The Public Trustee is ripping off pensioners

The Public Trustee is supposed to protect people it deems incapable of looking after themselves, but instead they are virtually stealing their money.

Take the case of Mark (not his real name), reported by the ABC yesterday. His sister placed him under guardianship, against his will, and the Western Australia Public Trustee now takes 40% of his pension for “administrative costs.”

At the very outset, it must be stated that government departments should not be charging fee-for-service to assist Australia’s most vulnerable. Imagine the outcry if Centrelink or NDIS started charging administrative costs for their clients.

Mark has a neurodevelopmental disorder and survives on an age pension. His sister, unable to care for him any more, had him placed under the care of the Public Trustee.

She now regrets that decision, but is blocked by the Western Australia government from reversing it. Once they get their claws into somebody, they don’t let go.

Mark was put under an interim administration with the WA Public Trustee, and he was blocked from accessing his own bank accounts.

He couldn’t even afford to buy food, forcing his sister to pay out of her own pocket to help.

In the first four months of their administration of his finances, Mark received only $3,500. In the same period, the Public Trustee took $3,664 in administration fees.

Then there is the case of Barry, a retired engineer whose wife died in May last year. For the relatively simple task of changing a bank account and seven shareholdings from her name into his, the Public Trustee slugged him $19,000.

This was for just 28 hours work at $370 an hour, which is $10,360. Where the rest of the money was spent is unclear.

Another pensioner with dementia is being held in a nursing home against his will, due to an order granted to the Public Trustee. He wants to return to his own home, but the Public Trustee won’t let him.

The Western Australia Public Trustee is an independently operated government institution which manages the assets of some of the community’s most vulnerable people.

Its clients include people with mental illness, cognitive impairments, and others deemed incapable of making their own decisions.

In 2008, legislation was changed with the aim of helping the Public Trustee achieve self-funding so the government would not have to subsidise its services.

The Public Trustee raised $23.7 million in 2022 from estates and trusts. It has $37.6 million in cash and cash equivalents on hand according to its 2022 annual report, and manages $1.5 billion in assets.

The question arises as to why the Western Australia government is profiteering from the misfortune of their most vulnerable citizens, and why isn’t this money being used to assist their clients?

When asked about this, the Western Australia government refused to give a clear answer. Instead, they quoted a lot of archaic laws claiming their hands were tied.

The reality is, the Western Australia government created these laws, and it is within their powers to simply change them. They have chosen not to.

It is not only Western Australia that has these laws, though the state has the strictest of any state or territory in the nation. There are over 50,000 Australian pensioners across the country who are subject to such guardianship.

Journalists are not allowed to report on the matters, or they face massive fines and imprisonment. Family and friends have no input as to what care can be given. They are completely at the mercy of some faceless and nameless public servant.

These laws are similar to the conservatorship laws in the United States, of which Brittany Speers was a victim. The difference is, in that case, her father benefitted from the laws. In Australia, it is the state and territory governments which benefit.

It seems clear that urgent action needs to be taken. State and territory governments should not be charging fees for these services, and certainly not such exorbitant fees. This should be a free service.

State and territory governments should not be denying people access to their money. If they are not able to make decisions about their finances for themselves, then the decisions should be left to family or friends.

State and territory governments should not be holding people in nursing homes against their will, or against the will of family and friends. This is not a decision for governments to make.

It is true that there are a number of people who don’t have family or friends that can make the decisions for them, but 50,000 seems unlikely.

In such extreme cases, the Public Trustee must be transparent and accountable. Such transparency and accountability does not exist in any state or territory, except the ACT.

These are Australia’s most vulnerable, and all their rights have been taken away from them. This practice needs to stop, and it needs to stop now.

Craig Hill is a Brisbane-based Social Justice Campaigner, Writer, Teacher and Business Consultant. He has campaigned for social justice in Australia, promoted human rights in China and worked with the homeless in Honolulu. He holds a Graduate Certificate in Education and a degree in Management.