, made himself a large gift and could not explain other withdrawals. The LPA was revoked | A police decision not to prosecute does not prove that an attorney complied with their civil and protective duties |
Re Buckley [2013] EWCOP 2965 | The donor’s money was put into the attorney’s reptile-breeding business | An investment involving the attorney’s own business is still a serious conflict and cannot be made safe by its description |
These cases point in both directions.
Chandler shows that an unauthorised lifetime transfer can be undone after death. Rea shows why families should not assume a surprising will is automatically invalid.
Evidence decides the difference.
Why the problem can begin before the paperwork
Financial abuse rarely announces itself with one dramatic bank transfer. It may begin with control of the donor’s relationships and information.
The donor stops seeing friends alone. Post is redirected. One person attends every appointment and answers every question. Other relatives are told that contact is “too stressful”. A new adviser appears. Old documents disappear.
None of those facts proves abuse.
Together, they may matter.
Official safeguarding guidance treats pressure concerning wills, property, inheritance or financial transactions as potential financial abuse. It also identifies unexplained withdrawals, missing financial papers and sudden will changes as warning signs requiring a closer look.
A closer look.
Not a public accusation.
OPG can investigate—but its role has boundaries
Anyone can report a concern about an attorney or deputy to the Office of the Public Guardian. A useful report identifies the donor, attorney, dates, transactions, current risk and available evidence.
OPG can request accounts and records, obtain information from financial institutions, refer safeguarding concerns and ask the Court of Protection to restrict or remove an attorney.
Demand is high. In 2025–26, OPG received 13,183 concerns. It accepted 3,645 for investigation and signposted 9,538 elsewhere. Its average completed investigation took 198 days, against a 70-day target.
That does not mean reporting is pointless. It means families should use the correct routes at the same time where necessary.
Immediate danger may require police or adult safeguarding involvement. A threatened property transfer may need urgent legal advice. Unmet care needs may require the local authority. Suspected theft or fraud may have a criminal route.
Do not report and wait blindly.
Match the route to the risk.
What changes when the donor dies?
An LPA ends on death. OPG’s statutory oversight also ends.
That is a jurisdictional limit. It is not a declaration that nothing happened.
After death, the executor or administrator manages the estate. Banks should be notified. Potential civil claims may belong to the estate. A suspected crime can still be reported to the police. A dispute about the will proceeds through probate law rather than through the LPA complaint process.
This is where Chandler v Lombardi matters. The donor had died, but the executor could still challenge the lifetime property transfer on behalf of the estate.
If the person suspected of wrongdoing is also the executor, the position becomes harder. A beneficiary may need specialist advice about disclosure, an account, preserving assets, replacing or removing a personal representative, or enabling the estate to pursue a claim.
Do not assume a beneficiary can simply demand every bank statement or sue in the estate’s name.
Authority matters there too.
A caveat can pause probate, but it is not a magic button
Where there is a genuine dispute about whether a will is valid, a probate caveat may temporarily prevent a grant from being issued. That can create time to investigate.
It does not recover missing money. It does not decide whether the will is valid. It may trigger formal steps and costs if challenged.
Use it for a real probate dispute, not simply because the inheritance feels unfair.
The distinction matters. If the concern is an unauthorised lifetime transfer rather than the will itself, stopping the grant may not address the main problem.
Design the LPA to leave an evidence trail
Trust is important. Records make trust verifiable.
A property and financial affairs attorney should be able to reconstruct the story of the donor’s money. A practical file might contain:
an opening list of assets, debts, income and regular spending;
monthly statements and a transaction ledger;
receipts and invoices for significant expenditure;
notes of major decisions, options considered and the donor’s wishes;
professional advice and disagreements between attorneys;
a gifts log recording recipient, occasion, amount and previous pattern;
valuations and conveyancing papers for a property sale; and
attorney expenses, separated from any payment for acting.
This protects the donor.
It also protects the honest attorney who later faces questions from worried siblings.
Safeguards to consider before signing
The best time to reduce risk is while the donor has capacity and can choose the structure freely.
Choose for character and competence
Being the eldest child is not a qualification. Consider honesty, organisation, financial ability, availability, conflicts and whether the person will tolerate oversight.
Ask them first.
Decide how attorneys act
Attorneys can act jointly, jointly and severally, or jointly for specified decisions and jointly and severally for others.
Joint action creates a check but can cause deadlock. It can also make the arrangement fragile if one attorney dies, loses capacity or can no longer act. Joint and several authority is more flexible, but one person may act alone.
A mixed arrangement can reserve a home sale or another major transaction for joint agreement. Overcomplicated drafting can make the LPA unworkable, so complex restrictions deserve professional checking.
Name replacements
Life changes. Attorneys die, become ill, move abroad, become bankrupt or step down. Replacement attorneys can prevent the entire arrangement from failing.
Use independent certification properly
The certificate provider checks that the donor understands the LPA and is not being pressured or defrauded. A private conversation with the donor can be particularly important where one proposed attorney controls access.
Build proportionate visibility
Possible safeguards include annual accounts sent to a named person and independent valuations before a property sale. The donor might also require professional advice for large investments or medical evidence before the financial LPA begins operating.
More control is not always better. Requiring four relatives to approve every electricity bill would create paralysis.
Target the high-risk decisions.
Warning signs and the first sensible response
Pattern | Why it matters | First proportionate step |
|---|---|---|
The attorney prevents all private contact with the donor | Possible isolation or coercive control, although care needs may offer an explanation | Record specific incidents and consider adult safeguarding or police help if there is immediate risk |
Repeated payments go to the attorney without receipts | Possible gifts, unauthorised remuneration or mixed funds | Preserve records you lawfully hold and report the transactions factually while the donor is alive |
The home is transferred or sold cheaply to the attorney or family | High-value conflict and possible unauthorised gift | Obtain urgent specialist advice and preserve title and transaction evidence lawfully |
The donor “loans” money to the attorney or their business | Repayment intention does not remove the conflict or create legal authority | Stop further transactions if lawfully able, report the concern and seek recovery advice |
A new will favours the person controlling access | Relevant to capacity, knowledge and approval or undue influence, but not proof | Preserve a chronology and seek probate advice after death rather than making public accusations |
The attorney cannot explain the accounts | Poor records may breach their duties and make an innocent explanation harder to verify | Make a focused request if entitled and report the missing records and transactions |
What to do depends on timing and capacity
The donor is alive and can make the decision
The donor remains in charge. They may instruct the attorney to stop, speak to the bank, remove an attorney or revoke the LPA if they have the relevant capacity.
Do not treat disagreement as incapacity.
If the donor is being threatened, isolated or defrauded, safeguarding and criminal routes may still apply even though they retain capacity.
The donor is alive but may lack capacity
Record the decision that concerns you and the facts suggesting the donor cannot understand, retain, use or communicate the relevant information. Avoid broad statements such as “Dad has dementia, so nothing he signed counts.”
Report the attorney concern to OPG. Give dates, amounts, recipients, documents and the current risk. If money or property may disappear before an ordinary investigation can finish, obtain urgent advice about protective Court of Protection orders.
In England, a local authority’s Care Act safeguarding duty has three key conditions. The adult must have care and support needs, face abuse or neglect, and be unable to protect themselves because of those needs. Wales has its own parallel safeguarding framework under the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014.
The donor has died
Identify the personal representative. Notify financial institutions. Check whether a grant has issued. Preserve lawful evidence and separate the possible will challenge from recovery of lifetime transactions.
Move promptly.
Probate, property and limitation issues can become more difficult with time.
Build an evidence pack, not a family prosecution speech
A strong concern report distinguishes documents, facts, inference and hearsay.
Include:
the type of LPA and the attorneys’ names;
whether the donor is alive and their present circumstances;
a dated table of transactions, amounts, accounts and recipients;
statements, messages, invoices, title entries or care records you lawfully hold;
the explanation requested and any answer given;
why the transaction may exceed the attorney’s authority;
what remains at risk; and
the action you are asking the recipient to consider.
Do not impersonate the donor, enter online banking without authority, redirect post, remove original documents or publish accusations on social media.
That can create another problem.
The practical lesson from Sarah’s story
The lesson is not “never appoint family”. Most attorneys act carefully, often for years, without payment and under considerable pressure.
The lesson is not “appoint everyone jointly” either. That can leave routine decisions stuck.
The better lesson is this: match power with evidence and proportionate oversight. Choose carefully. Record decisions. Make high-risk transactions visible. Act while the donor can still be protected.
And separate suspicion from proof.
That protects everyone.
How Unwildered can help
Caira by Unwildered can help explain an LPA and organise a chronology. It can turn transaction concerns into a factual question list before you speak to OPG, adult safeguarding or a solicitor.
It cannot decide capacity, obtain private bank records, make a court finding or determine whether a crime occurred. Urgent safeguarding, substantial transfers, a disputed property sale or a contested will may require specialist professional help.
FAQ: the questions people feel silly asking
Does an LPA mean my parent has lost capacity?
No. Making or registering an LPA does not itself mean the donor lacks capacity. A property and financial affairs LPA may sometimes be used with the donor’s permission while they still make their own decisions.
Can an attorney change the donor’s will?
No. An LPA does not let the attorney rewrite the will. The donor may make a new will if they have the required capacity and act freely. A statutory will involves the Court of Protection.
Is it still worth reporting something after the donor has died?
Yes, but usually not to OPG because its oversight has ended. Speak to the executor or administrator, notify relevant banks, consider probate advice and report suspected crime to the police where appropriate. Lifetime transactions may still be challengeable by the estate.
This article provides general information for England and Wales. It is not legal, financial, medical or safeguarding advice.
