Accessing Parents Financial Accounts

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm not "gleefully happy" that creditors get stiffed. These write offs are probably already baked into the prices we all pay for goods and services, medical or otherwise.
...

If you want to talk unethical, I'd say those collection agents fit the bill, pun intended. :popcorn:

Is it really unethical to refuse to pay the debt of another with your own money? No.

Probate is a public matter with court oversight, usually one overseer, and subject to state statutes of limitations on creditor claims. POD/TOD is a private matter. It takes only one person to notify a financial institution of the death. Claim forms get sent to every named beneficiary. A beneficiary isn't even entitled to know what % everyone is getting. Or if there are other assets not passing to them. Only the first person who gets to the decedent's paperwork/files may know the entire picture.
Agreed. Corporations and debt collectors use the laws to their benefit every chance they get, so I don't see anything wrong with someone doing the same thing. The laws are what they are, and until they change, there is nothing wrong with someone using them to their advantage.
 
It's actually the decedent who is sticking it to the creditors, not the beneficiaries. The law is clear on that. Decedent's bills have to be paid from decedent's money (the estate). POD/TOD inherited money is the beneficiary's money, not the decedent's money. Anything else is an opinion.

Medicaid, the IRS, and the State depending on the State's law, would not necessarily agree with you.

They would not look to a beneficiary if there are only debts; but the taxable estate is not limited to assets which pass by probate, and does include the POD/ TOD assets.
 
+1



Generally, OP wouldn't have to use any of his POD share to settle estate debts. POD/TOD assets become the legal property of the named beneficiary, instantly after the owner's death. They are not a part of the estate. There are extremely limited circumstances where a creditor can go after assets transferred via POD. The IRS is one of them. Most other debt, no. Credit card debt, mortgage debt, car loans, medical bills, personal loans, etc., all have to be written off. Creditors can only file claims against assets that have to go through probate. They can file even if an estate hasn't been opened up for probate, within the statute of limitations.

I've dealt with 2 insolvent estates. I've consulted with lawyers in both cases. I know this to be fact. You can die with amazing amounts of debt, yet the creditors get nothing and the beneficiaries get everything, if there is anything to inherit, that is. Fair or not, that's the way it is.

My FIL has set up all of his assets to pass via POD/TOD, including his house, using his lawyer for the latter document. Any debts not owed to the government will not be my husband's responsibility to pay.

OP did not mention being insolvent. He did mention his mother having a house. The house will have carrying costs, including property taxes and utilities, and costs involved with it's sale. The possibility of his mother needing Medicaid/nursing home care has not been discounted.

Most likely your FIL does not have a mortgage. Mortgage debt goes with the house. A beneficiary who received a bank account would not have to pay off a mortgage - But if a house has a mortgage on it before the date of death, it is not extinguished on death. That is why the banks typically file the mortgage with the County Clerk. It puts any subsequent owner on notice of their interest in the property. Houses can have liens put on them, with a right of priority. The government liens come first, then the mortgagee (bank), second mortgagee, etc. You don't get to keep the house and not pay the mortgage. Car loans? That depends upon whether the entity which issued the loan retained an interest in the car. They can be repossessed.

And the government IS a creditor, frequently the biggest one.

Most people don't intend to die with debts, rather it is something which tends to occur over time. That is a different situation altogether than someone who takes out loans, and titles assets to by-pass probate for the specific purpose of obtaining money from creditors and not paying them back. The latter could be considered a transfer made with an intent to defraud.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for what you and your mother are going through. We've lost 3 parents to cancer.

Check with an eldercare lawyer. I "think" if the CDs were opened more than 5 years ago you could cash in each one, put her half in a checking account to pay her bills including nursing home care and each keep the other half. Then once she has spent down her remaining assets to a certain point she would qualify for Medicaid long-term care... but they would have dibs on getting reimbursed from the proceeds from the sale of her home once she passes.

Alternatively, you could proceed with your plan in the OP.

I would be very careful about that. My friend (in Florida) had to put her mother in a nursing home about a year ago. The mother had a long standing bank account with one sister. Medicaid considered all the money in the account as belonging to the mother, not half. (Perhaps this would have been different if the sister could show that she had deposited money into the account?) The money had to be applied to the costs of the nursing home, along with the mother's income, with a certain small stipend allowed towards the mother's care each month.
 
Last edited:
If benefactors are that concerned, as I already said, it's up to them to make sure they have enough set aside in a non-beneficiary format to make sure it happens that way. It's not up to heirs to guess the deceased's intentions after the fact.

I'm not "gleefully happy" that creditors get stiffed. These write offs are probably already baked into the prices we all pay for goods and services, medical or otherwise.

But I have no high regard for collections agents, that is true. They can be cruel and start threatening you right out of the gate. They'll tell you lies to scare you into paying a debt that's not yours. Within hours of my mother's death, one did that to me. Sure, I understood that she wasn't happy to hear that there was no money to pay the over $30K my mother owed. I'm sure people lie about that all the time. But there are legal means to recovering such debts that don't involve threatening and trying to scare a then-27-year-old woman still trying to come to grips with the fact that her 48 year-old-mother is gone. :mad: And that was just one of the many I called that day. One creditor told me I was lying. Which is why I don't recommend contacting creditors, if you have no reason to really deal with them.

Not to mention the hassle I got over the relatively minor sum of $45 for a medical bill I truly did owe for services rendered to me when I was 18 and still covered on my father's insurance. I was 19 and I'd not seen any medical bills before getting this past due notice for the $45, billed to my father, listing me as the patient. (My father had originally been billed at his address. He told them I was an adult and to send the bill to me at my address. Which they did, but obviously not promptly.) I called the medical facility to find out what it was all about. I was promptly transferred to the collections department, (which shouldn't have happened), where a man literally screamed at me for several minutes and treated me like I was the worse deadbeat on earth. I wasn't disputing the bill. I had no original billing or insurance statements to back anything up. It had been more than a year since the medical visit. This was my first time handling such a thing for myself. That awful man had me shaking and in tears. Over $45. :facepalm: It took me such a long time to calm down afterwards. I paid the bill, of course, after asking that he send a bill in my name first. (Otherwise, technically, I'd have been paying my father's bill.) It was a legitimate debt. I was just trying to get the detail on it, that's all.

If you want to talk unethical, I'd say those collection agents fit the bill, pun intended. :popcorn:

Is it really unethical to refuse to pay the debt of another with your own money? No.

Probate is a public matter with court oversight, usually one overseer, and subject to state statutes of limitations on creditor claims. POD/TOD is a private matter. It takes only one person to notify a financial institution of the death. Claim forms get sent to every named beneficiary. A beneficiary isn't even entitled to know what % everyone is getting. Or if there are other assets not passing to them. Only the first person who gets to the decedent's paperwork/files may know the entire picture.

If I had an heir with your attitude and suggested that it was up to me to have money set aside in a separate account that was non-beneficiary desgnated to make sure my creditors got paid that heir would immediately be struck off the beneficiary list. I don't see it as a big stretch to think that the decedent would want their legitimate bills paid with their money and then the remainder distributed to their heirs.

You ask "Is it really unethical to refuse to pay the debt of another with your own money? No.".. I would agree that you have no obligation to pay the debts of a deceased parent or sibling or child with your own money... but I think that the decedent's money you just inherited because you were lucky enough to be a named beneficiary is different from your own money.

While uncollectables are built into the prices that we pay it is for people without the ability to pay... not greedy beneficiaries looking to game the system.... but nonetheless a great rationalization!

I agree that many collection people are unethical and try to convince the uninformed that they are financially responsible for a deceased parent or child or perhaps even as deceased siblings debt when they are not... and I am sorry that you have had some bad experiences.... but two wrongs do not make a right.

IMO it is unethical and greedy to stiff the decedent's creditors as you advocate.... even though it is legal.
 
Last edited:
I would be very careful about that. My friend (in Florida) had to put her mother in a nursing home about a year ago. The mother had a long standing bank account with one sister. Medicare considered all the money in the account as belonging to the mother, not half. (Perhaps this would have been different if the sister could show that she had deposited money into the account?) The money had to be applied to the costs of the nursing home, with a certain small stipend allowed towards the mother's care each month.

What was the third sentence in that post?
 
I was very glad that my father put my brother and me on his checking account and a brokerage account that wasn’t in his trust, as co-owners. He did get rather careless about financial matters in the years after that. I don’t think we could have convinced him to do it. It was important for us to be able to pay household bills and also some brief assisted living expenses. The one bill he kept hold of, firmly, was Amex. He owed them thousands in interest at his death, and it was with a collection agency. There was no lack of funds to pay it.

It’s very important to get these permissions set up while your parent is of sound mind. It can go quickly.
 
If I had an heir with your attitude and suggested that it was up to me to have money set aside in a separate account that was non-beneficiary desgnated to make sure my creditors got paid that heir would immediately be struck off the beneficiary list. I don't see it as a big stretch to think that the decedent would want their legitimate bills paid with their money and then the remainder distributed to their heirs.
That's interesting because I have exactly the opposite opinion. If I had an heir that received money outside of probate as a designated account beneficiary, and assuming my estate had debt after I passed, and assuming the estate creditor tried to collect against the funds that were passed outside of probate to my beneficiary, I would want my beneficiary to tell the estate creditor to go pound sand because they have no right to that money, and I would be very disappointed from the grave if they did not. I am now thinking of telling my beneficiaries just that. I know it is legal and I do not think it is unethical.

I also think that the moment I pass away, the funds that are designated to pass to my account beneficiaries becomes their money, not mine.
 
Last edited:
If I had an heir with your attitude and suggested that it was up to me to have money set aside in a separate account that was non-beneficiary desgnated to make sure my creditors got paid that heir would immediately be struck off the beneficiary list. I don't see it as a big stretch to think that the decedent would want their legitimate bills paid with their money and then the remainder distributed to their heirs.

You ask "Is it really unethical to refuse to pay the debt of another with your own money? No.".. I would agree that you have no obligation to pay the debts of a deceased parent or sibling or child with your own money... but I think that the decedent's money you just inherited because you were lucky enough to be a named beneficiary is different from your own money.

While uncollectables are built into the prices that we pay it is for people without the ability to pay... not greedy beneficiaries looking to game the system.... but nonetheless a great rationalization!

I agree that many collection people are unethical and try to convince the uninformed that they are financially responsible for a deceased parent or child or perhaps even as deceased siblings debt when they are not... and I am sorry that you have had some bad experiences.... but two wrongs do not make a right.

IMO it is unethical and greedy to stiff the decedent's creditors as you advocate.... even though it is legal.

[MOD HAT ON] Let me suggest to you, pb4uski, and to gwraighty that if the two of you want to continue debating the ethics of the POD situation, you do it by PM, not here it the thread. It is disruptive. [MOD HAT OFF]
 
That's interesting because I have exactly the opposite opinion. If I had an heir that received money outside of probate as a designated account beneficiary, and assuming my estate had debt after I passed, and assuming the estate creditor tried to collect against the funds that were passed outside of probate to my beneficiary, I would want my beneficiary to tell the estate creditor to go pound sand because they have no right to that money, and I would be very disappointed from the grave if they did not. I am now thinking of telling my beneficiaries just that. I know it is legal and I do not think it is unethical.

I also think that the moment I pass away, the funds that are designated to pass to my account beneficiaries becomes their money, not mine.

So are you saying that you think it is ethical to stiff your creditors? Vendors who have provided goods and services to you in good faith based on your promise to pay?

Or are there other funds that would be available to be used to settle your debts as of your date of death? If so, then what you wrote make sense... if not then IMO that is a whole different kettle of stinky fish. :D

You would be ok with an heir saying to you that "I'm going to keep all the money you bequest to me outside probate so if you want your debts paid you need to provide for that separately from what you bequest to me."?
 
Thanks for the interesting discussion, the questions raised in the OP have been well and fully addressed. :flowers:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom