Update 8/5/2017 - Leave it to a jerk like Setzler to publicly wring his hands after he and his cohorts set the stage for the nuclear power plant scandal involving SCANA and Santee Cooper. This article offers an apt summary:
"It was the same state Legislature that set the stage for the project in 2007 by passing a law that allowed investor-owned utilities like SCE&G to charge their customers as the large nuclear plants were being built rather than after they were completed."
Setzler was a co-sponsor (see 8th paragraph) of this ridiculous law. Just one more SC racket via legislators. No future charges for the never-to-be-completed boondoggle? We want our money BACK, and we want it back NOW, "Senator."
On 9/20, I published a few more comments on the nuclear power scandal.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Congratulations, "Senator."
For the 2017 legislative session, you succeeded in keeping mainstream media quiet regarding South Carolina's probate racket. thereby making sure that your bill never made it out of committee.
I'll reiterate something from what I previously wrote:
I'd like to know how Senator Setzler thinks it makes someone feel to have their affairs placed on hold - a kind of legalized extortion - unless they hand over thousands of dollars in attorney fees and participate in establishing a false public record that disrespects their deceased loved one.
A country that forces people into such an untenable predicament deserves no one's allegiance. The fact that it was done so secretively adds insult to injury.
"Senator," where did you learn such cowardice? Were you brought up to do dirt to people behind their backs? Or is it that somewhere along the way you realized that Americans will tolerate anything a corrupt government dishes out and you just couldn't resist exploiting the situation for your own selfish interests?
You're no public servant, "Senator." You never have been. Blinded by greed and political ambition, people like you are incapable of grasping the concept of public service. You're just another politician, more adept than most when it comes to feeding at the public trough.
People like you make a mockery of the electoral system. Anyone with normal sensibilities would be ashamed of themselves.
You must feel right at home when working with clods like Kenny Bingham and Emma Dean as you protect the financial interests of probate-dealing law firms like your own. In the absence of a free press, it's a special pleasure to protest South Carolina's attorney-instigated probate racket in front of the law firm of Williams, Stitely, and Brink.
"Senator," at least quit trying to con people into thinking the public has an interest in placing time limits on wills. Your repulsive charade fools nobody, and word is spreading about South Carolina's probate racket.
By the way, "Senator," are you a Lutheran or a Baptist? Your profile says Lutheran, but attendance-wise you seem attracted to the Baptist denomination. That must politically fortunate given the fact that among church-going South Carolinians, the Baptist denomination is far more popular than the Lutheran denomination. This survey revealed that a whoppin' 22.6% consider themselves Baptist, whereas only 1.3%. consider themselves Lutheran.
As for me, I'll keep fighting the good fight. It has to do with confronting tyranny, exposing injustice, and standing up for what's right. It's another one of those things that people like you will never understand.
Meanwhile...
Keep warming those pews, "Senator," regardless of the denomination you prefer to associate with. There's nothing like church attendance to confirm a devotion to the Golden Rule.
Update 8/30/2017 - Protested for two hours front of the Statehouse. BEST RESPONSE YET AT THAT LOCATION, PUSHING TOTAL BLOG VISITS WELL OVER 9,000. A million thanks to all who signaled support and visited this blog. A WIS-10 "news" person once again saw my sign and didn't stop to inquire. If there's anything WIS loves to censor, it's any mention of SC's probate racket.
Updates 8/1/2017 -
> Sent a link to this post to all members of the South Carolina Senate and House.
> Protested two hours in front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm beginning around 2PM. Another GREAT response - MANY thanks to all who signaled support and/or visited this blog. A WIS-TV "news" crew stopped in front of me at a traffic light, censoring coverage of the probate racket.
Update 7/31/2017 - Protested for two hours front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm in downtown Lexington, beginning around 12:30. FANTASTIC response from motorists - another BIG round of thanks to all who signaled support and/or visited this blog. Wunna the best responses yet.
Update 7/28/2017 - Tweeted links to "Ambassador" Nikki Haley and Governor McMaster.
Update 7/27/2017 - Such a pleasure to send Senator Nikki and his sidekick, Alisa Painter, a link to this post.
Updates 8/1/2017 -
> Sent a link to this post to all members of the South Carolina Senate and House.
> Protested two hours in front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm beginning around 2PM. Another GREAT response - MANY thanks to all who signaled support and/or visited this blog. A WIS-TV "news" crew stopped in front of me at a traffic light, censoring coverage of the probate racket.
Update 8/8/2017 - Sent a link to this post to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Update 8/11/2017 - Sent a link to this post to the House Judiciary Committee.
Showing posts with label Kenny Bingham. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kenny Bingham. Show all posts
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Sunday, April 9, 2017
Senator Setzler's bill is an insult to South Carolinians
"The idea is the public should know who is paying their part-time legislators so they can judge whether their pay from other sources presents any potential conflicts." - 1/9/2017 article re corruption in the SC legislature.
Wednesday a week ago (3/29/2017), there musta been quite a ruckus going on behind the scenes while I was protesting in front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm. They are not happy with my presence, and afterwards, when I checked my emails, there was word from Senator Setzler' office manager, Alisa Painter, that Setzler had introduced a bill and wanted me to have a copy of it.
What a "coincidence." And what an insult Setzler's bill is to the people of South Carolina. Talk about gall...
SENATOR SETZLER HAS HAD OVER 30 YEARS TO TAKE ACTION TO SIMPLIFY THE PROBATE PROCESS IN THE INTEREST OF FOLKS WHO HAVE LOST LOVED ONES.
Now - in the face of negative public exposure and with the current legislative session more than half over - he suddenly introduces a watered-down bill (See S. 589) (word for word, the exact same hogwash as Kenny Bingham's bill last year) to give probate courts authority to decide when to apply the 10 year limit on wills. Fact is, there's no excuse for having time limits on wills. Many other states don't have time limits, South Carolina didn't prior to 1986, and I replied accordingly to Setzler's office manager, urging an overall simplification in the probate process.
In 1986, what was Senator Setzler's role in adding those attorney-serving complexities to the probate code, and did he make any efforts to notify the taxpaying public of what was going on? In 1986, his probate-dealing law firm - established in 1977, the first year he served as a senator - had been in business for 10 years, which brings up another "coincidence" in Tricky Nikki's sudden decision to introduce his current "probate bill."
This year, for the first time ever, South Carolina lawmakers had to disclose private sources of income. Tricky Nikki introduced his watered-down probate bill just one day before he was exposed in this article revealing lawmakers' private sources of income. It's now a matter of public record: Senator Setzler derives private income from his probate-dealing law firm, and it's anyone's guess how much money the good ol' boy has stashed away over the past three decades due to those attorney-serving complexities added to the probate code.
Why hasn't local mainstream media investigated Tricky Nikki's decades-long conflict of interest? How fortunate for "lawmakers" like Setzler that the required disclosure of sources of private income was postponed until after the election.
I suppose probate-attorney Setzler somehow "forgot" to send out press releases regarding his current bill, an effort which is no doubt destined to quietly die - as did Bingham's bill - in Committee. Even if it passed, a deadline was crossed last week, and Setzler's watered-down bill could not become law until 2018.
Who does Senator Setzler think he's fooling with this probate bill? Tricky Nikki epitomizes the conflicts of interest that have made governments unresponsive to people's needs. It's way past time for the legislative gang to quit exploiting the probate process for the personal gain of probate attorneys in general, and probate-dealing attorney-legislators in particular.
On 3/29/2017, when I replied to Alisa Painter's email, I got a weirdly-worded (apparently fake) Mailer-Daemon message, which led me to think Ms. Painter's email wasn't authentic. Had I not taken time to investigate, I wouldn't have been aware of Senator Setzler's bill, just like I wasn't aware of Kenny Bingham's bill (see 6/3/2016 update) last year until after it had been submitted for over a week. I tried to forward my original reply to Ms. Painter, but it wasn't clear if she received that either. On 4/2/2017, I tried a third time, and on 4/4/2017, I received confirmation from Ms. Painter that she had received my reply and would make Senator Setzler aware of it. As was the case last year, it looks like someone is intent on keeping things quiet regarding time limits on wills.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an email expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
6/13/2017 update - protested for an hour, downtown Lexington, front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink law firm THANKS AGAIN to the many motorists who signaled support. I've heard no more - didn't expect to - regarding Senator Setzler's bill. Apparently, the bill never made it out of committee.
5/19/2017 update - protested front of the State House for an hour. Here's another round of thanks to everyone who shows support and visits this blog. WIS-10 "news" drove by again - depend on 'em to keep quiet about the probate racket.
5/16/2017 update - another hour of protest in front of the State House, another GREAT response even with relatively light traffic. MANY THANKS to all who expressed support and visited this blog.
5/11/2017 update - protested for one hour in front of the State House. Light traffic but still a SUPERB response from motorists. MANY THANKS to all those who signaled support and took photos.
5/3/2017 update - protested the probate racket for 3 hours in front of the Williams, Stitely, and Brink law firm. MANY shows of support (they seem to be increasing), and total blog visits have now topped 7,000. A MILLION THANKS TO ALL. WIS-10 drove by and again ignored an issue that should have made headlines years ago.
4/29/2017 update - Is anyone surprised that a jerk like Setzler favors a gas tax? What a sick joke when the senator - a conniving, career politician with a conflict of interest regarding probate laws - has the unmitigated gall to blabber that "he was elected by the people to do what he thinks is right." Wonder if "the people" would have elected Tricky Nikki if "news" organizations like WIS-10 hadn't covered up his decades-long conflict of interest. Here's an honest look at the gas tax issue.
4/26/2017 update - protested in front of my "favorite" law firm - Williams, Stitely, and Brink - for 3.5 hrs. New time frame gimme an even BETTER response than I've come to expect. MANY thanks to the MANY motorists who signaled support and took photos.
4/20/2017 update - Protested in front of the Williams, Stitely, and Brink law firm for 2 hrs - another round of SUPER encouragement from motorists. MANY THANKS to all who signaled support. If you know someone in another county who's fed up with SC's probate racket, send 'em a link to this blog.
4/17/2017 update - Protested for 2 hrs, front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm. Another great response from motorists - a million thanks to all. Mainstream media is trying to keep news of SC's probate racket quiet. Please spread the word about what's going on.
4/15/2017 update - Tricky Nikki, aka Senator Setzler, has again gone silent re substantial efforts to clean up South Carolina's probate racket.
4/13/2017 update - MANY THANKS to everyone who's helping to expose what's going on.
4/12/2017 updates -
> Protested 2 hrs, front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm. THANKS EVER SO MUCH TO THE MANY MOTORISTS who signaled support. Wunna WIS-10's vehicles passed by, kept right on going. South Carolina's "News Leader" is an expert at filtering out the news people need to know.
> Tweeted a link to this post to Gov. McMaster.
4/10/2017 updates -
> Protested in front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm for 3 hours. SUPER response from motorists, MANY THANKS to all who signaled support. BLOG VISITS CONTINUE TO INCREASE. SPREAD THE WORD - IT'S WORKING.
> My pleasure to send Senator Setzler a link to this post via Twitter, Alisa Painter, and SC Legislature Online.
Wednesday a week ago (3/29/2017), there musta been quite a ruckus going on behind the scenes while I was protesting in front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm. They are not happy with my presence, and afterwards, when I checked my emails, there was word from Senator Setzler' office manager, Alisa Painter, that Setzler had introduced a bill and wanted me to have a copy of it.
What a "coincidence." And what an insult Setzler's bill is to the people of South Carolina. Talk about gall...
SENATOR SETZLER HAS HAD OVER 30 YEARS TO TAKE ACTION TO SIMPLIFY THE PROBATE PROCESS IN THE INTEREST OF FOLKS WHO HAVE LOST LOVED ONES.
Now - in the face of negative public exposure and with the current legislative session more than half over - he suddenly introduces a watered-down bill (See S. 589) (word for word, the exact same hogwash as Kenny Bingham's bill last year) to give probate courts authority to decide when to apply the 10 year limit on wills. Fact is, there's no excuse for having time limits on wills. Many other states don't have time limits, South Carolina didn't prior to 1986, and I replied accordingly to Setzler's office manager, urging an overall simplification in the probate process.
In 1986, what was Senator Setzler's role in adding those attorney-serving complexities to the probate code, and did he make any efforts to notify the taxpaying public of what was going on? In 1986, his probate-dealing law firm - established in 1977, the first year he served as a senator - had been in business for 10 years, which brings up another "coincidence" in Tricky Nikki's sudden decision to introduce his current "probate bill."
This year, for the first time ever, South Carolina lawmakers had to disclose private sources of income. Tricky Nikki introduced his watered-down probate bill just one day before he was exposed in this article revealing lawmakers' private sources of income. It's now a matter of public record: Senator Setzler derives private income from his probate-dealing law firm, and it's anyone's guess how much money the good ol' boy has stashed away over the past three decades due to those attorney-serving complexities added to the probate code.
Why hasn't local mainstream media investigated Tricky Nikki's decades-long conflict of interest? How fortunate for "lawmakers" like Setzler that the required disclosure of sources of private income was postponed until after the election.
I suppose probate-attorney Setzler somehow "forgot" to send out press releases regarding his current bill, an effort which is no doubt destined to quietly die - as did Bingham's bill - in Committee. Even if it passed, a deadline was crossed last week, and Setzler's watered-down bill could not become law until 2018.
Who does Senator Setzler think he's fooling with this probate bill? Tricky Nikki epitomizes the conflicts of interest that have made governments unresponsive to people's needs. It's way past time for the legislative gang to quit exploiting the probate process for the personal gain of probate attorneys in general, and probate-dealing attorney-legislators in particular.
On 3/29/2017, when I replied to Alisa Painter's email, I got a weirdly-worded (apparently fake) Mailer-Daemon message, which led me to think Ms. Painter's email wasn't authentic. Had I not taken time to investigate, I wouldn't have been aware of Senator Setzler's bill, just like I wasn't aware of Kenny Bingham's bill (see 6/3/2016 update) last year until after it had been submitted for over a week. I tried to forward my original reply to Ms. Painter, but it wasn't clear if she received that either. On 4/2/2017, I tried a third time, and on 4/4/2017, I received confirmation from Ms. Painter that she had received my reply and would make Senator Setzler aware of it. As was the case last year, it looks like someone is intent on keeping things quiet regarding time limits on wills.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an email expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
6/13/2017 update - protested for an hour, downtown Lexington, front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink law firm THANKS AGAIN to the many motorists who signaled support. I've heard no more - didn't expect to - regarding Senator Setzler's bill. Apparently, the bill never made it out of committee.
5/19/2017 update - protested front of the State House for an hour. Here's another round of thanks to everyone who shows support and visits this blog. WIS-10 "news" drove by again - depend on 'em to keep quiet about the probate racket.
5/16/2017 update - another hour of protest in front of the State House, another GREAT response even with relatively light traffic. MANY THANKS to all who expressed support and visited this blog.
5/11/2017 update - protested for one hour in front of the State House. Light traffic but still a SUPERB response from motorists. MANY THANKS to all those who signaled support and took photos.
5/3/2017 update - protested the probate racket for 3 hours in front of the Williams, Stitely, and Brink law firm. MANY shows of support (they seem to be increasing), and total blog visits have now topped 7,000. A MILLION THANKS TO ALL. WIS-10 drove by and again ignored an issue that should have made headlines years ago.
4/29/2017 update - Is anyone surprised that a jerk like Setzler favors a gas tax? What a sick joke when the senator - a conniving, career politician with a conflict of interest regarding probate laws - has the unmitigated gall to blabber that "he was elected by the people to do what he thinks is right." Wonder if "the people" would have elected Tricky Nikki if "news" organizations like WIS-10 hadn't covered up his decades-long conflict of interest. Here's an honest look at the gas tax issue.
4/26/2017 update - protested in front of my "favorite" law firm - Williams, Stitely, and Brink - for 3.5 hrs. New time frame gimme an even BETTER response than I've come to expect. MANY thanks to the MANY motorists who signaled support and took photos.
4/20/2017 update - Protested in front of the Williams, Stitely, and Brink law firm for 2 hrs - another round of SUPER encouragement from motorists. MANY THANKS to all who signaled support. If you know someone in another county who's fed up with SC's probate racket, send 'em a link to this blog.
4/17/2017 update - Protested for 2 hrs, front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm. Another great response from motorists - a million thanks to all. Mainstream media is trying to keep news of SC's probate racket quiet. Please spread the word about what's going on.
4/15/2017 update - Tricky Nikki, aka Senator Setzler, has again gone silent re substantial efforts to clean up South Carolina's probate racket.
4/13/2017 update - MANY THANKS to everyone who's helping to expose what's going on.
4/12/2017 updates -
> Protested 2 hrs, front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm. THANKS EVER SO MUCH TO THE MANY MOTORISTS who signaled support. Wunna WIS-10's vehicles passed by, kept right on going. South Carolina's "News Leader" is an expert at filtering out the news people need to know.
> Tweeted a link to this post to Gov. McMaster.
4/10/2017 updates -
> Protested in front of Williams, Stitely, and Brink's law firm for 3 hours. SUPER response from motorists, MANY THANKS to all who signaled support. BLOG VISITS CONTINUE TO INCREASE. SPREAD THE WORD - IT'S WORKING.
> My pleasure to send Senator Setzler a link to this post via Twitter, Alisa Painter, and SC Legislature Online.
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
Time limit on wills creates false public record, insults the living and the dead
Talk about treating the bereaved like dirt.
One of the worst parts of putting time limits on wills is requiring victims of the senseless scam to participate in establishing a public record that is nothing short of a boldfaced lie about their deceased loved one. The public record makes it appear that the loved one left no will. It's embarrassing, insulting, and shows that self-serving attorney-legislators couldn't care less about the bereaved.
I'd like to know how Senator Setzler thinks it makes someone feel to have their affairs placed on hold - a kind of legalized extortion - unless they hand over thousands of dollars in attorney fees and participate in establishing a false public record that disrespects their deceased loved one. Perhaps the"senator" is too busy making bank deposits to lend a helping hand to victims of South Carolina's probate racket.
The very idea of a gang of greedy, attorney-legislators sneaking around behind people's backs and nullifying wills while a complicit mainstream media keeps things quiet. Anyone who would be a party to such connivery is a shameless coward, devoid of conscience. Same goes for all the other idiotic complexities quietly added to the probate code.
It was a hoot when the attorney I spoke with in Senator Setzler's law firm came up with an open-ended fee - $1,500 plus $275 per hour - to address my mother's "deemed intestacy." I shudder to think what the final number of hours would be as a perfectly viable will is cast aside and a probate attorney starts wading through the slew of complexities to perform a Determination of Heirs. Somehow, I don't think an attorney with an open-ended fee agreement would be in much of a hurry to get any of the ridiculous requirements completed. Those complexities added to the probate code in 1986 have no doubt served Senator Setzler quite well, while his constituents have been betrayed.
No wonder probate-attorney Setzler would rather not talk about the probate racket. After the brief, self-serving blabber he came up with as a reply to the email I sent him last year, Senator Setzler has now clammed up entirely about the probate racket. This year, he won't even so much as acknowledge receipt of my email suggesting he introduce a bill similar to the one introduced last year by House "Ethics" Chairman Kenny Bingham. Who does Senator Setzler think he's supposed to represent, and who does he think pays his salary? Of course, I realize that the salary - $10,400 per year plus per diem - is pocket-change for career politicians like probate-attorney Setzler. But even so...
Public Accountant Setzler needs to account for his questionable behavior over the past 30 years, including how much money his law firm - founded in 1977, the same year he first won his senate seat - has made from inheritance-related cases. Really, folks: What kind of "representative" refuses to reply to an e-mail from a constituent?
I'll send Senator Setzler a link to this post - taxpayers are due an explanation regarding his lack of interest in simplifying probate.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an email expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
3/24/2017 - Picketed 2 hrs this afternoon in front of that probate-dealing law firm (they ain't happy with my choice of location, but that's another story) across from Lexington Probate Court. GREAT response, thanks to all. Signals of support and blog visits are WAY up.
3/17/2017 update - Picketed over 2 hours today cater-cornered from Lexington Probate Court (best exposure, and the probate-dealing law firm I'm in front of provides a perfect backdrop). The encouragement from motorists and pedestrians was PHENOMENAL. BLOG VISITS ARE WAY UP, A MILLION THANKS TO ALL WHO HELPED. Law firms that have advertised probate-related services at any time over the past 30 yrs should be ashamed of themselves.
3/16/2017 update - picketed at Lexington Probate Court (cater-cornered across the street) for 30 mins. GREAT RESPONSE - THANKS FOR VISITING THIS BLOG. Also sent a link to this post to Gov. McMaster via Twitter.
3/15/2017 update - My pleasure to send Tricky Nikki Setzler a link to this post via South Carolina Legislature Online and via Twitter.
One of the worst parts of putting time limits on wills is requiring victims of the senseless scam to participate in establishing a public record that is nothing short of a boldfaced lie about their deceased loved one. The public record makes it appear that the loved one left no will. It's embarrassing, insulting, and shows that self-serving attorney-legislators couldn't care less about the bereaved.
I'd like to know how Senator Setzler thinks it makes someone feel to have their affairs placed on hold - a kind of legalized extortion - unless they hand over thousands of dollars in attorney fees and participate in establishing a false public record that disrespects their deceased loved one. Perhaps the"senator" is too busy making bank deposits to lend a helping hand to victims of South Carolina's probate racket.
The very idea of a gang of greedy, attorney-legislators sneaking around behind people's backs and nullifying wills while a complicit mainstream media keeps things quiet. Anyone who would be a party to such connivery is a shameless coward, devoid of conscience. Same goes for all the other idiotic complexities quietly added to the probate code.
It was a hoot when the attorney I spoke with in Senator Setzler's law firm came up with an open-ended fee - $1,500 plus $275 per hour - to address my mother's "deemed intestacy." I shudder to think what the final number of hours would be as a perfectly viable will is cast aside and a probate attorney starts wading through the slew of complexities to perform a Determination of Heirs. Somehow, I don't think an attorney with an open-ended fee agreement would be in much of a hurry to get any of the ridiculous requirements completed. Those complexities added to the probate code in 1986 have no doubt served Senator Setzler quite well, while his constituents have been betrayed.
No wonder probate-attorney Setzler would rather not talk about the probate racket. After the brief, self-serving blabber he came up with as a reply to the email I sent him last year, Senator Setzler has now clammed up entirely about the probate racket. This year, he won't even so much as acknowledge receipt of my email suggesting he introduce a bill similar to the one introduced last year by House "Ethics" Chairman Kenny Bingham. Who does Senator Setzler think he's supposed to represent, and who does he think pays his salary? Of course, I realize that the salary - $10,400 per year plus per diem - is pocket-change for career politicians like probate-attorney Setzler. But even so...
Public Accountant Setzler needs to account for his questionable behavior over the past 30 years, including how much money his law firm - founded in 1977, the same year he first won his senate seat - has made from inheritance-related cases. Really, folks: What kind of "representative" refuses to reply to an e-mail from a constituent?
I'll send Senator Setzler a link to this post - taxpayers are due an explanation regarding his lack of interest in simplifying probate.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an email expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
3/24/2017 - Picketed 2 hrs this afternoon in front of that probate-dealing law firm (they ain't happy with my choice of location, but that's another story) across from Lexington Probate Court. GREAT response, thanks to all. Signals of support and blog visits are WAY up.
3/17/2017 update - Picketed over 2 hours today cater-cornered from Lexington Probate Court (best exposure, and the probate-dealing law firm I'm in front of provides a perfect backdrop). The encouragement from motorists and pedestrians was PHENOMENAL. BLOG VISITS ARE WAY UP, A MILLION THANKS TO ALL WHO HELPED. Law firms that have advertised probate-related services at any time over the past 30 yrs should be ashamed of themselves.
3/16/2017 update - picketed at Lexington Probate Court (cater-cornered across the street) for 30 mins. GREAT RESPONSE - THANKS FOR VISITING THIS BLOG. Also sent a link to this post to Gov. McMaster via Twitter.
3/15/2017 update - My pleasure to send Tricky Nikki Setzler a link to this post via South Carolina Legislature Online and via Twitter.
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Senator Setzler can run, but he can't hide
You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Last year, I sent an email to the senator asking what he had done to simplify probate requirements, and I encouraged him to support Kenny Bingham's bill. After two weeks without a reply, I published a blog post, sent the senator a link to it, published the link on Twitter and Facebook, and made two appearances in front of the senator's law firm directing people to this blog. Almost immediately thereafter, I received the reply from Senator Setzler stating that he was "inclined to support Representative Bingham's bill."
Nice try at making it appear that you would like to help your constituents, Senator, but it was late in the 2016 legislative session, odds were overwhelmingly strong that Bingham's bill would never make it out of committee, and "Ethics" Chairman Bingham had announced his intention to retire. Bingham's bill was, as I noted in an update, too little too late, and of course Senator Setzler ignored those pesky questions I asked him in my blog post.
By the time Senator Setzler got around to replying to my email, the legislative gang's attitude toward victims of South Carolina's probate/trust racket had been underscored by the repulsive charade put on by "Ethics" Chairman Bingham and attorney Emma Dean of the House Judiciary Committee. Only the profoundest of clods would pull such a stunt.
The main interest in Bingham's bill seemed to be in making sure the bill was kept as quiet as possible.
This year, I decided to see just how sincere probate-attorney Setzler actually is about simplifying the probate code, and on 1/30/17 - over three weeks ago - I sent him an e-mail suggesting that he introduce a bill similar to Kenny Bingham's for the current legislative session. And wouldn't ya know it, just like last year, I have yet to find any replies from the senator.
Point is, nobody should have to prompt Senator Setzler to initiate efforts to clean up South Carolina's probate/trust racket. The senator - a career politician for 40 years - probably had a hand in initiating those attorney-serving complexities to the probate code, but regardless of his role at the time, Senator Setzler has had over 30 years to take action on behalf of the bereaved. I wonder if the senator ever saw fit to inform his constituents that the probate code had been turned into a money-making scheme for attorneys. It was a hoot the way the attorney I spoke with in Senator Setzler's law firm intimated that the 1986 revision to the probate code was done on behalf of the taxpaying public. Silence is indeed golden for the probate/trust racket.
Attorney-legislators must be dancing in the aisles now that the governorship has gone to one of their own. The state's new governor - Henry McMaster - is another career politician and former Attorney General who's already been embroiled in a scandal and who somehow forgot to mention the state's probate/trust racket in the much ballyhooed video he made upon taking office.
I understand this entire situation quite well, Senator Setzler. There you are a well-entrenched, career politician, and here I am, just a lowly constituent.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
3/14/2017 update: Interest in South Carolina's probate racket is increasing, and Senator Setzler's kind would never be elected if "news" organizations like WIS-10 did their job and informed the public about pertinent issues. Not a word from the "senator" re my 1/30/2017 e-mail.
3/10/2017 update: Twitter is blocking numerous tweets re Senator Setzler and the probate racket from appearing on my profile page, which tends to reduce the number of re-tweets. Please spread the word about Senator Setzler and the probate racket.
3/9/2017 update: Picketed across the street from Lexington County Probate Court for about 2 hrs starting around 12:30. FANTASTIC RESPONSE - THANKS A MILLION to everyone who signaled support. If you were one of quite a few that took a photo, it would be GREAT if you posted it on the Internet.
2/27/2017 update: Probate-attorney Setzler sure has gotten quiet about simplifying probate. How come, Tricky Nikki? The attorney I spoke with in your law firm certainly wasn't bashful about coming up with an exorbitant, open-ended fee ($1,500 up front plus $275 an hour) for services that never should have been required in the first place regarding my mother's will.
2/25/2017 update: Bicycling home yesterday, Sen. Setzler's law firm was on the way. Jus' COULDN'T RESIST standing in front of the joint for 15 mins protesting the probate racket.
2/24/2017 update: Another round of protesting in front of the State House as Senator Setzler clams up. MANY THANKS to all who signaled support and visited this blog. Today it was an ABC WOLO, "news" crew that drove by but declined to investigate. Never mind that their studio is directly across the street from the State House Special interests have taken control of mainstream media.
2/23/2017 update: Still no reply from Senator Setzler, and today I stood in front of the SC State House - where the senator is probably holed up - with a sign directing folks to this blog. Many thanks to all who signaled support, and it was a hoot watching an NBC WIS-10 "news" crew nonchalantly drive by, apparently knowing better than to investigate and submit a story.
2/21/2017 update: My pleasure to e-mail a link to this post to Senator Setzler and (via Twitter) to Governor McMaster.
Last year, I sent an email to the senator asking what he had done to simplify probate requirements, and I encouraged him to support Kenny Bingham's bill. After two weeks without a reply, I published a blog post, sent the senator a link to it, published the link on Twitter and Facebook, and made two appearances in front of the senator's law firm directing people to this blog. Almost immediately thereafter, I received the reply from Senator Setzler stating that he was "inclined to support Representative Bingham's bill."
Nice try at making it appear that you would like to help your constituents, Senator, but it was late in the 2016 legislative session, odds were overwhelmingly strong that Bingham's bill would never make it out of committee, and "Ethics" Chairman Bingham had announced his intention to retire. Bingham's bill was, as I noted in an update, too little too late, and of course Senator Setzler ignored those pesky questions I asked him in my blog post.
By the time Senator Setzler got around to replying to my email, the legislative gang's attitude toward victims of South Carolina's probate/trust racket had been underscored by the repulsive charade put on by "Ethics" Chairman Bingham and attorney Emma Dean of the House Judiciary Committee. Only the profoundest of clods would pull such a stunt.
The main interest in Bingham's bill seemed to be in making sure the bill was kept as quiet as possible.
This year, I decided to see just how sincere probate-attorney Setzler actually is about simplifying the probate code, and on 1/30/17 - over three weeks ago - I sent him an e-mail suggesting that he introduce a bill similar to Kenny Bingham's for the current legislative session. And wouldn't ya know it, just like last year, I have yet to find any replies from the senator.
Point is, nobody should have to prompt Senator Setzler to initiate efforts to clean up South Carolina's probate/trust racket. The senator - a career politician for 40 years - probably had a hand in initiating those attorney-serving complexities to the probate code, but regardless of his role at the time, Senator Setzler has had over 30 years to take action on behalf of the bereaved. I wonder if the senator ever saw fit to inform his constituents that the probate code had been turned into a money-making scheme for attorneys. It was a hoot the way the attorney I spoke with in Senator Setzler's law firm intimated that the 1986 revision to the probate code was done on behalf of the taxpaying public. Silence is indeed golden for the probate/trust racket.
Attorney-legislators must be dancing in the aisles now that the governorship has gone to one of their own. The state's new governor - Henry McMaster - is another career politician and former Attorney General who's already been embroiled in a scandal and who somehow forgot to mention the state's probate/trust racket in the much ballyhooed video he made upon taking office.
I understand this entire situation quite well, Senator Setzler. There you are a well-entrenched, career politician, and here I am, just a lowly constituent.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
3/14/2017 update: Interest in South Carolina's probate racket is increasing, and Senator Setzler's kind would never be elected if "news" organizations like WIS-10 did their job and informed the public about pertinent issues. Not a word from the "senator" re my 1/30/2017 e-mail.
3/10/2017 update: Twitter is blocking numerous tweets re Senator Setzler and the probate racket from appearing on my profile page, which tends to reduce the number of re-tweets. Please spread the word about Senator Setzler and the probate racket.
3/9/2017 update: Picketed across the street from Lexington County Probate Court for about 2 hrs starting around 12:30. FANTASTIC RESPONSE - THANKS A MILLION to everyone who signaled support. If you were one of quite a few that took a photo, it would be GREAT if you posted it on the Internet.
2/27/2017 update: Probate-attorney Setzler sure has gotten quiet about simplifying probate. How come, Tricky Nikki? The attorney I spoke with in your law firm certainly wasn't bashful about coming up with an exorbitant, open-ended fee ($1,500 up front plus $275 an hour) for services that never should have been required in the first place regarding my mother's will.
2/25/2017 update: Bicycling home yesterday, Sen. Setzler's law firm was on the way. Jus' COULDN'T RESIST standing in front of the joint for 15 mins protesting the probate racket.
2/24/2017 update: Another round of protesting in front of the State House as Senator Setzler clams up. MANY THANKS to all who signaled support and visited this blog. Today it was an ABC WOLO, "news" crew that drove by but declined to investigate. Never mind that their studio is directly across the street from the State House Special interests have taken control of mainstream media.
2/23/2017 update: Still no reply from Senator Setzler, and today I stood in front of the SC State House - where the senator is probably holed up - with a sign directing folks to this blog. Many thanks to all who signaled support, and it was a hoot watching an NBC WIS-10 "news" crew nonchalantly drive by, apparently knowing better than to investigate and submit a story.
2/21/2017 update: My pleasure to e-mail a link to this post to Senator Setzler and (via Twitter) to Governor McMaster.
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
For SC's probate racket, silence is golden
Update 2/15/2019 - The so-called Freedom Action Network (FAN) of South Carolina is refusing to publish my submitted post on their Facebook page warning South Carolinians that time limits have been placed on wills. Maybe FAN has bosses in the SC legislature that won't let 'em spread the word.
"...they cannot rescue themselves via the voting booth. In my opinion, the American people will remain serfs until they wake up to Revolution." - Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
It's been a hoot watching the charade of silence surrounding South Carolina's probate racket. From Governor Haley to mainstream media, the guideline is "keep it quiet," and news blackouts are in full swing, most notably, perhaps, by South Carolina's "News Leader," WIS-10. Even the SC Policy Council dares not address the issue. I've sent both of these "news" organizations links to this blog. A Facebook message (with a link to this blog) to the local radio show, "Return to Joy," - which purports to help folks struggling through the process of bereavement - got no reply.
A couple of months ago, I tuned in to another local radio spot, Frankie Griffin's "Success in Real Estate Show," and was treated to blabberings from a spokesperson for Caldwell, Inc., extolling the virtues of setting up trusts to avoid probate. How the taxpayer-funded nightmare of probate got started in South Carolina wasn't mentioned, and a "caller" chimed in with remarks about how simply having a will no longer offered any assurance that the probate process would be reasonably simple. Interesting that Caldwell, Inc. was founded shortly before the SC legislature turned the taxpayer-funded probate process into an attorney-serving nightmare for heirs. Realtor Frankie Griffin, incidentally, also promotes Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) - I call 'em neighborhood gangs - and he's quick to point out that HOAs have been granted police powers and can file liens and foreclose on properties.
Ah, that orchestrated effort at brainwashing a gullible, cowardly public. The "Home of the Brave" is apparently scared to death of a gang of self-serving attorneys in the legislature, not to mention the American Bar Association.
Meanwhile, Kenny Bingham's bill regarding time limits on wills never even got a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. The effort at keeping things quiet regarding Chairman Bingham's watered-down bill - time limits on wills need to be abolished, not reformed - have been incredibly successful, and as things unfolded, I realized just how determined South Carolina's corrupt power structure is to bury the issue. The realization prompted me to re-publish a post I had previously removed, and include a detailed explanation of how the came to be published.
In my open remarks to Senator Setzler, I asked what it will take for the taxpaying public to get some fundamental decency out of this government. But here's a better question:
How much longer will the taxpaying public sacrifice its time, money, and effort at the alter of a pervasively corrupt power structure?
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
Update 12/19/2017 - According to the SC Secretary of State, the SC Policy Council's president, Ashley Landess, is paid a whoppin' $104,681 per year. No wonder the Council wants people to donate. I blogged about Ms. Landess' absurd response to SC's nuclear power scandal.
Update 4/18/2017 - The probate-dealing law firm - Williams, Stitely, and Brink - that I've been protesting in front of across from the Lexington Probate Court sure has gone silent since I exposed what they said to me about my presence.
Update 2/23/2017 - Today I stood in front of the SC State House holding up a sign that directed folks to this blog, and it was a hoot watching a WIS-10 "news" crew drive nonchalantly by, apparently knowing better than to investigate and submit a story.
Update 1/27/2017 - In addition to having a slew of attorney-legislators, South Carolina now has an attorney-governor. Henry McMaster has yet to breathe a word about the probate racket.
Update 6/9/2016 - Dr. Paul Craig Roberts references a great article that discusses efforts to keep the public unaware of corrupt laws. South Carolina's probate racket epitomizes this sorry state of affairs.
Update 7/14/2016 - Caldwell, Inc. recently came up with a new radio ad. Their previous ad belted out "Probate is avoidable, peace of mind is attainable," but any reference to probate has now been removed. My, my, wonder why.
"...they cannot rescue themselves via the voting booth. In my opinion, the American people will remain serfs until they wake up to Revolution." - Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
It's been a hoot watching the charade of silence surrounding South Carolina's probate racket. From Governor Haley to mainstream media, the guideline is "keep it quiet," and news blackouts are in full swing, most notably, perhaps, by South Carolina's "News Leader," WIS-10. Even the SC Policy Council dares not address the issue. I've sent both of these "news" organizations links to this blog. A Facebook message (with a link to this blog) to the local radio show, "Return to Joy," - which purports to help folks struggling through the process of bereavement - got no reply.
A couple of months ago, I tuned in to another local radio spot, Frankie Griffin's "Success in Real Estate Show," and was treated to blabberings from a spokesperson for Caldwell, Inc., extolling the virtues of setting up trusts to avoid probate. How the taxpayer-funded nightmare of probate got started in South Carolina wasn't mentioned, and a "caller" chimed in with remarks about how simply having a will no longer offered any assurance that the probate process would be reasonably simple. Interesting that Caldwell, Inc. was founded shortly before the SC legislature turned the taxpayer-funded probate process into an attorney-serving nightmare for heirs. Realtor Frankie Griffin, incidentally, also promotes Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) - I call 'em neighborhood gangs - and he's quick to point out that HOAs have been granted police powers and can file liens and foreclose on properties.
Ah, that orchestrated effort at brainwashing a gullible, cowardly public. The "Home of the Brave" is apparently scared to death of a gang of self-serving attorneys in the legislature, not to mention the American Bar Association.
Meanwhile, Kenny Bingham's bill regarding time limits on wills never even got a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. The effort at keeping things quiet regarding Chairman Bingham's watered-down bill - time limits on wills need to be abolished, not reformed - have been incredibly successful, and as things unfolded, I realized just how determined South Carolina's corrupt power structure is to bury the issue. The realization prompted me to re-publish a post I had previously removed, and include a detailed explanation of how the came to be published.
In my open remarks to Senator Setzler, I asked what it will take for the taxpaying public to get some fundamental decency out of this government. But here's a better question:
How much longer will the taxpaying public sacrifice its time, money, and effort at the alter of a pervasively corrupt power structure?
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
Update 12/19/2017 - According to the SC Secretary of State, the SC Policy Council's president, Ashley Landess, is paid a whoppin' $104,681 per year. No wonder the Council wants people to donate. I blogged about Ms. Landess' absurd response to SC's nuclear power scandal.
Update 4/18/2017 - The probate-dealing law firm - Williams, Stitely, and Brink - that I've been protesting in front of across from the Lexington Probate Court sure has gone silent since I exposed what they said to me about my presence.
Update 2/23/2017 - Today I stood in front of the SC State House holding up a sign that directed folks to this blog, and it was a hoot watching a WIS-10 "news" crew drive nonchalantly by, apparently knowing better than to investigate and submit a story.
Update 1/27/2017 - In addition to having a slew of attorney-legislators, South Carolina now has an attorney-governor. Henry McMaster has yet to breathe a word about the probate racket.
Update 6/9/2016 - Dr. Paul Craig Roberts references a great article that discusses efforts to keep the public unaware of corrupt laws. South Carolina's probate racket epitomizes this sorry state of affairs.
Update 7/14/2016 - Caldwell, Inc. recently came up with a new radio ad. Their previous ad belted out "Probate is avoidable, peace of mind is attainable," but any reference to probate has now been removed. My, my, wonder why.
Wednesday, May 4, 2016
A closer look at Lexington County Probate Court
Update 4/28/2017 - It's now a matter of public record that Senator Setzler does indeed have a CONFLICT OF INTEREST when it comes to SC's probate racket. He derives income from his probate-dealing law firm.
Self-serving slobs - er I mean attorneys - in the legislature have passed a law prohibiting probate court personnel from giving "legal advice." Kinda vague, but the message is clear: "Drum up as much business as possible for probate attorneys."
Summary of my situation
I initially telephoned Lexington County Probate Court and was told that my mother's will was no longer valid, and I would have to contact an attorney. I told them I wanted to act as my own attorney and was told that I couldn't do so.
I then contacted the attorney who drew up my mother's will. He no longer handled probate matters, and referred me to an attorney in Richland County who offered to resolve my mother's will for $1,800 and my dad's for an additional $700 (I should be able to probate my dad's will myself, but my mother's will has to be probated first). When asked, he said I could represent myself in resolving my mother's will, but he "wouldn't recommend it."
Next, I visited the probate court with my mother's will, explained that an attorney had told me I could represent myself, and was nonetheless again instructed to see an attorney, and I was given a couple of phone numbers for lawyer referral services. And... I was strongly advised to see an attorney in Lexington County.
Right. If yer gonna force folks to hire an attorney, it might as well be one in the county the court is located in. Never mind that any probate attorney in the state is capable of handling the matter.
After I persisted in requesting to represent myself, mention was made of a "Determination of Heirs," the fact that the court had no forms relevant to this, and that in addition to preparing legal documents, there was some sort of requirement that I run a few newspaper ads. Later, I telephoned the court and asked for a standard packet of forms. I noticed a place to explain facts justifying "Tardy Probate," so I went ahead and completed the first form - an application to be appointed personal representative of my mother's estate - had it notarized, and took it to the court...
But alas. The notarized application to be appointed personal representative of my mother's estate - which shouldn't have been necessary anyway since I was named Executor in her will - was refused. I was told that "an attorney will have to be involved," and when I asked court personnel to provide that in writing, my request was refused. Twice.
So I consulted an attorney in Lexington County. In fact, I consulted an attorney in the law offices of my district's senator - and probate attorney - Nikki Setzler. Not that Senator Setzler might conceivably have a conflict of interest when it comes to legislation aimed at simplifying the probate process, but his guy wanted $1,500 plus $275 per hour to probate my mother's estate.
Shortly thereafter, I contacted my district's House representative Kenny Bingham to see if any efforts were underway to eliminate South Carolina's time limit for probating wills, and that led to a bill giving probate courts discretion. The bill remains in committee, but at least it's a start in addressing the probate/trust racket in South Carolina.
Probate racketeering is taking place all across America, and it's the product of a brain-dead, cowardly public that tolerates anything special interests dish out. For anyone out there who still has a sense of fundamental decency and is willing to act on it, here are a few suggestions:
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
Update 5/13/2016 - Monday of this week, I sent an e-mail to Senator Setzler, asking what he's done, or plans to do, to simplify South Carolina's probate process, and I encouraged him to support Kenny Bingham's efforts. I'm unaware of any response from Senator Setzler. Stay tuned.
Update 5/21/2016 - Still can't find any response from Senator Setzler. 'Course, I realize that probate attorneys in SC must be very busy these days...
Self-serving slobs - er I mean attorneys - in the legislature have passed a law prohibiting probate court personnel from giving "legal advice." Kinda vague, but the message is clear: "Drum up as much business as possible for probate attorneys."
Summary of my situation
I initially telephoned Lexington County Probate Court and was told that my mother's will was no longer valid, and I would have to contact an attorney. I told them I wanted to act as my own attorney and was told that I couldn't do so.
I then contacted the attorney who drew up my mother's will. He no longer handled probate matters, and referred me to an attorney in Richland County who offered to resolve my mother's will for $1,800 and my dad's for an additional $700 (I should be able to probate my dad's will myself, but my mother's will has to be probated first). When asked, he said I could represent myself in resolving my mother's will, but he "wouldn't recommend it."
Next, I visited the probate court with my mother's will, explained that an attorney had told me I could represent myself, and was nonetheless again instructed to see an attorney, and I was given a couple of phone numbers for lawyer referral services. And... I was strongly advised to see an attorney in Lexington County.
Right. If yer gonna force folks to hire an attorney, it might as well be one in the county the court is located in. Never mind that any probate attorney in the state is capable of handling the matter.
After I persisted in requesting to represent myself, mention was made of a "Determination of Heirs," the fact that the court had no forms relevant to this, and that in addition to preparing legal documents, there was some sort of requirement that I run a few newspaper ads. Later, I telephoned the court and asked for a standard packet of forms. I noticed a place to explain facts justifying "Tardy Probate," so I went ahead and completed the first form - an application to be appointed personal representative of my mother's estate - had it notarized, and took it to the court...
But alas. The notarized application to be appointed personal representative of my mother's estate - which shouldn't have been necessary anyway since I was named Executor in her will - was refused. I was told that "an attorney will have to be involved," and when I asked court personnel to provide that in writing, my request was refused. Twice.
So I consulted an attorney in Lexington County. In fact, I consulted an attorney in the law offices of my district's senator - and probate attorney - Nikki Setzler. Not that Senator Setzler might conceivably have a conflict of interest when it comes to legislation aimed at simplifying the probate process, but his guy wanted $1,500 plus $275 per hour to probate my mother's estate.
Shortly thereafter, I contacted my district's House representative Kenny Bingham to see if any efforts were underway to eliminate South Carolina's time limit for probating wills, and that led to a bill giving probate courts discretion. The bill remains in committee, but at least it's a start in addressing the probate/trust racket in South Carolina.
Probate racketeering is taking place all across America, and it's the product of a brain-dead, cowardly public that tolerates anything special interests dish out. For anyone out there who still has a sense of fundamental decency and is willing to act on it, here are a few suggestions:
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
Update 5/13/2016 - Monday of this week, I sent an e-mail to Senator Setzler, asking what he's done, or plans to do, to simplify South Carolina's probate process, and I encouraged him to support Kenny Bingham's efforts. I'm unaware of any response from Senator Setzler. Stay tuned.
Update 5/21/2016 - Still can't find any response from Senator Setzler. 'Course, I realize that probate attorneys in SC must be very busy these days...
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
THANK YOU, Ethics Chairman Kenny Bingham, for your bill regarding South Carolina's time limit on wills.
Update 6/3/2016 - I've decided to re-publish a previous post regarding events leading up to the publication of this post.
I e-mailed Kenneth A. "Kenny" Bingham (House Representative for my district, and chairman of the Ethics Committee), asking if any efforts were underway to eliminate placing time limits on wills, and I mentioned that many states had no limits. He e-mailed back immediately, asking for specifics regarding my situation. Here's a copy of my reply:
Dear Mr. Bingham,
Many thanks for your interest and your efforts.
I'm an only child, sole heir, age 70, and have lived in South Carolina most of my life. My mother died in 2002 at age 86, a year after my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. The property deed is in all three of our names (we each purchased a third), and each of us had wills leaving our share to each other and naming each other as executors. We all three lived at the residence since purchasing it in the late 70s, and all financial accounts were joint with right of survivorship.
When my mother died, I was devastated, but I was honored to accept full-time-care-giving-duties for my dad. I was totally unfamiliar with the probate process - all relatives are in distant states out west - and I could discern no immediate reason to have my mother's will probated. To the best of my knowledge, the matter involved no time limits and could be resolved by little more than taking death certificates to the Register of Deeds. In 2010, my dad died at home at age 92.
Several years after my dad died, I contacted Lexington County Probate Court and was told that my mother's will was no longer valid and I would have to hire a lawyer. I was told that I could not represent myself in the matter - something I now know is technically incorrect, but intestate requirements (Determination of Heirs) are indeed beyond the expertise of most folks. Attorney fees to resolve my situation are in the $2,000 range, and as you may imagine, I have been in quite a quandary regarding how to proceed.
I think my situation demonstrates that each case is unique. This is no doubt why other states - including Florida, Virginia, and Oregon - have no time limits, and why Pennsylvania has a limit of 21 years. Everyone I've spoken with is unaware of South Carolina's current 10-year limit and is shocked and dismayed to learn of it. I don't think South Carolina had any such limits prior to 1986.
Any assistance you can offer will be deeply appreciated.
Sincerely,
Parris Boyd
Chairman Bingham referred me to Emma Dean, an attorney who works with the House Judiciary Committee, and the two of them prepared a bill aimed at helping me, and people in situations similar to mine. Chairman Binghams's bill has now been submitted to the Judiciary Committee.
Saying that I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Bingham and attorney Dean is certainly an understatement. I hope the South Carolina legislature will pass Chairman Bingham's bill without delay.
Update 1/20/2017 - All for naught. Chairman Bingham retired last year, and I've heard nothing further about the bill he introduced.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
I e-mailed Kenneth A. "Kenny" Bingham (House Representative for my district, and chairman of the Ethics Committee), asking if any efforts were underway to eliminate placing time limits on wills, and I mentioned that many states had no limits. He e-mailed back immediately, asking for specifics regarding my situation. Here's a copy of my reply:
Dear Mr. Bingham,
Many thanks for your interest and your efforts.
I'm an only child, sole heir, age 70, and have lived in South Carolina most of my life. My mother died in 2002 at age 86, a year after my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. The property deed is in all three of our names (we each purchased a third), and each of us had wills leaving our share to each other and naming each other as executors. We all three lived at the residence since purchasing it in the late 70s, and all financial accounts were joint with right of survivorship.
When my mother died, I was devastated, but I was honored to accept full-time-care-giving-duties for my dad. I was totally unfamiliar with the probate process - all relatives are in distant states out west - and I could discern no immediate reason to have my mother's will probated. To the best of my knowledge, the matter involved no time limits and could be resolved by little more than taking death certificates to the Register of Deeds. In 2010, my dad died at home at age 92.
Several years after my dad died, I contacted Lexington County Probate Court and was told that my mother's will was no longer valid and I would have to hire a lawyer. I was told that I could not represent myself in the matter - something I now know is technically incorrect, but intestate requirements (Determination of Heirs) are indeed beyond the expertise of most folks. Attorney fees to resolve my situation are in the $2,000 range, and as you may imagine, I have been in quite a quandary regarding how to proceed.
I think my situation demonstrates that each case is unique. This is no doubt why other states - including Florida, Virginia, and Oregon - have no time limits, and why Pennsylvania has a limit of 21 years. Everyone I've spoken with is unaware of South Carolina's current 10-year limit and is shocked and dismayed to learn of it. I don't think South Carolina had any such limits prior to 1986.
Any assistance you can offer will be deeply appreciated.
Sincerely,
Parris Boyd
Chairman Bingham referred me to Emma Dean, an attorney who works with the House Judiciary Committee, and the two of them prepared a bill aimed at helping me, and people in situations similar to mine. Chairman Binghams's bill has now been submitted to the Judiciary Committee.
Saying that I appreciate the efforts of Chairman Bingham and attorney Dean is certainly an understatement. I hope the South Carolina legislature will pass Chairman Bingham's bill without delay.
Update 1/20/2017 - All for naught. Chairman Bingham retired last year, and I've heard nothing further about the bill he introduced.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring a probate attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Executors (now called Personal Representatives) shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
Monday, April 18, 2016
Legal Aid? No, Mr. "Ethics" Chairman. What I need is a government with fundamental decency.
Update 6/3/2016 - On 4/20/16, bewildered by the strange sequence of events, I removed this post. I've decided to re-publish it, along with a detailed explanation of what happened.
I first contacted Kenny Bingham on 2/25/16, and received the insulting "legal aid" e-mail from Emma Dean (copy to Kenny) on 3/15/16. I immediately replied that I didn't qualify for legal aid. On 3/29/16, I asked attorney Dean for the status of Rep. Bingham's bill, and got no reply. On 4/4/16, having heard nothing from attorney Dean, I published this blog, and on 4/5/16, I sent a blog link to attorney Dean (copy to Kenny Bingham).
I heard nothing more from attorney Dean until 4/20/16, which was two days after this post was publicized on Blogger, Facebook, and Twitter, including links to Governor Haley, and the blog had received over 200 visits. On 4/20/16 at 8:37 AM, I received an e-mail from attorney Dean informing me that Kenny Bingham's bill had been submitted to the House Judiciary Committee on 4/12/16. Bewildered, but willing to give them the benefit of a doubt, I then removed this post and published a post thanking Chairman Bingham and attorney Dean for their efforts.
There seems to be a concerted effort - from the legislature to mainstream media - to "keep it quiet" regarding anything relevant to South Carolina's probate/trust racket.
Before publishing this blog, I e-mailed Kenneth A. "Kenny" Bingham (House Representative for my district, and chairman of the Ethics Committee), asking if any efforts were underway to eliminate placing time limits on wills. I mentioned that many states had no limits, and he asked for specifics regarding my situation. Here's a copy of my reply:
Dear Mr. Bingham,
Many thanks for your interest and your efforts.
I'm an only child, sole heir, age 70, and have lived in South Carolina most of my life. My mother died in 2002 at age 86, a year after my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. The property deed is in all three of our names (we each purchased a third), and each of us had wills leaving our share to each other and naming each other as executors. We all three lived at the residence since purchasing it in the late 70s, and all financial accounts were joint with right of survivorship.
When my mother died, I was devastated, but I was honored to accept full-time-care-giving-duties for my dad. I was totally unfamiliar with the probate process - all relatives are in distant states out west - and I could discern no immediate reason to have my mother's will probated. To the best of my knowledge, the matter involved no time limits and could be resolved by little more than taking death certificates to the Register of Deeds. In 2010, my dad died at home at age 92.
Several years after my dad died, I contacted Lexington County Probate Court and was told that my mother's will was no longer valid and I would have to hire a lawyer. I was told that I could not represent myself in the matter - something I now know is technically incorrect, but intestate requirements (Determination of Heirs) are indeed beyond the expertise of most folks. Attorney fees to resolve my situation are in the $2,000 range, and as you may imagine, I have been in quite a quandary regarding how to proceed.
I think my situation demonstrates that each case is unique. This is no doubt why other states - including Florida, Virginia, and Oregon - have no time limits, and why Pennsylvania has a limit of 21 years. Everyone I've spoken with is unaware of South Carolina's current 10-year limit and is shocked and dismayed to learn of it. I don't think South Carolina had any such limits prior to 1986.
Any assistance you can offer will be deeply appreciated.
Sincerely,
Parris Boyd
The "ethics" chairman referred me to Emma Dean, an attorney (of course), and the two of them put on an award-winning "we'll-try-to- help" performance that would have made any politician proud. Their "encouraging" e-mails went on for about two and a half weeks, suddenly culminating in an absurd and insulting e-mail from attorney Dean (copy to Kenny) suggesting that I contact legal aid services to see if I qualified. This was followed by their refusal to reply to any of my subsequent e-mails.
Perhaps the "ethics" chairman and attorney Dean were offended that anyone would dare to address the nonsensical nature of placing time limits on wills, and the outlandish fees probate attorneys are raking in to "resolve" such matters.
It is becoming obvious that we now live in an oligarchy run by special interests. In South Carolina, we are confronted not only by the probate/trust racket, but also by a gang of "legislators" who won't repair the roads, waste tax dollars on roundabouts, and have turned a deaf ear to widespread public outrage over homeowners' associations (HOAs).
One thing's for sure:
Only a gang of subhuman monsters would line their own pockets by leveraging tax dollars to torment people struggling through the process of bereavement.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring an attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Heirs shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
I first contacted Kenny Bingham on 2/25/16, and received the insulting "legal aid" e-mail from Emma Dean (copy to Kenny) on 3/15/16. I immediately replied that I didn't qualify for legal aid. On 3/29/16, I asked attorney Dean for the status of Rep. Bingham's bill, and got no reply. On 4/4/16, having heard nothing from attorney Dean, I published this blog, and on 4/5/16, I sent a blog link to attorney Dean (copy to Kenny Bingham).
I heard nothing more from attorney Dean until 4/20/16, which was two days after this post was publicized on Blogger, Facebook, and Twitter, including links to Governor Haley, and the blog had received over 200 visits. On 4/20/16 at 8:37 AM, I received an e-mail from attorney Dean informing me that Kenny Bingham's bill had been submitted to the House Judiciary Committee on 4/12/16. Bewildered, but willing to give them the benefit of a doubt, I then removed this post and published a post thanking Chairman Bingham and attorney Dean for their efforts.
There seems to be a concerted effort - from the legislature to mainstream media - to "keep it quiet" regarding anything relevant to South Carolina's probate/trust racket.
Before publishing this blog, I e-mailed Kenneth A. "Kenny" Bingham (House Representative for my district, and chairman of the Ethics Committee), asking if any efforts were underway to eliminate placing time limits on wills. I mentioned that many states had no limits, and he asked for specifics regarding my situation. Here's a copy of my reply:
Dear Mr. Bingham,
Many thanks for your interest and your efforts.
I'm an only child, sole heir, age 70, and have lived in South Carolina most of my life. My mother died in 2002 at age 86, a year after my dad was diagnosed with Alzheimer's. The property deed is in all three of our names (we each purchased a third), and each of us had wills leaving our share to each other and naming each other as executors. We all three lived at the residence since purchasing it in the late 70s, and all financial accounts were joint with right of survivorship.
When my mother died, I was devastated, but I was honored to accept full-time-care-giving-duties for my dad. I was totally unfamiliar with the probate process - all relatives are in distant states out west - and I could discern no immediate reason to have my mother's will probated. To the best of my knowledge, the matter involved no time limits and could be resolved by little more than taking death certificates to the Register of Deeds. In 2010, my dad died at home at age 92.
Several years after my dad died, I contacted Lexington County Probate Court and was told that my mother's will was no longer valid and I would have to hire a lawyer. I was told that I could not represent myself in the matter - something I now know is technically incorrect, but intestate requirements (Determination of Heirs) are indeed beyond the expertise of most folks. Attorney fees to resolve my situation are in the $2,000 range, and as you may imagine, I have been in quite a quandary regarding how to proceed.
I think my situation demonstrates that each case is unique. This is no doubt why other states - including Florida, Virginia, and Oregon - have no time limits, and why Pennsylvania has a limit of 21 years. Everyone I've spoken with is unaware of South Carolina's current 10-year limit and is shocked and dismayed to learn of it. I don't think South Carolina had any such limits prior to 1986.
Any assistance you can offer will be deeply appreciated.
Sincerely,
Parris Boyd
The "ethics" chairman referred me to Emma Dean, an attorney (of course), and the two of them put on an award-winning "we'll-try-to- help" performance that would have made any politician proud. Their "encouraging" e-mails went on for about two and a half weeks, suddenly culminating in an absurd and insulting e-mail from attorney Dean (copy to Kenny) suggesting that I contact legal aid services to see if I qualified. This was followed by their refusal to reply to any of my subsequent e-mails.
Perhaps the "ethics" chairman and attorney Dean were offended that anyone would dare to address the nonsensical nature of placing time limits on wills, and the outlandish fees probate attorneys are raking in to "resolve" such matters.
It is becoming obvious that we now live in an oligarchy run by special interests. In South Carolina, we are confronted not only by the probate/trust racket, but also by a gang of "legislators" who won't repair the roads, waste tax dollars on roundabouts, and have turned a deaf ear to widespread public outrage over homeowners' associations (HOAs).
One thing's for sure:
Only a gang of subhuman monsters would line their own pockets by leveraging tax dollars to torment people struggling through the process of bereavement.
What YOU can do:
> Spread the word about the probate/trust racket. Most folks don't find out about the attorney-generated horrors of probate until they are struggling through the bereavement process, and shock value is a key part of the effort to browbeat people into hiring an attorney.
> If you need help with non-probate matters, avoid using attorneys who advertise that they specialize in probate. Many attorneys refuse to get involved in the probate racket, and one of them told me with a wink, "It's a 'highly specialized' area of law."
> Refuse to be bullied by the attorney-generated horrors of probate into paying attorneys to set up trusts. Probate is financed with tax dollars, and should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts. Heirs shouldn't need a law degree to probate an inheritance.
> Cut costs by downloading your own estate documents - especially wills - from the Internet. Paying probate attorneys outlandish fees to "draw up a will" is risky business, because attorney-legislators have a vested interest in nullifying wills.
> Last - and what certainly shouldn't be least (but probably is) - send "your representatives" an e-mail expressing your sentiments about the probate/trust racket.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)