A probate judge is a civil court judge who oversees the estates of deceased persons, competency issues, and adoptions in some instances. Learn more about them.
Three judges and six other lawyers, all from London and the Home Counties, are in court after they were arrested over an alleged plot to scam £12.6million from the legal aid system.
It was a gotcha moment that didn’t go so well for an insurance company determined to play hard ball with a mentally ill young woman.
Family sought to have William O’Brien removed from overseeing trust before discovery he diverted money
Recently there was some discussion on a thread on this blog on the topic of what to do about an executor who is stealing from the estate that he or she is supposed to be administering. One of the comments made by a reader seemed to me to be right from the heart - an expression of anger, bitterness, and resignation. I want to share that comment with you here, and give some thoughts of my own about it. Here is what the reader said: "There isn't a damn thing anyone can do about it because the police call it a civil issue and the lawyers are VERY expensive. Basically with my experience Executors can do what ever they want with absolutely NO repercussions in Canada. It is rampant." I agree with the last sentence of this comment, which is that dishonest and greedy executors milking estates are rampant. This is not to say that no executors are honest and none are trying to do a good job. Of course, there are plenty who are doing their best. However, there are executors all over this country who are mishandling assets, making egregious errors that cost the beneficiaries money, and in some cases just outright stealing from the estate. Why is it so rampant, and what can be done about it? There are several factors which together create a perfect storm for a greedy or selfish person to take advantage of an estate. The first factor is the choice of executor. I'm sorry, but at some point, some of you are going to have to ask yourselves why in HELL Mom or Dad put the one sibling in charge who is known to be a bully, or a gambling addict, or greedy. Parents blindly put the oldest child, or the only male child, or the one who lives closest to them on the will as executor without any consideration whatsoever of how that's going to work out. Part of this is a refusal by parents to admit their child's faults, part of it is an unwillingness to insult the kids by getting an independent third party involved, and part of it is that they are trying to do everything as cheaply as possible. If parents would only make more realistic choices for their wills, they wouldn't put their kids through so much stress, anger, frustration, and fighting. Most parents out there should be thinking about naming a trust company as their executor. Yes, I do mean "most" because all of these executors who are stealing from estates are family members, usually the kids. Of course it costs money when the trust company administers the estate, but it costs money even when the kids do it, and giving up 3% to a trust company should be easier to swallow than giving up 75 - 100% to a thief. And if a trust company makes a mistake that costs the estate money, the regulations for banks and trust companies allow for the recovery of the funds. Parents whose estates are extremely modest should consider naming someone such as a longtime family friend, cousin, or longtime business associate to work together with one of the kids as co-executors. Yes, they do have to agree on everything and that's not always easy, but at least you will have built in an extra safeguard. By the way, don't assume that your estate is too modest for a trust company. If you have a house, a car and an RRSP/RRIF, you are in the ballpark. A second major factor that contributes to the ease with which executors ride roughshod over estates is that executors don't know what they are doing and rarely like to hear advice that goes against their preconceived ideas. There is a widespread belief among executors that the will gives them full legal rights to do whatever they want. They move into the deceased's home, give away personal goods to anyone they like, use estate funds to live on for months or years, set up businesses and give loans to their family members with estate funds. By the time a lawyer or a banker straightens out that misconception, the executor feels that he or she has already gotten away with it, and sees no need to change anything. You would also be surprised at how many executors only tell the estate lawyer half the story and don't even divulge the existence of some of the assets. A third factor is that beneficiaries let things get too far before they speak up about something. Many beneficiaries write to me on this blog and tell me that is has been years since the deceased passed away and they've heard nothing. Really, years? By the time the beneficiaries speak up, the estate is drained and the executor has spent the money, and no amount of litigation is going to bring it back. Beneficiaries are too willing to accept anecdotal information from friends or co-workers, or to accept everything the executor says because they think he knows more than they do. This area is the one in which I think individuals can do the most to protect their interest in an estate. Ask for a copy of the will immediately. Insist on progress reports. Ask specific questions about specific assets, such as the selling price of the house. Know your rights. Talk to other beneficiaries, read blogs, see what local legal resource centres or seniors' centres have to say that can inform you. As soon as there is a problem, such as the executor refusing to divulge information to which you are entitled, take action. You have a right to expect the estate to move along efficiently and you should let the executor know you expect that. Acting sooner can make the difference between a one-day court application to have a slow-moving or secretive executor removed, and a ten-week full-blown trial to determine where the money went. Acting sooner is more cost-effective as well as much more likely to catch mistakes or frauds before they engulf the entire estate. When I say to act quickly, I don't mean to say that you should always sue the executor. Other means such as demand letters, mediation, negotiation, case management, or family meetings with an independent third party may bring about the result you want. This brings me to the fourth factor that I want to mention: In our legal system, it costs money to enforce your civil rights. Not all of us have extra cash laying around to hire lawyers, and yes, lawyers are expensive when it comes to lawsuits. Aggressive and greedy executors count on the fact that the beneficiaries may not have the cash to hire a lawyer. Many executors have actually been known to threaten the beneficiaries that if a lawsuit is started, the executor will use the whole estate to fight it. There are other options. The reader's comment that the police will say it's a civil matter is not universally true. I can say this from my own experience with clients who consulted me because the police were investigating them for executor fraud. It is true that the vast majority of estate-related issues are settled through the civil courts using remedies such as removing the executor, requiring passing of accounts, or ordering an executor to forego his executor's compensation. If you want the police to respond to an allegation of theft, you are going to need some evidence to go on. Even within the civil system, some things cost more than others. The most expensive thing you can hire a lawyer to do is sue someone, especially in a complicated case involving a will and the grey areas of executor's responsibility and beneficiaries' rights. This is why you need to see a lawyer with plenty of experience in estate work who will think of other options to try before committing to a draining lawsuit. In conclusion, I certainly feel for the reader who left this comment. Thousands of executors steal from their siblings and it's heart-breaking for each and every one of them. I honestly hope that the blog posts and books I write help parents, executors, and beneficiaries alike make some more informed choices. Would any of you like to add your two bits to the reader's original comment? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
The U.S. Justice Department has filed a denaturalization lawsuit against a Maryland man who authorities say concealed his sexual abuse of a child while he was going through the naturalization process to become a U.S. citizen.
The 82-year-old was jolted to action by bank statements and a Gazette article containing familiar names
The Reno Police Department has arrested Stewart Handte for allegedly helping in the kidnapping of Reno woman, 80, last week. She is still missing.
We blame John Grisham and Law & Order for why so many bafflingly archaic flaws still exist in our laws, courtrooms, and prisons.
If you remember we posted this a few blogs in the past. We are posting this again. Alan Kauffman claimed he did not know where this Estate was and he had no standing to remove any money from this estate. The Will of Albert Robert Miller stated that if Elizabeth (Lakie) Miller became incapacitated then Legg Mason has to go to court and appoint a new Trustee. Loretta Miller was willed in her husband's Will to be the trustee of this estate since there was a in AR Miller's Will clause no 11 stating a Trusteeship can be willed by a trustee. Loretta Miller was the lawful Trustee. But Charles Shuman the wealth manager of this estate hated Loretta Miller because she removed him from her account and moved her account out of Legg Mason to Alex Brown. In 2003 Jordan Miller after moving to Florida transferred as the Trustee of AR Millers Trust to a Legg Mason office in Palm Beach Florida. The Account Manager was Roy Apple and Roy looked at a this account and adjusted which increased the earnings by $200,000.00. When Lakie came out of the Menorah House Susan King took over the Albert Robert Miller Trust ( her name and address was found on one of the documents and well as orders to pay her with copies of the checks) and schemed with Charles Shuman in opening the Living Lakie Trust Account with the Marital Trust of over 1 1/2 million dollars and Elizabeth in her Wachovia Bank Checking Account dissolved 5 account that was high yielding , stuck over $800,000.00 into a checking account. Elizabeth held the money there for 1 year and then placed it into the Living Lakie Trust. In 2004 after she was Baker Acted Elizabeth got rid of Susan King and hired Frank Pilotti. With Frank Pilotti's help she bought a Condo in Broward County at the Century Village over paid for this Condo and moved there. This purchase was done with AR Miller Trust account not the Living Lakie Account. She decided to place the condo into the name of the Living Lakie Trust without any regard to the fact the money came from the AR Miller Trust and the fact she bought it after she was Baker Acted and declared incapacitated by Saint Mary's Hospital . Elizabeth needed to get out of Palm Beach County since her Baker Acting in her mind would follow her. She told the Hospital she was never institutionalized but her daughter in law was and had electric shock treatments. They did not believe her. According to the court orders she was assigned to the Florida NeuroPsychiatric Institute in Broward County Florida for treatment and medication adjustment for her schizophrenia, bipolar and dementia along with parinoidia. Elizabeth had visited the Festival Market Place where Marcus and Loretta had a business and would stop there to talk to them. Loretta ordered shoes for Elizabeth, did not charge her and suddenly Elizabeth was accusing Loretta again of stealing her money with the Condo in West Palm Beach at the Century Village that had both their names on the deed. Loretta knew Elizabeth was not living there and Elizabeth refused to give her the keys. Elizabeth was allowing Charles Shuman to use it and others. Alan Kauffman and Charles Shuman together hid the account. Charles Shuman left Legg Mason and the account fell onto a computer that spit out a $8,000 check a month going directly into an account Alan Kauffman was in control of . No bills just word of month between Shuman and Alan Kauffman and with Alan Kauffman in control the AR Miller Trust that became online account access with no watch dog. Stealing each month from the AR Miller Estate and placing it in the Lakie Living trust. When Elizabeth died he Randy Schlanger and John Shrills became the owners of money's stolen from the Albert Robert Miller estate and divided it up amongst themselves. The reason why Charles Shuman hated Loretta was that Charles Shuman was giving information of the movement of Loretta's , Jordan's both joint and singular and Marcus' account and money along with stock purchases to Elizabeth Miller which was none of her business and that was unethical. Loretta Miller, Jordan had jointly and as custodians for Marcus, filed a complaint against Charles Shuman and a call from Shuman was received that he was going to kill her for that. Charles Shuman was acting illegally in this action below. Many complaints were written to the SEC both Federal and State and nothing was done. Pennsylvania Law pertaining to Wills, Estates, Foundations must go to Orphan's Court to appoint a Trustee. Alan Kauffman self appointed himself and when it was brought up in Family Court to Magistrate Rita Berry she claimed that Florida courts have nothing to do with Pennsylvania or Pennsylvania Laws, So according to Florida Laws anyone can steal from another state. If this is the case. OJ should have never been arrested. Court order to stop sending any account information to Alan Kauffman because he has no standing. .According to the hospital records at Delray Beach Hospital it stated that Elizabeth Miller had dementia when she was in the hospital November 7 2006 Plus she was on narcotics. There was a video taken paid by the AR Miller Trust therefore the video belongs to the AR Miller Trust. This video was suppose to demonstrate she had capacity when she signed these papers to protect her and her attorney. The Video is a public record if he stated it was used for capacity. If Elizabeth had her capacity he would have blasted that video in all the courtrooms we brought him into. But Kauffman didn't . Meaning it showed she was incapacitated. Kauffman refused to show the video stating it would embarrass her. If she had her capacity she would not be embarrassed in fact if she was incapacitated she would not know the difference. Kauffman tried to use everything in the book to stop us from seeing this video but it was obtained and I will put this video on later as soon as we place it on Youtube and Vimeo for educational purposes. Her capacity showed she had dementia (I am putting it nicely) and she was coached what to say and for her test. Randy Schlanger coached her. There is no where in this living will that states Elizabeth is not to be taken to the hospital or the police is not to be called if she dies in the home. Normal routine at Homewood is to call the ENT's if the person is in distress or the Sheriff if the person dies. This way the home is not held responsible for any foul play. But the Sheriff was not called nor she was taken to the hospital. She died not in the home. She was removed in August 2009 and brought somewhere. We have witness's that she was brought to Randy Schlangers home and there are witness's that a body was removed on November 22, 2009 from Randy Schlangers home Please note the signature of Holly Alter. She became Alan Kauffman's wife right after the death of Elizabeth (Lakie) Miller.That is public record, She just recently divorced him right after he thought the estate in Philadelphia was settled, The Money was settled the body of Elizabeth Lakie Miller was exhumed. Once the body is buried in a family plot it becomes the property of the family.
The WOLF AT THE DOOR is a compact and comprehensive reference for identifying and fighting back against elder financial abuse. The book's author, Michael Hackard, is a California attorney who has practiced for forty years. Includes an index and six pages of endnotes with URLs. | Author: Michael Hackard | Publisher: Hackard Global Media, LLC | Publication Date: September 29, 2017 | Number of Pages: 166 pages | Language: English | Binding: Paperback | ISBN-10: 099914460X | ISBN-13: 9780999144602
An Ontario Liberal candidate was once reprimanded for professional misconduct after her staff were found to have engaged in “misleading, harassing, and threatening" conduct.
Recently there was some discussion on a thread on this blog on the topic of what to do about an executor who is stealing from the estate that he or she is supposed to be administering. One of the comments made by a reader seemed to me to be right from the heart - an expression of anger, bitterness, and resignation. I want to share that comment with you here, and give some thoughts of my own about it. Here is what the reader said: "There isn't a damn thing anyone can do about it because the police call it a civil issue and the lawyers are VERY expensive. Basically with my experience Executors can do what ever they want with absolutely NO repercussions in Canada. It is rampant." I agree with the last sentence of this comment, which is that dishonest and greedy executors milking estates are rampant. This is not to say that no executors are honest and none are trying to do a good job. Of course, there are plenty who are doing their best. However, there are executors all over this country who are mishandling assets, making egregious errors that cost the beneficiaries money, and in some cases just outright stealing from the estate. Why is it so rampant, and what can be done about it? There are several factors which together create a perfect storm for a greedy or selfish person to take advantage of an estate. The first factor is the choice of executor. I'm sorry, but at some point, some of you are going to have to ask yourselves why in HELL Mom or Dad put the one sibling in charge who is known to be a bully, or a gambling addict, or greedy. Parents blindly put the oldest child, or the only male child, or the one who lives closest to them on the will as executor without any consideration whatsoever of how that's going to work out. Part of this is a refusal by parents to admit their child's faults, part of it is an unwillingness to insult the kids by getting an independent third party involved, and part of it is that they are trying to do everything as cheaply as possible. If parents would only make more realistic choices for their wills, they wouldn't put their kids through so much stress, anger, frustration, and fighting. Most parents out there should be thinking about naming a trust company as their executor. Yes, I do mean "most" because all of these executors who are stealing from estates are family members, usually the kids. Of course it costs money when the trust company administers the estate, but it costs money even when the kids do it, and giving up 3% to a trust company should be easier to swallow than giving up 75 - 100% to a thief. And if a trust company makes a mistake that costs the estate money, the regulations for banks and trust companies allow for the recovery of the funds. Parents whose estates are extremely modest should consider naming someone such as a longtime family friend, cousin, or longtime business associate to work together with one of the kids as co-executors. Yes, they do have to agree on everything and that's not always easy, but at least you will have built in an extra safeguard. By the way, don't assume that your estate is too modest for a trust company. If you have a house, a car and an RRSP/RRIF, you are in the ballpark. A second major factor that contributes to the ease with which executors ride roughshod over estates is that executors don't know what they are doing and rarely like to hear advice that goes against their preconceived ideas. There is a widespread belief among executors that the will gives them full legal rights to do whatever they want. They move into the deceased's home, give away personal goods to anyone they like, use estate funds to live on for months or years, set up businesses and give loans to their family members with estate funds. By the time a lawyer or a banker straightens out that misconception, the executor feels that he or she has already gotten away with it, and sees no need to change anything. You would also be surprised at how many executors only tell the estate lawyer half the story and don't even divulge the existence of some of the assets. A third factor is that beneficiaries let things get too far before they speak up about something. Many beneficiaries write to me on this blog and tell me that is has been years since the deceased passed away and they've heard nothing. Really, years? By the time the beneficiaries speak up, the estate is drained and the executor has spent the money, and no amount of litigation is going to bring it back. Beneficiaries are too willing to accept anecdotal information from friends or co-workers, or to accept everything the executor says because they think he knows more than they do. This area is the one in which I think individuals can do the most to protect their interest in an estate. Ask for a copy of the will immediately. Insist on progress reports. Ask specific questions about specific assets, such as the selling price of the house. Know your rights. Talk to other beneficiaries, read blogs, see what local legal resource centres or seniors' centres have to say that can inform you. As soon as there is a problem, such as the executor refusing to divulge information to which you are entitled, take action. You have a right to expect the estate to move along efficiently and you should let the executor know you expect that. Acting sooner can make the difference between a one-day court application to have a slow-moving or secretive executor removed, and a ten-week full-blown trial to determine where the money went. Acting sooner is more cost-effective as well as much more likely to catch mistakes or frauds before they engulf the entire estate. When I say to act quickly, I don't mean to say that you should always sue the executor. Other means such as demand letters, mediation, negotiation, case management, or family meetings with an independent third party may bring about the result you want. This brings me to the fourth factor that I want to mention: In our legal system, it costs money to enforce your civil rights. Not all of us have extra cash laying around to hire lawyers, and yes, lawyers are expensive when it comes to lawsuits. Aggressive and greedy executors count on the fact that the beneficiaries may not have the cash to hire a lawyer. Many executors have actually been known to threaten the beneficiaries that if a lawsuit is started, the executor will use the whole estate to fight it. There are other options. The reader's comment that the police will say it's a civil matter is not universally true. I can say this from my own experience with clients who consulted me because the police were investigating them for executor fraud. It is true that the vast majority of estate-related issues are settled through the civil courts using remedies such as removing the executor, requiring passing of accounts, or ordering an executor to forego his executor's compensation. If you want the police to respond to an allegation of theft, you are going to need some evidence to go on. Even within the civil system, some things cost more than others. The most expensive thing you can hire a lawyer to do is sue someone, especially in a complicated case involving a will and the grey areas of executor's responsibility and beneficiaries' rights. This is why you need to see a lawyer with plenty of experience in estate work who will think of other options to try before committing to a draining lawsuit. In conclusion, I certainly feel for the reader who left this comment. Thousands of executors steal from their siblings and it's heart-breaking for each and every one of them. I honestly hope that the blog posts and books I write help parents, executors, and beneficiaries alike make some more informed choices. Would any of you like to add your two bits to the reader's original comment? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
