LPA Attorney Conflict of Interest UK (2026): Self-Dealing, Gifts & OPG Rules

A conflict of interest arises when an LPA attorney has a personal financial interest in the donor's affairs that could distort or compromise the decisions the attorney makes on behalf of the donor. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) requires an attorney to act in the donor's best interests at all times — this is the foundational duty of an attorney. A conflict of interest creates a risk that the attorney's own interests will take precedence over the donor's interests, even if the attorney does not intend this. The conflict matters because the donor — who has lost or is at risk of losing mental capacity — is in a uniquely vulnerable position and cannot protect themselves from an attorney who acts in self-interest. The law provides several protections: the self-dealing rule (an attorney cannot transact with the donor's property at an advantageous rate without Court of Protection consent), the gift restrictions in MCA 2005 s.12 (an attorney can only make limited gifts to themselves), the OPG's investigatory powers, and the Court of Protection's power to remove an attorney for misconduct. Common conflicts include: the attorney is also a beneficiary under the donor's will; the attorney wants to buy the donor's property (for example, the family home at a price convenient to the attorney); the attorney has a business or commercial relationship with the donor; the attorney is a co-trustee with a financial interest in a trust the donor benefits from. Not all conflicts are automatic grounds for removal — some are manageable with transparency and safeguards — but undisclosed or deliberately exploited conflicts are serious and can constitute financial abuse.

Yes — an attorney being named as a beneficiary in the donor's will is common and generally permissible. Many LPAs are drawn up by older individuals for their adult children, who are typically both the intended attorneys and the intended will beneficiaries. The law does not prohibit this combination, and the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) does not treat it as an automatic conflict. However, the combination creates a structural tension: the attorney has a personal financial interest in the size of the estate (the larger it is, the more the attorney inherits) and may be tempted to preserve the estate for inheritance rather than spend it for the donor's benefit — or alternatively, to make gifts to themselves that deplete what others would inherit. The key legal principle is that the attorney must at all times act in the donor's best interests, not in their own inheritance interests. In practice, this means: the attorney cannot make significant gifts to themselves (beyond MCA 2005 s.12 limits); the attorney cannot invest the donor's estate in ways that preserve inheritance at the expense of the donor's care; and the attorney should be prepared to account to co-attorneys, the OPG, or the Court of Protection if their decisions are questioned. If there is a concern that the attorney is making decisions motivated by self-interest rather than the donor's welfare, any person interested in the donor's welfare can make a safeguarding referral to the OPG using Form OPG103.

The self-dealing rule is an equitable principle that an agent (including an LPA attorney) cannot enter into a transaction that benefits themselves at the principal's (donor's) expense without the full and informed consent of the principal — and where the principal lacks capacity, without the consent of the Court of Protection. In practical terms, this means an LPA attorney cannot: purchase the donor's property (for example, buy the family home at market value, let alone below market value) without an order from the Court of Protection authorising the specific transaction; take a fee or commission from a third party in connection with managing the donor's affairs (for example, receive a referral fee from an estate agent or financial adviser); enter into a business transaction with the donor on terms that favour the attorney; or take advantage of information obtained as attorney for personal financial gain. The self-dealing rule applies even if the transaction is at market value — the point is that the attorney cannot be both the fiduciary decision-maker for the donor and a counterparty to a transaction, because there is an inherent conflict of interest regardless of price. If an LPA attorney genuinely wishes to purchase the donor's property (for example, the attorney wants to buy the donor's house to keep it in the family), the correct route is to apply to the Court of Protection for authorisation under MCA 2005 s.23. The application requires independent legal advice, an independent valuation, and a report demonstrating that the transaction is in the donor's best interests. Court of Protection proceedings cost £371 in application fees (as of 2026) plus legal costs.

An LPA attorney's power to make gifts is strictly limited by section 12 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Gifts are only permitted: (1) on 'customary occasions' — birthdays, wedding anniversaries, Christmas or other religious festivals, or similar occasions on which it is customary to make gifts; and (2) to a value that is 'not unreasonable' having regard to all the circumstances, including the size of the donor's estate. There is no fixed monetary limit in the statute — what is 'not unreasonable' depends on context. A gift of £50 to a grandchild at Christmas is plainly within s.12. A gift of £5,000 to the attorney themselves for their birthday from a donor with a £50,000 estate is plainly not. A gift of £1,000 from a donor with a £2 million estate may be reasonable; the same gift from a donor with £20,000 in savings is almost certainly not. Gifts outside s.12 — including any substantial gifts to the attorney, large charitable donations, or significant transfers of assets to beneficiaries — require Court of Protection authorisation. The OPG actively investigates complaints about improper gifting by attorneys. An attorney who makes gifts to themselves outside s.12 limits may be removed from the LPA by the Court of Protection, required to repay the gifts, and in serious cases may face criminal charges under the Fraud Act 2006 or the Mental Capacity Act 2005 wilful neglect provisions. The OPG's guidance document 'LP12: Make and register your Lasting Power of Attorney — a guide for attorneys' sets out these restrictions in plain English and should be read by every newly appointed attorney.

The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is the statutory body responsible for supervising attorneys acting under registered LPAs in England and Wales. The OPG has several powers when it receives a complaint about an attorney's conduct: (1) Investigation: the OPG can visit the donor (with a Court of Protection visitor), interview the attorney, and review financial records. The attorney is obliged to cooperate and provide accounts; (2) Requiring accounts: the OPG can require the attorney to provide a full account of all transactions made on behalf of the donor, supporting receipts and bank statements; (3) Referral to the Court of Protection: if the OPG's investigation reveals misuse, the OPG can apply to the Court of Protection to cancel and revoke the LPA and remove the attorney from office; (4) Referral to the police/CPS: in cases of financial abuse, the OPG can refer the matter for criminal investigation. To make a complaint to the OPG about an attorney, contact the OPG helpline (0300 456 0300) or submit a report using Form OPG103, available on gov.uk. The donor (if they have capacity), close family members, social workers, healthcare professionals, or any person concerned about the donor's welfare can make a referral. Local authority adult safeguarding teams can also investigate concerns about financial abuse of a vulnerable adult and can work alongside the OPG. The threshold for the OPG to act is a concern about specific conduct — general dissatisfaction with how an attorney is managing money is not enough without specific examples of improper transactions.

Yes — the Court of Protection has the power under MCA 2005 s.22 to revoke an LPA if it is satisfied that the attorney has behaved, or is proposing to behave, in a way that is not in the donor's best interests, or has behaved in a way that contravenes the authority conferred by the LPA or the MCA 2005. To apply for the revocation of an LPA and removal of an attorney, the applicant uses Form COP1 (application to the Court of Protection) with supporting evidence showing the specific conduct complained of. Evidence typically includes: bank statements showing improper transactions; a statement from a social worker, doctor, or OPG visitor commenting on the donor's circumstances; evidence of the attorney's personal financial interest in the transactions; and if possible, a statement from the donor (if they retain some capacity to express views). The Court can order: cancellation of the LPA (permanent revocation); replacement of the attorney with another named attorney, a professional deputy, or a family member; repayment of misappropriated funds; and compensation. Court of Protection proceedings are formal and require legal representation in contested cases — costs can be significant. Where there is an urgent risk (for example, an attorney is imminently about to complete a purchase of the donor's home), the Court can grant an interim order to freeze the transaction while the full application is heard. If the donor still has capacity to make their own decisions, they can revoke the LPA themselves (using Form LP005) without court involvement.

When creating an LPA, the donor has several options to build in safeguards against future conflict-of-interest issues: (1) Appoint two or more attorneys to act jointly for significant financial decisions — requiring two attorneys to agree prevents one from acting unilaterally on a conflicted transaction. The LPA can be drafted to require joint agreement for any transaction above a specified value (for example, joint agreement required for any transaction over £10,000); (2) Appoint a replacement attorney who is not a potential beneficiary — if the primary attorney is also a will beneficiary, the replacement attorney can be an independent person (such as a professional or a non-beneficiary friend) who acts as a check; (3) Include a condition in the LPA requiring independent legal advice for any property transaction — this is an optional restriction that can be written into the LPA document; (4) Appoint a certificate provider who knows the donor well and who can informally monitor the situation; (5) Register a 'named person' with the OPG when the LPA is registered — a named person receives notification when the LPA is registered and can raise concerns with the OPG if they have grounds; (6) Keep clear financial records — an attorney should maintain a separate bank account or at minimum a detailed ledger of all transactions made on the donor's behalf, with supporting receipts. The OPG provides a guidance booklet 'Keeping records as an attorney or deputy' (OPG107) which sets out best practice. A donor who is worried about potential future conflicts can also speak with a solicitor about whether a professional attorney or a trust corporation might be more appropriate than a family member.