Bielski Law Office, Ltd.

An Odd and Bitter UK Estate Battle

An estate battle in the United Kingdom pits four large charities against the son of a 95-year-old Alzheimer’s patient whom the charities accuse of fraudulently creating a new will for another woman.

In an interesting estate battle in the United Kingdom, two facts are not disputed. First, in 1982 Dorothy Whelan executed a will that would have left her £1.6 million estate, including her Greater London area home, to four charities. Second, a new will was created in 1999 that revoked the earlier will and instead left the estate, including the home, to Hazel Turner.

When Whelan passed away in 2012, the charities sued Turner claiming she created the second will fraudulently. She is now 95-years-old and incapacitated due to Alzheimer’s, so her son is fighting the battle on her behalf.

The Turner side of the story is that Whelan and Turner were childhood friends and continued that friendship until Whelan passed away. According to this side, the 1982 will reflected the wishes of Whelan’s husband with whom she created mirror wills.

The husband wanted to support the charities, but when he passed away in 1989 Mrs. Whelan changed her mind and wanted to take care of her friend.

The charities, on the other hand, claim that the 1999 will was created under suspicious circumstances. They claim that Whelan may not have been competent at the time. The charities also claim that the alleged witnesses to the 1999 will have no recollection of seeing Whelan and that they thought they were witnessing a will for Mrs. Turner.

The Daily Mail has more on this story in “Charities in court battle with son of frail 95-year-old who 'tricked friend into signing over her £1.6million fortune in will'.”

A court has taken this case under advisement and will issue a ruling in the future. It is undoubtedly a difficult decision as Mrs. Turner is unable to defend herself and tell her side of what happened in 1999.

Reference: Daily Mail (Nov. 10, 2015) “Charities in court battle with son of frail 95-year-old who 'tricked friend into signing over her £1.6million fortune in will'.”

Another Reason to Avoid Probate

Judges are supposed to be impartial and not allow any personal issues to get in the way with the fair administration of justice. One probate judge in Maine illustrates that is not always what actually happens.

York County Probate Judge Robert M.A. Nadeau wanted a substantial raise. In Maine the salaries of elected probate judges are set by the local county commissioners. Judge Nadeau was working two days a week for an annual salary of $48,499.

He requested that he be given a three-day workweek for a salary of $90,000 or a four-day workweek for a salary of $120,000.

The county commission refused his request but did give him a raise to $54,206 and kept his schedule at two days per week.

This did not please the judge.

He almost immediately changed his schedule from working Wednesdays and Thursdays to working Mondays and Fridays so he could receive more paid holidays off. He also blocked out large portions of his time during those workdays for duties that did not include hearing cases.

The result was that probate cases in his court nearly ground to a halt.

At the same time, Judge Nadeau is facing possible disciplinary action by the state’s supreme court for other possible improper behavior. This is not the first time that Judge Nadeau has been charged with acting improperly.

You can read more about this in the Portland Press Herald’s original story “Judge denied big pay raise retaliated by causing backlog, York County officials say.”

This is obviously an extreme case. Most judges do not engage in this type of petty retaliation for not getting their way. However, it is important to note that all judges are human beings who do bring their own personal issues with them, even though they try to suppress those issues when ruling on a case before them.

Usually, you can avoid this problem for your estate by creating an estate plan that avoids probate entirely. Why take the risk that your estate will get the wrong judge when you can easily avoid it?

Consult an estate planning attorney to learn more.

Reference: Portland Press Herald (Nov. 9, 2015) “Judge denied big pay raise retaliated by causing backlog, York County officials say.”

The Importance of Digital Asset Planning and Organization

If you have ever forgotten a password to a digital account, then you know how difficult it can sometimes be to retrieve it. It might require remembering how you answered a security question like “Who was your favorite teacher growing up?” Remembering how you quickly answered that question several years in the past can be difficult. It is even more difficult, if not impossible, for an estate executor.

As more and more of our vocational, financial and personal business is done digitally it becomes increasingly difficult for our heirs to sort out our affairs after we pass away. As the New York Times points out in “Plan Your Digital Legacy, and Update Often,” executors and heirs can no longer simply walk through our homes and see what property we own.

Instead much of our property can now be stored digitally, including pictures, movies, music and even valuable domain names. We might also own digital currency and conduct our business and financial affairs online.

For executors and heirs to have access to these digital items, they often need to know where to look for them and what the passwords are to access them.

The best way around this dilemma is to plan ahead and to organize your digital assets in a way that makes them easy to access after you pass away. You can create a list of all the accounts you own and use a password manager to store the passwords.

The master password can then be stored in a safe or with an attorney (or both) so it can be made available to your estate’s executor. You can also use online storage services to make important files, such as family photos and movies, easy to access after you pass away.

Digital estate planning is still in its infancy, but it is important to talk with your estate planning attorney about making your digital assets part of your larger estate plan.

Reference: New York Times (Nov. 11, 2015) “Plan Your Digital Legacy, and Update Often”

Single Estate Planning

People who have never been married often face more difficult estate planning decisions than people with families.

For married people, the basics of who gets what after they pass away is usually fairly obvious. Most married people want the bulk of their estates to go to their spouses, children and grandchildren.

Similarly, most married people will grant a spouse or child the authority to act as a medical power of attorney and a general durable power of attorney. However, as the New York Times points out in “Estate Planning for the Never-Married” these decisions are not as obvious for people who have never been married and who have never had children, especially if they live far away from their closest relatives.

Deciding who gets what property after a single person passes away is a matter of understanding the laws of intestacy. If a single person passes away without an estate plan, then those laws dictate that the closest surviving relatives will inherit.

Normally, that means parents and siblings will receive the estate, but if none of them is still alive then the law can get complicated. For this reason single people will want to have estate plans so they can choose who gets what after they pass away.

Granting someone power of attorney in the event of incapacitation can be more difficult. Most people would prefer to appoint family members. However, if no family lives nearby, then often a trusted friend or partner might need to be appointed.

As our friends and partners often change over time single people usually need to change their choices every few years.

If you have never been married, visit with an estate planning attorney about getting the right kind of estate plan for you.

Reference: New York Times (Nov. 11, 2015) “Estate Planning for the Never-Married”

Have a Favorite Charity? Consider an Endowment

It is not easy for nonprofit organizations to secure new funding sources every year. When a regular donor passes away, the organization is often left with a desperate need to replace the funding. If you want to avoid this happening to your favorite charity, you can leave an endowment in your estate plan for a lot less money than you probably think.

Charities are always grateful and pleased to receive large one-time donations, or even small one-time donations. However, what really keeps most charities solvent are the annual donations they receive from regular donors.

It is these donations that allow a charity to plan ahead and budget.

When those regular donors pass away the charity has to replace them, which is not always easy to do quickly. One way to avoid this problem for charities that you support is to leave an endowment for them in your estate plan.

As the Statesman Journal points out in “Today’s nonprofits need forever friends,” you do not need to leave millions in an endowment to make a difference.

If you annually contribute $100 to a nonprofit organization, then leaving $2,000 in an endowment is enough for that level of annual giving to continue in perpetuity. That ratio holds up no matter how much you give annually. An endowment of 20 times an annual gift should allow for the same contribution annually long after you pass away.

Many nonprofits have endowment funds to which you can contribute. For those that do not, you will want experienced help to create one.

Consult with an estate planning attorney if you would like to consider leaving a charitable endowment.

Reference: Statesman Journal (Nov. 13, 2015) “Today’s nonprofits need forever friends”

Declaring Lord Lucan Completely Dead

In the United Kingdom Lord Lucan was officially declared dead by High Court order in 1999. However, that does not mean that he is considered legally dead for all purposes.

In 1974 a nanny in the employ of the 7^th Earl of Lucan was found murdered at the Earl's home. His wife was found severely beaten as well. The Lord's car was found bloodstained and abandoned.

The Lord has never been found. He was convicted of the murder and has been a fugitive ever since.

Over the years there have been numerous reported sightings. In 1999 the High Court declared Lord Lucan officially dead. However, reminiscent of the famous scene in The Princess Bride that ruling only makes Lord Lucan mostly dead.

The court's declaration allowed property to go to heirs and let his family get on with their lives.

However, it did not allow for Lord Lucan's son to inherit the title and become the 8^th Earl of Lucan.

The Mirror reports in "Lord Lucan death certificate bid faces last minute legal challenge from son of murdered nanny" that the son has submitted an application to have his father declared "presumed dead," which would allow him to inherit the title of nobility.

As the headline suggests the nanny's son is asking that Lord Lucan not be declared presumed dead.

In the United States, we do not have to deal with titles of inheritance and the estate headaches that they can bring. On the other hand, we do sometimes have to deal with missing persons and when they can be declared deceased for other estate purposes.

If you have a relative who has been missing for a long time, you might want to speak to an attorney to see when you can and should apply to have him or her declared deceased.

Reference: Mirror (Nov. 7, 2015) "Lord Lucan death certificate bid faces last minute legal challenge from son of murdered nanny"

Preventing Long Term Care Policy Lapses

Long term care in a nursing home is extremely expensive. One way to mitigate that expense is to purchase a long term care insurance policy. Unfortunately, many of the people most in need of long term care insurance let their policies lapse before they need them.

Planning for end-of-life medical care often goes hand-in-hand with estate planning. An estate plan is useless if nursing home costs eat up all of your savings as there will be no assets left for your heirs to inherit through the estate plan.

For this reason it is important to decide how you will pay for nursing home care should you ever need it.

Long term care insurance policies are a popular and effective solution. However, more than a third of the people who purchase long term care policies let them lapse before they need them to pay for nursing home expenses.

Most of the time people do not intentionally let the policies lapse. Instead, they simply forget to pay the premiums.

This may not happen out of ordinary forgetfulness but may happen because as we age we often start to suffer from cognitive impairments.

Unfortunately, the people who suffer from the cognitive impairments that would make them forget to pay the insurance premiums are the very same people who are most likely to need long term care in a nursing home.

Next Avenue reported on this problem in "How Long-Term Care Insurance Policies Backfire."

The article does point out a potential solution to this problem. It is possible to have the insurance policy statements sent to a trusted third party who can make sure that the premiums are paid.

However, if this is going to work as an anti-lapse strategy, it needs to be done when the policy is first purchased rather than risking forgetfulness later in life.

Reference: Next Avenue (Nov. 6, 2015) "How Long-Term Care Insurance Policies Backfire."

Leaving an Intellectual Inheritance

Most people who amass wealth do not do it so that their heirs can squander it. However, that is what happens in most cases. One way to help prevent this from happening to your wealth is to leave your family with an intellectual inheritance.

In "Preparing for Inheritance: How to Avoid Losing It All," Barron's points out that 70% of a family's wealth is lost in the second generation and 90% of the wealth is lost in the third generation after an initial inheritance.

What typically happens is that the first generation works hard to amass wealth and the second generation lives off the wealth instead of working hard to make more. The third generation continues where the second left off until nothing is left of the original fortune.

Of course, this is not true for all families.

Some wealthy families continue to amass wealth generation after generation. The article points out how this occurs: the families that continue to thrive leave an "intellectual inheritance" for heirs.

Consequently, they educate their heirs about the family's legacy and values. They have conversations with their heirs about how the wealth was generated and why it is so important that it be maintained through continued hard work.

Think about this when you are creating your own estate plan.

It is not enough to have an airtight estate plan drawn up by a professional. If you really want that estate plan to be a legacy for future generations of your family, then educate your heirs and also leave them an intellectual inheritance.

Reference: Barron's (Nov. 7, 2015) "Preparing for Inheritance: How to Avoid Losing It All"

What Did the Scaife Trustees Know?

The contentious battle over the trust of the late Richard Mellon Scaife has taken an interesting turn as new court filings make it appear that at least one of the three trustees may have suspected the trust was being mismanaged.

Richard Mellon Scaife's mother created a multi-million dollar trust for his benefit. When he passed away, the remainder of the trust was then supposed to pass to his children. However, instead of receiving a windfall the children received nothing because when Scaife passed away there was nothing left in the trust.

Scaife had apparently drained the trust of all of its assets to prop up his failing newspaper. His children are suing the trustees on the basis that they should not have allowed Scaife to drain the trust for that unintended purpose.

As the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports in "Scaife children say they were kept in dark about trust as it was drained," it appears that one of the trustees, PNC Bank, was aware that there was a potential issue with the way the trust was being administered.

It further appears that, in conversations with its legal advisors, PNC was wondering if Scaife's requests were proper and, if not proper, how the bank could protect itself from potential liability for accommodating them. The children claim that they were never informed.

While this case is still in its infancy, these revelations do not bode well for the trustees. If they knew that the trust was not supposed to be completely emptied by Scaife, then the trustees had a duty to say "no" to his requests. If they failed in that duty, then they can be held liable for that failure.

Reference: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Nov. 6, 2015) "Scaife children say they were kept in dark about trust as it was drained"

How Probate Can Get Expensive

There are many reasons to want to avoid probate for your estate. One of them is that probate can get very expensive. One doctor's bill in a case in New Hampshire illustrates just how expensive.

The story of Geraldine Webber's estate has been followed closely on estate planning blogs. The basics are that Webber was an elderly woman who met an on-duty police officer named Aaron Goodwin. Although Goodwin had a wife and children and was much younger than Webber, it appears that she became enamored with him.

She rewrote her will to leave Goodwin a $2 million inheritance.

The will was challenged by a group of Webber's friends, two hospitals, a city and a school on the basis that Goodwin had unduly influenced and taken advantage of her. The challengers won the case.

However, as Seacoast Online reports in "Doc charged $70K for losing testimony in cop's inheritance case," testimony from one witness came at a steep cost for the estate.

A doctor, who was hired by the estate to serve as an expert witness, concluded that Webber was competent and not suffering from dementia at the time she signed the will.

The doctor, who reached his conclusion by reviewing medical records and visiting Webber's home, had never met her. For his services to the losing case he is asking to be paid $70,120 by the estate. A judge will have to approve the amount.

That is how probate can get so expensive.

The testimony of one expert witness for the losing side can cost $70,000. Imagine if there had been other expert witnesses and not just the one.

Of course, while the judge may not approve the bill for the amount asked, the doctor will certainly receive a substantial amount from the estate.

Reference: Seacoast Online (Nov. 4, 2015) "Doc charged $70K for losing testimony in cop's inheritance case,"