Concerning the chief guardian’s audit of annual accounts from legal guardians. Also criticism of the City of Stockholm’s Chief Guardian Committee for delays in this regard

Summary of the decision: In this case, the Parliamentary Ombudsman has investigated the general method applied by the City of Stockholm’s Chief Guardian Committee to auditing legal guardians’ annual accounts. The Parliamentary Ombudsman underlines that auditing annual accounts is an important part of the chief guardian’s work to ensure that the client’s assets are used correctly and appropriately. Among other things, she points out that a thorough audit must include an assessment of whether the reported items are reasonable and whether the expenses incurred actually relate to the individual and whether they are for their benefit. The Parliamentary Ombudsman also notes that vigilance is called for so that irregularities do not occur, and underlines that high demands must be placed on the chief guardian’s supervisory activities. While the Parliamentary Ombudsman understands that in certain cases a more general audit may be permissible, she emphasises that a working method involving an initial general reconciliation and audit must not mean that only the formalities of the annual accounts are checked.

In the case reported to the Parliamentary Ombudsmen, it took just under a year for the committee to complete its audit of the annual accounts and decide on the legal guardian’s fee. The committee is criticised for its slow processing time.