Not everyone that a California court appoints to make decisions for someone else deserves that right. Some people make a good impression in court, but in practice, leave much to be desired. When it becomes apparent that conservatorships are more vehicles for taking advantage of vulnerable people rather than for protecting them, those conservators failing in their duties ought to be removed.
The primary duty of a conservator is to make decisions based on what would be in the best interests of the conservatee. Doing so includes properly managing money and assets, involving the conservatee in the decision-making process and pursuing all reasonable avenues before making a final determination on an issue such as living arrangements. When a conservator fails to carry out these and other duties, the vulnerable person suffers.
When suspicions arise regarding the efficacy of a conservator, it may be time to consider removing him or her from that position. Removing a conservator requires the approval of the court. It will be necessary to provide the court evidence that the conservator is falling short of the legal obligations that come with the position. If a California court rules that the removal is warranted, another person must then be appointed if the conservatorship will continue.
Far too many conservatorships result in the conservatees not receiving the support and protection they deserve. When those individuals, their friends or their family members suspect that the conservator is not fulfilling his or her duties, it may be a good idea to conduct an investigation in order to either confirm or invalidate any suspicions. Knowing what to look for and figuring out how to present the case to the court may require some guidance, which would more than likely be worthwhile considering what is at stake.