Investigating human rights not take care of himself. The AOB informed the Vienna Social Fund of the aforementioned problems. Thereafter, the Fund – in cooperation with the legal guardian – had the apartment renovated and provided intensified care. According to the final report, the measures taken fully satisfied the affected person. Denial of contact with the family The son of an elderly, financially secure, married couple with a legal guardian, who were cared for in a Vienna home, contacted the AOB. The father was said to need permanent nursing care. The mother, according to the report, could make personal decisions for herself, but the legal guardian was preventing the termination of legal guardianship and contact with the family. The son’s criticism was that “the (grand) mother, who was ambulatory, was being kept in a ward of the home like a prisoner”. Even a short, escorted walk or a visit to the hair dresser or the ice-cream parlour depended on the whim of the legal guardian. Financial matters A sprightly pensioner who had her own savings criticised the fact that her legal guardian had the pensioner’s pocket money dispensed to her by a social worker, whom she had to pay. She has always been capable of making financial decisions and taking care of herself. Now the legal guardian is refusing to let her withdraw her pocket money from the bank or ATM machine herself, which would cost less and spare her having to wait for the social worker. The elderly woman is also angry that she does not receive a statement of account from the legal guardian, since the latter is only obliged to report to the court. By examining her file, the pensioner found out that the legal guardian withdrew 5,000 euros from her account without any plausible reason, which was not use for the affected person, but apparently for the legal guardian herself. A business woman, who – together with her considerably older husband – had built up and managed a successful business for many years, criticised the economically incomprehensible actions of her husband’s legal guardian. He terminated the existing managing directors and was in the process of breaking up the company. A well-operated family business with secure jobs would have been destroyed, and there would be nothing left for the two sons, who were students. A 60-year-old childless widow from Styria complained that the court would not approve the sale of her big house. After her husband’s death and her serious accident, a legal guardian was appointed for her – with whom she was unsatisfied. At her request, her former boss, an ex-CFO and friend of her husband, was then appointed as her legal guardian. He managed her affairs very well. She left the big house and moved into a more comfortable apartment, but now the court is refusing to approve the sale of the house, which constitutes a significant expense burden. The wife of an academic, who was in temporary legal guardianship after a stroke and a hospital stay, complained that the legal guardian and the court 72