I have met him once, and we got on well. However, he has been a long-standing adviser to my Brother-in-Law, and he is not a trustee. He has made his opinion on the lack of trustee meetings clear. So, whilst I can contact him, I am loath to open a private conversation without understanding the legal context of my actions.
I do know (because I asked him) that the Financial Adviser's services are free of charge, in respect of my mother's investments. His firm is remunerated simply out of commission on sale of investments. Whilst this has cost advantages to my Mother, I suspect it means that the Adviser will not initiate evaluations of investment bond performance. If this were done, it we might ensure that my mother's monthly income is drawn, were possible, from those bonds that are historic under-performers. I doubt that my brother-in-Law is so minded, but I dont know.
So far as I can perceive, when my Mother's income from investments was reduced, due to a change in living arrangements, it was the Financial Adviser who instructed the relevant funds to reduce monthly payments to my mothers bank account. If this is the sole way in which my mother's investments are handled, then it is a wise one; but I dont know.
Finally, my personal position is NOT one of seeking to control (ie be in charge; boss) other Trustees and Trust business. I simply see my mother's wealth (in Trust or otherwise) becoming more vulnerable under the effective control of a single person. I hope there is a nice way of sorting this out, as we do meet and spend time together, very politely and sometimes more!