The family guardian does not receive any remuneration in the strict sense of the term. The professional guardian, on the other hand, is funded according to a regulatory scale indexed to the resources of the protected person. Between these two regimes, there are many gray areas, and the texts leave more leeway than one might think.
Funding scale for the judicial representative for the protection of adults
The remuneration of the professional representative follows a public scale, not a traditional salary grid. The funding depends on the type of measure (guardianship, curatorship, judicial protection), the living situation of the protected person (home or institution), and especially their resources. We observe that this logic of administrative service is often confused with a salary, including by families who contest the deductions from the accounts of the protected adult.
See also : Everything You Need to Know About Article 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Its Implications
The judicial representative for the protection of adults (MJPM) can operate under three distinct statuses: employee of a guardianship association, agent of a public institution, or independent. In each case, the method of calculating their remuneration differs. The independent professional bills directly according to the scale; the association employee receives a salary from their employer, which is funded through allocations and contributions from the protected persons.
The question of the remuneration of a family or professional guardian deserves to be raised by clearly distinguishing these two regimes, as the accounting obligations and recourse are not the same.
See also : Everything You Need to Know About Calories and Nutritional Value of Pepe Chicken
The deduction from the resources of the protected person is capped. Beyond a certain income threshold, the state or department covers part of the cost through public funding. This mechanism makes the actual cost highly variable from one case to another.
Free service of the family guardian: principle and concrete exceptions
French law establishes a clear principle: the family guardian performs their mission free of charge. However, Article 419 of the civil code provides for exceptions that public articles rarely mention in detail.
First exception: the guardianship judge may authorize the reimbursement of expenses actually incurred by the family guardian in the exercise of their mission. Travel expenses, registered mail, banking management fees incurred on behalf of the protected adult – these expenses can be charged to the assets of the protected person, upon justification.
Second exception: when the complexity of the assets or the workload justifies it, the judge may grant compensation to the family guardian. This compensation remains exceptional and is subject to case-by-case assessment. We recommend documenting precisely the time spent and the steps taken before any request, as the judge expects tangible elements.
Partial delegation to a professional
The family guardian may also request the judge to appoint an MJPM for certain complex asset management acts (real estate sale, portfolio management). In this case, the professional is compensated according to the legal scale for the delegated acts, while the family guardian retains the day-to-day management without remuneration.
Actual costs of guardianship beyond the guardian
Reducing the cost of guardianship to just the remuneration of the guardian would be a mistake. Several expense items add up and weigh on the resources of the protected adult:
- The detailed medical certificate, required to open or renew the measure, remains the responsibility of the protected person. It is not reimbursed by the CPAM. If the expert doctor visits the home, additional fees apply.
- Judicial procedure costs: attorney fees if the adult or their family contests a decision, notary fees for asset operations subject to the judge’s authorization.
- Any civil liability insurance taken out by the family guardian to cover their mission, the cost of which is often underestimated.
Legal aid does not cover the detailed medical certificate. This point regularly causes misunderstandings when the protected adult has low resources.
Medical opinion on non-maintenance at home
When the protected person must leave their home to enter an institution (such as a nursing home), a specific medical opinion is required. This cost adds to the regular expenses of the measure.
Employee professional guardian: salary grid and collective agreement
The employee professional guardian of a guardianship association generally falls under the national collective agreement of 1966 (CCN66) or the collective agreement for establishments and services for people with disabilities. Their remuneration depends on their seniority, qualifications, and the applicable index grid, not directly on the number of measures managed.
A novice MJPM is situated in the lower levels of the “qualified technician” or “specialized educator” grid according to the associations. Salary progression follows the conventional seniority, with predefined thresholds. Bonuses are rare in this sector, and the workload per measure tends to increase due to the shortage of professionals.
The independent representative, on the other hand, does not have a fixed salary. Their income fluctuates according to the number and complexity of the measures entrusted by the guardianship judge. After deducting social charges and operating expenses (professional insurance, travel, management software), the net income can be significantly lower than that of an association employee for a comparable workload.
Judicial control of remuneration and family recourse
The guardianship judge retains control over the remuneration of the professional representative and any compensation for the family guardian. Any dispute over the amount deducted from the resources of the protected adult must go through a request to the judge.
Families have several levers:
- Request the chief clerk to verify the annual management accounts, which detail the deductions made by the professional representative.
- Appeal to the guardianship judge if the billed amount seems disproportionate compared to the acts actually performed.
- Request the replacement of the professional representative with a family guardian, which eliminates the financial burden related to the scale, at the cost of a heavier personal investment.
The transition from a professional representative to a family guardian is the most direct lever to reduce the cost of a protection measure. The judge grants it when the family demonstrates its ability to assume the mission in the interest of the protected adult.
The increasing workload of professional representatives, partly linked to the difficulty of finding available family guardians, makes these remuneration questions more frequent before the courts. For the families involved, mastering the regulatory framework remains the best negotiation tool in the face of the costs of a legal protection measure.