Sister thinks POA means OWNER

[Walt34]

I don't see how you can make this statement with the information we've been given. Gifting money to grandkids is something grandparents do all the time. I did it last year, and will again this year. The POA does not obligate the sister to handle the money in the OP's best interest, just the Mom's.<snip>

You are absolutely correct, and what this is called is "mere suspicion". But the subtle signs of theft are all there; the secretiveness of the sister, refusal to discuss, the signs that the mother is being manipulated, the fact that OP said "Mom is in a different world" all strongly suggest to me that while Mom might be vaguely aware (she did sign the checks for the grandkids but did not write them) suggests that Mom is not clearly/fully aware of what is happening. This suggests that there may be financial abuse going on.

If the OP had brought what he has into our fraud office I would have opened a case on it, subpoenaed bank records, get a copy of the POA, and interviewed some people. This would establish some facts. That is not to say that definitely anything criminal or even immoral is going on. But there's enough there that it deserves a look, I think.

 

[pb4uski]

While I concede that from what the OP has described that there is no evidence of wrongdoing, the POA's lack of transparency and unwillingness to share information on how she is managing her mother's financial affairs is suspicious and IMO it would be foolish to just ignore it.

It may be that the POA is acting properly and the Mom has instructed the sister to not provide the information or the POA is unwilling to provide the information to the OP without the Mom's permission. OTOH, it could be that the POA is acting improperly and knows sharing information would highlight her shenanigans.

Like I said in an earlier post, if the Mom allows financial information to be shared with the OP, then the POA is obligated to share it and if the POA stonewalls or refuses that is a flashing red light IMO.

ETA: +1 to Walt's response that was cross-posted with this one.

 

[Car-Guy]

The situation could be much worse. I've seen it in a similar case.

Personally, I think the child (or children) that take "responsibility" for the well-being of an aging parent "or one that is just in need", should have full control over the parent(s) finances and have no obligation to the other siblings "unless" they are participating in helping in some meaningful way.

If the time comes where the other kids need to chip in to help out financially, then they have the right to ask for an accounting of "where the money went".

 

[Walt34]

While I concede that from what the OP has described that there is no evidence of wrongdoing, the POA's lack of transparency and unwillingness to share information on how she is managing her mother's financial affairs is suspicious and IMO it would be foolish to just ignore it.

The situation could be much worse. I've seen it in a similar case.

Personally, I think the child (or children) that take "responsibility" for the well-being of an aging parent "or one that is just in need", should have full control over the parent(s) finances and have no obligation to the other siblings "unless" they are participating in helping in some meaningful way..

Clearly the level of openness differs with different people. While I was handling my mother's finances if either of my sisters had asked, I'd have been completely open about it. But they never asked. When DW was handling her father's finances she would have been open about it with her brother and sisters. But again, no one asked.

Perhaps it's the reason that I'm with pb4uski in believing that the lack of transparency is a huge red flag. Others don't see it that way, and perhaps even see it as intrusive.

 

[MichaelB]

In matters of money, scrutiny is important, and that's how I understand "transparency" as used by Walt34, pb4uski and others. Back in my w*rking days there was a phrase often used - expect what you inspect.

There may be nothing inappropriate happening in the case of the OP, but there is no harm in confirming with his DM that she is aware of and agrees with all transactions and financial management.

 

[NW-Bound]

You are absolutely correct, and what this is called is "mere suspicion". But the subtle signs of theft are all there; the secretiveness of the sister, refusal to discuss, the signs that the mother is being manipulated, the fact that OP said "Mom is in a different world" all strongly suggest to me that while Mom might be vaguely aware (she did sign the checks for the grandkids but did not write them) suggests that Mom is not clearly/fully aware of what is happening. This suggests that there may be financial abuse going on.

If the OP had brought what he has into our fraud office I would have opened a case on it, subpoenaed bank records, get a copy of the POA, and interviewed some people. This would establish some facts. That is not to say that definitely anything criminal or even immoral is going on. But there's enough there that it deserves a look, I think.

+1 It is not rare that the POA is abused to enrich the caretaker.

The problem is once the OP crosses the bridge with his siblings, they will no longer talk face-to-face but through their attorneys.

Very sticky situation.

 

[Car-Guy]

Others don't see it that way, and perhaps even see it as intrusive.

I wouldn't call it intrusive, but I've seen cases of "sibling second guessing" of where the money is being spent by those who don't have to deal with the on-going support of a parent. Not saying that is the case here, but it does happen.

 

[harley]

If the OP had brought what he has into our fraud office I would have opened a case on it, subpoenaed bank records, get a copy of the POA, and interviewed some people. This would establish some facts. That is not to say that definitely anything criminal or even immoral is going on. But there's enough there that it deserves a look, I think.

Seriously? You could get a subpoena for bank records off of somebody coming in and saying "my sister won't tell me what she's doing with Mom's money, and Mom gave some of it to her grandkids?" That seems unbelievable to me. I thought you'd need more than that.

I personally agree that the sister's lack of transparency is suspicious and annoying. Certainly it's not how most people would handle things. But I also agree with Sojourner that there might be other reasons than theft for not doing it. Embarrassment, annoyance at what she considers her greedy brother's pushiness, and probably others I haven't thought of. But if I were the Mom and one of my kids called the cops or started a legal battle without having talked to me first, the first thing I would do is change the will and remove any need to worry about the estate. But that's me.

 

[pb4uski]

Au contraire... given the facts and circumstances described by the OP and the incidence of elder abuse I would want local law enforcement to at least investigate the situation... if all is honky dory then the investigation could be closed quickly, if not then the elder is protected from the potential of getting fleeced by a loved one. Unfortunately it happens frequently enough that IMO an investigation would not be out of line.

Reminds me of a friend whose brother was the executor of his parent's estate and was self-dealing and converting assets to the brother's kids (who were not beneficiaries of the estate). My friend ultimately had to go to court and have his brother removed as executor but by then a lot of damage had been done to both the estate and of course the sibling relationships.

 

[MichaelB]

Au contraire... given the facts and circumstances described by the OP and the incidence of elder abuse I would want local law enforcement to at least investigate the situation... if all is honky dory then the investigation could be closed quickly, if not then the elder is protected from the potential of getting fleeced by a loved one. Unfortunately it happens frequently enough that IMO an investigation would not be out of line.

WADR to the OP, we have only one point of view here.

I am sole POA and sole Trustee for DM's financial matters. Once a quarter I send a list of all financial transactions to one of my many siblings. I do not share any other info with any of them, and one, the oldest, asks regularly. I just don't answer. When DM was turning control of her affairs to me I asked what info she gave to the others, here answer was "none", and in response to my question about how much info she wanted me to share, and she chose not to answer, which I took as "none". She was a private person, and still tries to be despite her circumstances. I review her finances with her regularly, but she is no recollection of this due to memory issues.

Should I be alive and she not, then I will share some info with them, as they are potential eventual but not immediate beneficiaries. DM is leaving assets, they are purposed, and if they all knew, I am certain there would be no agreement among the siblings regarding their disposition.

If my refusal to provide details to one of my siblings is grounds for a police investigation and subpoena for bank records, something is wrong. She has no need to know, and neither do the authorities. At most, I think the police might be entitled to a polite conversation.

 

[CardsFan]

OP:
You said that Sis has Mom sign all the checks given to family. Since Sis has POA, this is not required. Does Mom sign all checks, for everything?

I guess I am asking if there is real POA in place, that has been filed with all the banks and financial institutions.

You mentioned Sis has POA for the "Estate" of your Mom. As noted earlier, as long as Mom is alive, there is no "estate" in the legal sense.

So, if she was executor for your Dad's estate, or will be for your Mom's estate, she still has no legal standing related to your Mom's finances.

However, if there is a true POA, that's different. Or if Mom has just decided that Sis is her only confidant for financial matters, then.....

I am sorry for your circumstances, and as others have said, there may be no pleasant way for you to know the details. But I think it is only fair for you to politely tell your Mom (and Sis) that you are only concerned that Mom has the wherewithal to manage should she need expensive nursing home care.

 

[Luck_Club]

WADR to the OP, we have only one point of view here.

I am sole POA and sole Trustee for DM's financial matters. Once a quarter I send a list of all financial transactions to one of my many siblings. I do not share any other info with any of them, and one, the oldest, asks regularly. I just don't answer. When DM was turning control of her affairs to me I asked what info she gave to the others, here answer was "none", and in response to my question about how much info she wanted me to share, and she chose not to answer, which I took as "none". She was a private person, and still tries to be despite her circumstances. I review her finances with her regularly, but she is no recollection of this due to memory issues.

Should I be alive and she not, then I will share some info with them, as they are potential eventual but not immediate beneficiaries. DM is leaving assets, they are purposed, and if they all knew, I am certain there would be no agreement among the siblings regarding their disposition.

If my refusal to provide details to one of my siblings is grounds for a police investigation and subpoena for bank records, something is wrong. She has no need to know, and neither do the authorities. At most, I think the police might be entitled to a polite conversation.

+1
I'm handling the finances for a family member, who is incompetent. My father holds the POA and the 4 main heirs to the estate have a broad stroke picture of the estate at time of incompetence and I fully plan to pass over the check register at time of death to the heirs for review should they so request it. In the mean time. I don't want to keep and disseminate a detailed accounting, thus further increasing my time burden to what is already a time consuming activity.

OTOH...
I have a FIL, who's suing his brother because during his mothers last years he may have changed the will and transferred assets, and refused to disclose all the records to the estate after death.

 

[Walt34]

Seriously? You could get a subpoena for bank records off of somebody coming in and saying "my sister won't tell me what she's doing with Mom's money, and Mom gave some of it to her grandkids?" That seems unbelievable to me. I thought you'd need more than that.

Understand that a subpoena can be obtained (or could be at the time) with a lot less evidence than a search warrant, which is a much higher bar to clear. All I needed to do was to convince a state's attorney to issue it and the banks would honor it. The courts admitted the evidence since it was far less intrusive than evidence gathered in a search warrant.

Also understand that if someone reports a possible crime to law enforcement that creates a duty to investigate. It would be dereliction of duty not to unless there clearly is no crime or it is a civil, not criminal matter. Also, it wasn't uncommon for investigations to be closed as "unfounded" when suspicions were found to be just that, suspicions, and nothing more after a brief investigation.

Speaking of future heirs and "family money" that reminds me of a story... It wasn't my case, but everyone in the office got a laugh out of it. Some adult children came in to complain that "their inheritance" was disappearing at a faster than expected rate. How they came by this knowledge I forget. After a brief but intense investigation it turned out that Grampaw was hiring prostitutes to clean his house while in a state of undress. There was no indication of anything more going on. Unfortunately for the "heirs-to-be" this did not violate any law.

Case closed as unfounded.

 

[NW-Bound]

According to the following article, even in the case where POA power is abused, it's the elder who must sue as a victim. But if he/she is incompetent, does the state step in to protect his/her right?

Looks like the OP needs help from an attorney, but he needs to talk tactfully to his mother first to assess the situation.

See: Elder Financial Abuse: Power of Attorney Scams | Nolo.com

and http://law.freeadvice.com/estate_planning/living_wills_power_of_attorney/power-of-attorney-abuse.htm,

and http://www.americanbar.org/content/...a_abuse_fact_sheet_consumers.authcheckdam.pdf.

 

[Walt34]

According to the following article, even in the case where POA power is abused, it's the elder who must sue as a victim. But if he/she is incompetent, does the state step in to protect his/her right?

I would hope so but don't really know. One reason to get a copy of the POA is to see what, if any, limitations are placed on what the funds can be used for. Is it "open-ended" in being vague about what the money can be used for, or does it specify clearly that the funds are to be used only for certain and specific purposes?

 

[NW-Bound]

It seems to me that a POA arrangement is very helpful, but also dangerous at the same time. There appears to be nothing put in place to monitor the "agent" or "attorney-in-fact" to see the "principal" (the elder) is abused.

Suppose the elder has an accountant, could she require that the accountant have access to all financial records? But if the accountant smells something fishy, is he obligated to report it? And to whom?

 

[EastWest Gal]

Two red flags for me:

1. The sis has mom sign the checks. As was just pointed out, he/she doesn't need to sign the checks if sis has POA. So is there a POA? If there is, sis isn't doing it properly. And if this check writing occurs during a Christmas visit, why isn't OP allowed to also visit at Christmas?

2. OP pointed out that she is the only one left out of the meeting when the grandkid's checks are written. Why is the OP disinvited to this ? What are the other siblings hiding?

The OP is acting in her mother's interest-what if mom lives a long time and needs dementia care. Her money needs to pay for this. What happens if it's gone?

The OP should contact the local probate court in her mother's jurisdiction if she has concerns.

https://www.caring.com/questions/power-of-attorney-acting-fraudulently.

 

[NW-Bound]

... what if mom lives a long time and needs dementia care. Her money needs to pay for this. What happens if it's gone?

That's why even if the POA agent is the sole heir, the agent is not allowed to divert the money for personal use. The money is not for the heir to spend until the principal has passed.

About having the elder sign the gift checks, it could be to show that the mom was fully aware of the fact, in case there is an audit later. And the mom could be, and was giving full consent too. Who knows?

 

[CardsFan]

About having the elder sign the gift checks, it could be to show that the mom was fully aware of the fact, in case there is an audit later. And the mom could be, and was giving full consent too. Who knows?

You are correct, and that crossed my mind. But I would still ask for a copy of the POA.

 

[Starsky]

In reviewing my Mom's POA, it is a California Uniform Statutory POA that follows a standard format under California Probate Code, Section 4401.

A few items stand out. First, it may grant all powers or withhold certain powers from the Agent; and it may or may not be continued if the party becomes incapacitated. The section on incapacity provides for the POA to continue and must be struck out if they do not want it to continue if they become incapacitated. (mine is not struck out)

Secondly, the form includes the following language: "By accepting or acting under this appointment, the agent accepts the fiduciary and other legal responsibilities of an agent." Those are the only responsibilities of the recipient of the POA that are stipulated. I'm not an attorney, so I can't explain what that means to you as a family member [but I did stay at a Holiday Inn]. Here's a link: California Civil Code On Agency / Agents

If you're really Concerned in CA it could be worth a call...

One more thing: Our POA provides for 4 different people to be my Mom's POA. The assignment is consecutive, and my late Dad was first. I am second and so on.... I don't know if my the next person even knows he's next in line or how that notification works. Given my recent heart attack, I'd better let him know.

 

[samclem]

"Call the police, get a lawyer". . . before just talking to Mom? What's the reluctance to just ask the lady what her wishes are, and if she'll give the green light to Sis to share the info? A lot of litigiousness here, and some very indirect approaches when just talking could clear things up.
About the gift checks:. This is money from Grandma. Perhaps both she and Sis think it is proper and nice that Mom sign the checks to make it very clear who is being generous.

 

[Walt34]

https://www.caring.com/questions/power-of-attorney-acting-fraudulently.

Wow. Some seriously sad stories there.

 

[Walt34]

"Call the police, get a lawyer". . . before just talking to Mom? What's the reluctance to just ask the lady what her wishes are, and if she'll give the green light to Sis to share the info?

Because it is not at all clear that Mom has all her marbles, that's why.

She "lives in a different world". She "doesn't know the difference between $1000 and $10k".

Among others. That's a problem.

 

[Music Lover]

About the gift checks:. This is money from Grandma. Perhaps both she and Sis think it is proper and nice that Mom sign the checks to make it very clear who is being generous.

Yes, it's generous...but only if Grandma knows what she is signing and for what amounts.

 

[samclem]

Because it is not at all clear that Mom has all her marbles, that's why.

She "lives in a different world". She "doesn't know the difference between $1000 and $10k".

Among others. That's a problem.

A quick conversation could shed a lot of light on this, instead of trying to guess. A reluctance on the part of the OP to ask Mom directly is a red flag, no? Mom might have some good and non-demented reasons that she's doing things like this. Maybe have the three people concerned discuss things together?