Award-winning Court of Protection Costs Specialists
Professional deputies managing the property and financial affairs of Protected Parties (P) operate within a structured framework governing how their costs may be recovered from P’s estate. The fixed-cost regime for professional deputy costs continues to evolve, and the updated guidance issued by the Office of the Public Guardian on 18 June 2025 provides further clarity on how Practice Direction 19B should now be applied.
This guide explains how Court of Protection fixed costs operate for professional and public authority deputies, when fixed fees apply instead of detailed assessment, how the revised asset threshold affects recoverability and what deputies should consider when reviewing existing deputyship orders. It also highlights the practical implications of the updated guidance and explains how deputies can ensure their approach to costs remains compliant with current expectations.
Court of Protection fixed costs are the standard remuneration professional deputies may recover for managing P’s property and financial affairs without the need to prepare a bill for detailed assessment by the Senior Courts Costs Office. The fixed-cost regime provides certainty where estates fall below defined thresholds and ensures costs remain proportionate to the size of P’s estate.
These fixed fees typically relate to the ongoing annual management of the deputyship and the routine responsibilities carried out by professional deputies in administering P’s financial affairs. Where estates exceed the relevant threshold, or where the deputyship order provides authority for assessment, deputies may instead seek detailed assessment through the usual Court of Protection costs process.
The fixed-cost regime applies to deputies appointed by the Court of Protection to manage property and financial affairs when those deputies act in a professional or public-authority capacity. This includes solicitor deputies, trust corporations and local authority deputies acting under court appointment.
Whether fixed costs apply in a particular case depends not only on the nature of the appointment but also on the wording of the deputyship order and the value of P’s estate during the relevant period. Reviewing the order carefully remains essential before deciding whether assessment authority exists.
Following revisions to Practice Direction 19B, professional deputies appointed in property and financial affairs matters, on or after 1 April 2024, will not generally be entitled to seek a detailed assessment where P’s net assets fall below £20,300, unless the court has made a specific order permitting assessment. In these circumstances, deputies are expected to rely on the Court of Protection fixed-fee regime instead.
When determining whether the threshold has been exceeded, the court takes a broad view of what constitutes net assets. These may include:
The approach to calculating net assets was clarified in PennTrust Ltd v West Berkshire District Council & Anor [2023] EWCOP 48, which confirmed that assets not yet in possession may still be relevant when determining whether a detailed assessment is available.
Where estates fall below the threshold, deputies should normally proceed on the basis that fixed costs apply unless the deputyship order expressly preserves authority for assessment.
Where a deputy obtains an assessment of costs without authority to do so, the Office of the Public Guardian expects the deputy to apply to the Court of Protection for retrospective approval to recover costs at the assessed level together with relief from liability arising from the recovery of unauthorised fees.
Such applications should address:
Where a deputy does not make such an application, the Office of the Public Guardian may consider making its own application to discharge the deputy.
Practice Direction 19B confirms that professional deputies may take an annual management fee not exceeding 4.5% of P’s assets on the anniversary of the deputyship order where the estate falls below £20,300.
Where taking fixed costs reduces the estate below the threshold level, deputies should be prepared to explain why the costs remain reasonable and proportionate in light of the size of the estate and the work undertaken. The Office of the Public Guardian continues to expect deputies to demonstrate that costs recovered from smaller estates remain consistent with P’s best interests.
Where P’s estate previously fell between the earlier threshold of £16,000 and the revised threshold of £20,300 prior to 1 April 2024, and interim payments were taken during that period, the Office of the Public Guardian has confirmed these payments are not expected to be refunded. This clarification provides certainty for deputies who relied on earlier threshold guidance during the transition between regimes.
The wording of the deputyship order remains central when determining whether costs may be assessed. In practice, the position is usually as follows:
Because deputyship orders vary significantly in their drafting, interpretation often requires careful case-by-case review.
The updated Office of the Public Guardian guidance reinforces that professional deputy costs must remain proportionate to the size of P’s estate and appropriate to the work undertaken. Where fixed costs reduce the estate below the applicable threshold level, deputies should be prepared to demonstrate why those costs remain justified and consistent with their duties to act in P’s best interests.
This expectation reflects the wider supervisory role of the Office of the Public Guardian and its continued focus on ensuring that remuneration taken by professional deputies remains transparent, reasonable and properly authorised.
The updated guidance means deputies should take a structured approach when determining how costs should be recovered in each matter. In practice, this involves considering several factors together rather than relying on a single threshold test.
Deputies should typically review:
Because many deputyship matters involve transitional scenarios or historic orders drafted under earlier frameworks, careful interpretation is often necessary to ensure compliance with current expectations and to avoid difficulties during OPG supervision or later assessment proceedings.
Understanding whether Court of Protection fixed costs apply, whether a detailed assessment remains available, and how thresholds affect recoverability can be complex, particularly where deputyship orders predate the Practice Direction 19B revisions or estates sit close to the relevant limits.
A&M Bacon regularly supports professional deputies with the interpretation of deputyship costs provisions, the preparation of Court of Protection general management bills, advice on whether fixed costs or assessment apply, and applications for retrospective authority where required. We also provide specialist assistance with provisional assessment proceedings before the Senior Courts Costs Office.
If you would like guidance on how the updated Court of Protection costs framework affects your matters, our specialist Court of Protection costs team would be pleased to assist.
23.05.2026
Need assistance? Let’s have a chat!
