Tag Archives: Probate

Now what? (Part II)

In the last post, I raised some issues regarding most people’s approach to marriage.  I touched on aspects of marriage that significantly impact both spouses’ lives and yet most people feel it is taboo to even discuss nuptial or cohabitation agreements.  In this post, I will raise issues stemming from divorce.  Specifically, how divorce impacts a newly-single person’s estate plan.  Please note that the following assumes the following facts: the marriage was for over 5 years, there are young children from the marriage, and there were some assets divided between the ex-spouses, and the ex-spouses are both currently employed.

(Part I can be found here.)

Divorce: So you’re newly divorced.  Congratulations! That must have been a strange, emotional journey.  But, alas, you’ve made it to the other side–granted, a helluva lot poorer–but you’ve made it nonetheless.  What’s even more important is that your minor children can move on with life and just be a kid again.

There are few issues, though, that are imperative to address before you get too happy over in divorceville.  Mainly, now that you are single, did you make sure to cover all your bases with respect to your “new” estate plan?  What I mean is that you don’t have a wife anymore, but you still have children.  If you were to keel over and die right this second, what would happen to your 401(k), stocks, savings, car, house, etc.? Did you think that they would go directly to your children?

Yes and no.  I guess the first question is, “Do you have a will?”

No will: Anytime someone dies without a will, his/her property is distributed to heirs as determined by what’s called an “intestacy statute.” By default, in California, a dead person’s property first goes to a surviving spouse.  You got rid of that person.  Next, it goes to one’s surviving children.  Bingo! That’s what you wanted, right? Almost.  Children under 18 years of age cannot hold property.  Therefore, all that property going to a minor is frozen by the court, and promptly released to that child upon turning 18 years of age.  That’s bad in two respects.  One, the property is frozen (i.e., no one can do anything with it, including investing it).  Two, an 18 year old will come into a whole lotta cash when he/she is way too young to do smart things with it.  That’s bad all around.

Will: Phew! Ok, so you at least have a will in place.  Well, if that will provides for a minor taking property, see above.

On a similar note, imagine if you listed your ex-spouse as a beneficiary to those things that do not pass through your estate when you die (e.g., 401(k), pension, life insurance, etc.).  Without changing that beneficiary to someone else, that ex-spouse you took your time and money to get rid of is now the proud beneficiary of all of those assets!

If you were thinking, “Ah, who cares? It all goes to my kids someday anyway.”  That’s a bit short-sighted.  What if your ex-spouse re-marries with someone who has children from a previous relationship?  Well, all of those assets that just passed to your ex-spouse upon your death may end up going to someone else’s children! The bottom line is that now is the time to declare what you want done.  Once you’ve died, well… “speak now or forever hold your peace.”  I’m sure you remember that one from your wedding day.

So what’s the solution, then?

First, upon final judgment of divorce, notwithstanding what was decided during the divorce, a newly-single person should review all of his/her beneficiary designations, all insurance policies, all deeds, and all forms of title.  Make sure it’s consistent with your divorce and with your wishes.  Second, think about seeing an estate planning attorney to discuss appropriate estate plans for you now that you are single, have minor children, and want to make sure your wishes are carried out post-death.  One way is by way of a trust, where someone else holds property for the benefit of your minor children.  Maybe just a thorough will suffices.

The bottom line is that you are a newly single individual charged with the task of caring for minors.  Single parents do this all the time.  They try their best to get by.  However, you’re different.  You used to be married.  You’re used to a certain lifestyle.  You’ve accumulated quite a bit of assets, and debts, that are now crudely divided.  You worked hard to get through your divorce.  Death is another form of divorce, where life leaves your body and takes all of your property with it.  Don’t leave it up to chance.


Sowing the Seeds of Law

Preface: Probate attorneys fees are set by statute.  A lawyer’s fees in probate are not necessarily increased or decreased by more involvement with the realtor selection process.

Under ethical rules promulgated by California, lawyers must refrain from making contact with a person represented by a lawyer.  The lawyer may only communicate with that person’s legal representative.  This is to ensure that one lawyer does not undermine the relationship between attorney and client and to also keep the dialogue between lawyers, as opposed to splintered discussions between lawyers, parties, and lawyers with the parties themselves.  However, this ethical rule is, as far as I know, unique to the legal profession.  Accountants may speak to anyone else, even if that person has an accountant.  Doctors may speak to any else, even if that person is the patient of another doctor.

It may seem ridiculous to limit accountant or doctor communications, but there are a few circumstances where I think people would benefit from limited communication from certain professionals.  One of those circumstances is within the probate realm.  As an estate goes through probate, the assets are inventoried and oftentimes sold so that the assets can become liquid to distribute to beneficiaries (e.g., a house is sold so that it can be “split” between multiple beneficiaries who do not want to live in and maintain the house).  In this situation where the estate’s real property is sold, a realtor is often used to market and sell the property.  The broker is hired by the estate’s personal representative (the executor or administrator).

While the personal representative of the estate is often represented by an attorney, there are no limits as to whom a realtor may contact like there are for lawyers.  Therefore, a realtor can keep an eye out for the public notices denoting recent probate filings (all public records) and then cold-call each and every representative of each new probate filing.  It’s something akin to ambulance chasing, except it’s more like hearse chasing!  As you can imagine, the realtor has a financial interest in getting the listing–the commission.  The realtor will also try to steer the client toward early marketing and to forgo any court confirmation of the sale in order to get his commission quicker and easier.  Sometimes this meddling by the realtor undermines the attorney’s representation of the personal representative.  Once that probate is filed and the notice is posted, the personal representative of the estate is literally bombarded by realtor phone calls, flyers, mailers, personal visits, etc.  It gets overwhelming.  The personal representative often feels pressure to sign the listing before he/she has authority to act on behalf of the estate.  It’s ugly.

If there is a place other than the legal industry where there should be limited communication with represented individuals, this is surely one of them.  With the stress of going through the funeral process, sifting through a dead person’s records and property, and answering to heirs who want their distribution of the estate, the representative must also deal with greedy realtors looking to score a listing.  When trying to counsel the client to be very careful in choosing the realtor, the realtor oftentimes convinces the personal representative that the lawyer is merely dragging his/her feet.  It can be an ugly push-pull.  If realtors were required to communicate with the estate representative through his/her attorney, then this predatory behavior would at least be hindered.  In this case, more lawyer involvement is beneficial.


Where There’s a Will, There’s a Say

We’re all going to die. I don’t mean that in a Chicken Little sort of way. I mean that in a stating-the-obvious sort of way. The jury is still out as to what happens to us after we die, but one thing that is fairly certain is that once you die you have little say over what happens to your property, to whom you give your property, and any other instructions you’d like to make from “beyond the grave.” Of course, you can have a say if you properly draft and execute a will.

Wills are cheap and easy to create. I even saw a commercial on TV where a famous lawyer advertised will drafting services online for less than $100. Even still, there are few people out there who have a will. Statistics vary, but one study shows that 55% of adult Americans do not have will.

If that’s the case, it seems like it’s not that big of a deal to die without a will, right?

Not exactly. When someone dies without a will, the person is said to have died intestate. For those keeping score at home, that means “without a will.” When you die intestate, your property (which becomes your estate’s property, since you’re dead and all) is distributed using your state’s intestacy statute. Well, we all know what intestate means, but what exactly does statute mean? A statute is a law created by the legislature, or law-making body of the government (think, Congress). So somewhere in the California Code (Probate Code sections 6400, et seq. to be exact) there is a statute (remember, that just means “law”) that says where a person’s property goes if he or she dies intestate. Well, that then suggests that if you don’t have a will when you die, then the legislature decides who gets your property.

Who cares? I don’t even own anything!

The cool thing about a will is that it doesn’t “speak” until you die. So it can dispose of property that you don’t even own yet. You don’t have anything now, but what if you start accumulating property? Or what if you are later the beneficiary of someone else’s estate? Or you marry someone else who has some property? Just as importantly, you can “cut” people out of any share of your estate if you so decide.

Let me use an example to illustrate an extreme circumstance where a will would certainly clarify any ambiguity. Hypothetically, let’s assume Harry is in a relationship with Wendy. Harry and Wendy have a child, Cheryl. Unfortunately, Harry and Wendy start having problems and decide to split up. They were never married. Harry moves on, and although he remains a loving father to Cheryl, he decides to marry his new girlfriend Greta. Greta has two children from her previous marriage. As tragedy would have it, Harry chokes on a pretzel and dies. Harry never got around to drafting a will. Under California’s intestacy statute, all of Harry’s estate goes to his surviving spouse, Greta. When Greta dies, all of her property (including the property she acquired from Harry’s estate) is now disposed of through her will, or if there is no will, by the intestacy statute. In other words, unless Greta provides for Cheryl through her own will, Cheryl will have to somehow intervene in order to assert her rights, if any, to take some of her father’s property. However, if Harry had a will providing for Cheryl, then disaster could be averted… or, at least Harry’s true wishes would be clear.

So, what’s the point? I still don’t have any more property than when this post began.

The point is that peoples’ living situations are changing constantly. These days, a Thanksgiving feast involving ex-spouses, step-children, biological children, half-siblings, etc., are commonplace. Divorces are par for the course. People are living longer and dying with considerable amounts of property. Property is being re-characterized all the time. Everyone should take the time to at least consider drafting a will.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.