Movie "I Care A Lot" - question about accuracy (No spoilers)

[firemediceric]

(haven't seen it, but going by the description here): The gaps in the story - that challenge the legality and likelihood - seem to fall in the process of how the court order was obtained.

We assume that the judge isn't compromised...but decided to sign the emergency binding order without insisting on interviewing the woman first and having a court appointed doctor complete an exam. And that they made a permanent decision without doing so. At best I would imagine - IRL - that a temporary order would be put in place to "rescue" the woman and have an independent assessment.

A complete asset confiscation and guardianship setup on one court appointment with a non-compromised judge seems like a stretch. Even if the judge is on the take it seems like a leap that all that happens from a first order.

Great point about the "emergency binding order." In Florida it's referred to as Emergency Temporary Guardianship (ETG)


The ETG is good for no more than 90 days, if it is even granted. For an ETG to be granted a pretty strong case needs to be made to the Judge that if immediate intervention does not take place the AIP will suffer irreparable physical or financial harm. During the 90 day ETG the Court appointed attorney and the examining committee members will be getting with the AIP. The AIP will also be served with the court documents.


During this time the Guardian does not have authority to liquidate assets. Rather the Guardian is supposed to PROTECT the assets. That often means closing current bank accounts and putting the funds into a guardianship account. It also means sending ETG documentation to investment houses so the AIP nor people acting on the AIP's behalf who may be actually exploiting them can access the funds. Credit bureaus are notified to freeze the credit. A full accounting of known assets is made to the Court.


If Plenary or Limited Guardianship is granted following the Court hearing, only after that and only with specific Court order may assets be disposed of.

 

[Amethyst]

Firemediceric,

Thank you so much for your insights.

The part about having a committee interview the AIP is particularly interesting. Would you say there is ever a case where the court goes ahead and takes away the person's rights without such an interview? Because that was central to the movie's plot (at least at first...I truly didn't "spoil" too much)

Amethyst

 

[firemediceric]

The doctor has provided the guardian with a strongly-worded diagnosis of dementia and incompetence. The guardian explains, later on, that in an "emergency" situation, it is not necessary that the patient appear. It is all about their safety and health, because they have no one else looking out for them!

In my experience it has always been a family member, DCF, or a health care facility such as a hospital that has filed the Petition of Incapacity. I am known to several attorneys and they call on me to serve on cases which may benefit from my skill set as a guardian as opposed to another guardian. Until being recommended to the Court by an attorney representing the petitioner or the AIP, I have not had any information about a prospective client.

 

[firemediceric]

Firemediceric,

Thank you so much for your insights.

The part about having a committee interview the AIP is particularly interesting. Would you say there is ever a case where the court goes ahead and takes away the person's rights without such an interview? Because that was central to the movie's plot (at least at first...I truly didn't "spoil" too much)

Amethyst

NEVER! Not beyond the 90 day ETG anyway. Although COVID did lead to some interesting challenges in interviewing AIP's in ALF's

 

[firemediceric]

Aside from the 4th amendment issue here, which I guess is obviated by guardianship, is there any way regular old folks' homes wouldn't allow the inmates to use the Internet? Does no one get to keep their phone? Are there no computers? .

In the ALF's I have never seen computers in the Memory Care Units. The residents mostly wouldn't be able to use them. Some of my clients do have cell phones they use to call loved ones locally and out of state. I had one client though with Louie Body Disease who I could not allow any access to the telephone because he would harass his ex wife and children so. He would actually complain of chest pain to get to the hospital just to use the telephone at the hospital! You may think that indicates he is sly and in no way incapacitated to engage in such behavior but his personal and financial habits became so self destructive that he was adjudicated incapacitated.

 

[firemediceric]

Perhaps, but if I were a senior and a bunch of greedy people were colluding to rob me of my freedom and life savings I think I would just start shooting and take my chances with the criminal justice system.

One of my recent cases the senior citizen called a contact out of state implying he was going to commit suicide. A 911 call was made and law enforcement went by for a well being check. The subject was in his car when LEO's showed up. His paranoia caused him to try to run over a deputy. He then tried to drive through a treeline and totaled his car. FD had to cut the car away from the man and deputies four-pointed him out of the vehicle. He had a loaded revolver in the car.



He was charged criminally but the mental health angle kept him out of jail. On the flip side though, he can only leave the ALF for medical reasons. Much better than being in jail though.

 

[firemediceric]

This thread has focused mostly on the concerns of elderly people being caught up in the system. Mention has been made of Brittany Spears who certainly is not elderly.


Most of my clients have been elderly and suffering from dementia/Alzheimer's. They are the ones most ripe for neglect and exploitation. One woman in her 80's had retired years previous from being the Chief Clerk of Courts. Her no good grandson and his girlfriend shuffled this slight old lady down to the bank where they had her sign the paperwork for a HELOC. Plenty of credit cards were also taken out in her name.


The no good grandson exhausted the money on heroin. The house went into foreclosure. When I first met the woman they had her in a walk in closet with a bucket to use as a toilet. The house was in as bad as shape as the elderly woman was. She was crying when I took her out of there and moved her to an ALF. She felt her grandson was taking care of her.


As the grandson made laughable demands of me once I cut off his access to her Florida Retirement checks and Social Security, I was contacting DCF asking why they hadn't yet pulled the two elementary school age children out of the house yet.


That whole situation was brought to light by neighbors getting the town involved over the house and yard falling into disrepair. The town officials then got DCF involved. I say shame on the bank personnel for allowing the grandson to have his obviously compromised grandmother execute the HELOC documents. They should have put a stop to it.



At the other end of the spectrum I am financial guardian for two unrelated minors. 8 and 12 years old. Through insurance settlements they came into large sums of money. Parents are convicted felons. I secure the money so it will be there when they become adults. In the meantime, after purchasing Florida Pre-Paid College plans for them with Court approval, the money is invested and growing protected for their benefit and not to be spent on the whims of their parents.

 

[Koolau]

Attended MIL's hearing where her son sought guardianship over her. (Have NOT seen the movie in question.) The hearing took maybe 25 minutes. Very little evidence was presented other than statements by the DS and I think an affidavit from her doc. I don't even recall if there was an Ad Litem for MIL. BUT the judge asked her if she was okay with the guardianship. Had she said NO, my understanding is that everything would have changed and there would have been evidentiary hearings with future hearings. She stated that she was disappointed that this was happening, but she did not protest as such.

No other data on which to base a conclusion about the movie in question. I'm sure travesties happen to people who can not speak well for themselves. I do assure everyone here that MIL was much better off for the guardianship though she never truly "accepted" the idea completely. I could hope that one of our kids would be as responsible toward us as her son was toward her. I was fortunate that My mom had given me POA long before she needed to be placed in a care facility. YMMV

 

[Fishsticks007]

Protection from Guardianship Thieves

I recently read two articles listed below about predatory guardianship. Basically any stranger can accuse you of not being able to care for yourself and that stranger uses the court to take over your life with no due process or opportunity to defend yourself. I watched some YouTube horror stories on this as well. This is beyond frightening that in the “land of the free” a person’s life and finances can be stolen with zero chance of regaining the person’s freedom. How does one even begin to protect themselves if durable POAs mean nothing if a court and a bunch of sleazy people can openly rob you? It sounds like you can’t even trust your lawyers.

[mod edit]

 

[Amethyst]

I suspect the reason it is easy for the sleazy guardians, is that this doesn't happen to very many people, and mostly happens to Old people. So the vast bulk of the population doesn't know, doesn't care, doesn't worry, and most of all, doesn't pester its representatives to do something.

I recently read two articles listed below about predatory guardianship. Basically any stranger can accuse you of not being able to care for yourself and that stranger uses the court to take over your life with no due process or opportunity to defend yourself. I watched some YouTube horror stories on this as well. This is beyond frightening that in the “land of the free” a person’s life and finances can be stolen with zero chance of regaining the person’s freedom. How does one even begin to protect themselves if durable POAs mean nothing if a court and a bunch of sleazy people can openly rob you? It sounds like you can’t even trust your lawyers.

[mod edit]

 

[marko]

So far, no one has actually addressed the question of what the woman, legally, could have done, other than go along with the bad guys. It's true, we find out more later on in the movie about what this particular woman might have done...but no spoilers.

I've tried looking it up but all I get is stuff about how you shouldn't let things get to "that point" (i.e. have a DPOA). Nothing about what to do when the knock comes on the door.

I think it becomes quite difficult legally.

Forty years ago had a horrifying experience: I had visited a friend in a mental hospital.

When I left, I took a wrong turn and ended up lost. An orderly asked me where I was going and I said "I'm trying to get out of here". A few more questions and I said: "No, no, no, I don't belong here, I'm a visitor". Well, things went downward from there. It took me over an hour to 'escape'!

So, once a court decree is signed it can become very, very difficult to prove otherwise.

My own brother has been declared incompetent with me as his guardian. I know first-hand how difficult it would be for him to change that.

 

[JoeWras]

Guardian scammers are part of the galaxy of scammers that prey on vulnerable populations.

What makes this so disturbing and somewhat unbelievable is that it requires so much personal contact and legal oversight. We want to believe that nobody would ever spend the time to scam up close like that with The State watching.

 

[Amethyst]

What a terrible experience! But at least you had entered the facility of your own volition, and I'm sure could name people, including doctors, to vouch for you if you were allowed to call them.

I'm wondering what would have happened if the woman had told the guardian to get lost and shut the door in her face? I have the impression that the police would break down her door and drag her out. But meanwhile, she could have called her lawyer.

I realize that a truly incapable person would not know to do these things, and that there comes a time when bad things happen because there's nothing else to be done. I'm thinking of the scams where the person isn't truly incapable, or at least not yet.

I think it becomes quite difficult legally.

Forty years ago had a horrifying experience: I had visited a friend in a mental hospital.

When I left, I took a wrong turn and ended up lost. An orderly asked me where I was going and I said "I'm trying to get out of here". A few more questions and I said: "No, no, no, I don't belong here, I'm a visitor". Well, things went downward from there. It took me over an hour to 'escape'!

So, once a court decree is signed it can become very, very difficult to prove otherwise.

My own brother has been declared incompetent with me as his guardian. I know first-hand how difficult it would be for him to change that.

 

[Lsbcal]

In the Netflix movie, "I Care A Lot," an evil woman connives with an evil doctor and a stupid judge to obtain "emergency" guardianship of old people who have money, but no one to look out for them. The doctor exaggerates patients' early dementia to make it seem as if they are a danger to themselves. An "Emergency" guardianship hearing is held, unbeknownst to the victim.

The evil guardian shows up at a rich old woman's door with a court order. The old woman questions this, so the guardian shows her some police officers and a squad car with lights flashing. The intimidated woman assents, is allowed to pack one suitcase, and is driven to a care facility where they take away her cellphone. The guardian and accomplices quickly strip the woman's home, auction the contents, put it up for sale and take over all her other assets.

The whole thing came across like the Nazis knocking on the door and dragging people off to Auschwitz. Since we don't live in Nazi Germany, my question: What would have happened if the old woman (who, according to the script, had some problems but was capable of living alone) have said "No, thanks," closed the door, and called her lawyer? Could the police have taken action to remove the woman against her will?

We passed on this show probably because it looked like a setup for the viewer and an unlikely event. At least unlikely in the way it would be shown. So instead we went on to watch a police procedural show with murder, drugs, etc. It had the redeeming feature of having a lot of flaws and unlikely events.

I often ask myself why do we all like to scare ourselves with creep shows, scammer shows, murder shows, etc. I guess this "entertainment" can be a way of working out how to react in the scary world we sometimes find we inhabit. It's like a chess game where you can then see all the pieces and recognize an attack a few moves ahead.

Also I like to see flaws in movies and literature because that makes me feel less vulnerable. Like "it wouldn't happen to me because that stupid guy did something I'd never do".

Similarly in real world news I often look for the reason that person got cancer. Did they smoke (I don't)? Did they have a bad diet (I don't)? Or I look for why I won't have to personally deal with a terrorist event, etc.

 

[Amethyst]

I avoid "reality" shows. Especially body horror, something I cannot abide.

The movie is fantasy, but the premise could happen to anyone financially independent enough, so I thought I'd get other FIRE people's take.

I often ask myself why do we all like to scare ourselves with creep shows, scammer shows, murder shows, etc. .

 

[Mykle57]

Netflix had a docuseries called Dirty Money. Episode 9 featured a real life man in my area who was placed into guardianship and bilked of his properties and savings.

 

[Music Lover]

The movie is fantasy, but the premise could happen to anyone financially independent enough, so I thought I'd get other FIRE people's take.

We wanted to watch it but couldn't get past the first 3 or 4 minutes. That's too bad because what might have been a good story was ruined by bad film making.

 

[tmm99]

When I was watching the film, I was thinking to myself, "Surely, this doesn't happen in real life." And I did a quick Google search and saw some articles that said, "It's not illegal..." but I didn't read any further as I was still in the middle of the film...

 

[Koolau]

At the other end of the spectrum I am financial guardian for two unrelated minors. 8 and 12 years old. Through insurance settlements they came into large sums of money. Parents are convicted felons. I secure the money so it will be there when they become adults. In the meantime, after purchasing Florida Pre-Paid College plans for them with Court approval, the money is invested and growing protected for their benefit and not to be spent on the whims of their parents.

I have no right to ask, but am curious what fees are charged for your services - especially for handling the growth of finances. It's not an idle question. I've mentioned elsewhere that a trust company handled our kid's inheritance from their grandparents until they reached 21. The fees were 4 1/2% of TOTAL (remaining) funds in the trust. So, while the kids funds were barely making 4% on their funds, the trust company was taking 4 1/2 percent. I saw NO evidence from the paperwork that the trust company was "managing" anything other than THEIR fees from the kids funds. I called them several times to complain and they always promised to lower their fees - but they never did. This was all in another state and suing was out of the question because of the size of the estate. Probably no court would have agreed with me that 4 1/2 % fees for sending quarterly reports was excessive, though it clearly is. Most of these "legal" procedures are considered "reasonable and customary" which no one ever challenges - and would lose if they did.

My point (without ANY inference of wrong doing on your part) is that even totally LEGAL, and "normal" handling of OTHER people's affairs can seem abusive when looked at from the outside. Imagine if they were corrupt instead of just (legally) greedy! Maybe (seemingly) ridiculous fees are NOT considered abusive within the "community" (legal/trust/courts etc.) It's "just the way it is." BUT our kids sure could have used that money for their education. Had the grandparents handled things differently, we could have been the "bad guys" (misusing those funds) OR we might have been the savior that doubled the kids assets as we dd our own in the same period of time. So, I see the issues, but I wish there were a better way to deal with the issues because YMMV.

 

[firemediceric]

I have no right to ask, but am curious what fees are charged for your services - especially for handling the growth of finances. .

As far as investments, the financial advisor the money is placed with charges a 1% fee on the money he is handling. A decent some of the money is in a restricted money market account and in laddered CDs. No fees on that money per se as it is just with a local bank.

With regard to what I charge, on these two cases I will occasionally have a brief telephone conference with the financial advisor, I will balance the checking account and review bank statements roughly once a quarter. These two cases are pretty much on auto-pilot considering I am just financial guardian of these particular assets. I’m not guardian of the person on these cases.

I charge an hourly fee. My fee is $100 per hour. Non-professional guardians typically are not allowed to charge more than $35 an hour unless they have some type of special qualifications. There are plenty of attorneys who serve as guardians but are not “registered professional guardians.” Because of their “special qualification” as an attorney however, they often charge much more than the $35 an hour they would otherwise be restricted to charging.

 

[Koolau]

As far as investments, the financial advisor the money is placed with charges a 1% fee on the money he is handling. A decent some of the money is in a restricted money market account and in laddered CDs. No fees on that money per se as it is just with a local bank.

With regard to what I charge, on these two cases I will occasionally have a brief telephone conference with the financial advisor, I will balance the checking account and review bank statements roughly once a quarter. These two cases are pretty much on auto-pilot considering I am just financial guardian of these particular assets. I’m not guardian of the person on these cases.

I charge an hourly fee. My fee is $100 per hour. Non-professional guardians typically are not allowed to charge more than $35 an hour unless they have some type of special qualifications. There are plenty of attorneys who serve as guardians but are not “registered professional guardians.” Because of their “special qualification” as an attorney however, they often charge much more than the $35 an hour they would otherwise be restricted to charging.

Thanks. That sounds very reasonable. I have no idea what is considered "reasonable" in the trust area, but I've heard that 4 1/2% would not be out of line - even though I have no idea how that could be. As nearly as I could tell, the trust placed the kids money in fairly conservative investments - that would make sense because it would be assumed they would need the money relatively soon. BUT, since the trust company was only (essentially) forwarding us the quarterly statements, I wonder on what (moral) basis they could justify their fees. I guess we'll never know as that was many years ago - though I'm still helping the last kid pay off her student loans! YMMV

 

[smihaila]

What would have happened if the old woman (who, according to the script, had some problems but was capable of living alone) have said "No, thanks," closed the door, and called her lawyer?

More often than not, people just don't have "their lawyers". I for one, don't have one. Neither a "your travel agent", and not even a "your doctor", or "your tax accountant" etc etc .

 

[EA-Sports]

I care a lot

Anyone else watch I care a lot on Netflix? It’s really scary scenario especially for older wealthy folks with no relatives...

 

[Al in Ohio]

Anyone else watch I care a lot on Netflix? It’s really scary scenario especially for older wealthy folks with no relatives...

I watch alot of Netflix but hadn’t watched that. Can you give a summary of what it’s about?

 

[EA-Sports]

I care a lot

I watch alot of Netflix but hadn’t watched that. Can you give a summary of what it’s about?

It’s about a fictional legal guardian who colluded with doctors and care facilities to get old wealthy folks, and preferably with no families, under her legal guardianship so that she can drain their assets..that is until she chose a wrong victim..that’s the gist of it...