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 legislators. Show all posts
Showing posts with label legislators. Show all posts
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Monday, March 27, 2017
Probate-dealing law firm doesn't like where I stand
See 3/31 and 3/29 updates below.
One of downtown Lexington's high falutin, probate-dealin' law firms - Williams, Stitely, and Brink - is not happy about a victim of the probate racket standing in front of their building directing folks to this blog. Some of them came out (dressed fit to kill, I might add), and Mr. Williams kindly informed me (never in a million years had I realized) that I was "standing in front of a law firm." It seems his wife - and by extension Mr. Williams himself - were unhappy about my presence, and never mind my first amendment rights or the fact that I'm not touching their property. Mr. Williams thought it would be better if I protested in front of the South Carolina Statehouse (better for me, 'cause "you can't change anything here in Lexington"), or that I should at least move back to my former location across the street, where I would be "nearer to the probate court." He absurdly mentioned the word "ripoff" being on one side my sign (it's presented as part of this blog's address), admitted that they handled probate cases, but emphasized that they didn't "rip anyone off." I wuz glad to hear that.
Watchin' 'em squirm was reminiscent of that movie about the lawyer who was suddenly bewitched by honesty and had to tell the truth. "Liar Liar," starring Jim Carrey, is one of the best films ever.
I chose the new location for best exposure, but told 'em I thought their law firm provided a nice backdrop for my efforts. I suggested they call Senator Setzler and tell him to clean up the probate racket and reply to my email. But alas. They didn't think Tricky Nikki wuz gonna "do anything." In other words, all they can figure out to do regarding the probate racket is to rake in profits. They never evidenced any concern for the plight of folks who had lost loved ones being treated like dirt, or the fleecing of inheritances. This blog - which Mr. Williams claimed to have visited - was "interesting," which of course is a nice, non-committal way of putting it from folks who are satisfied with the status quo.
Here's the deal:
Victims of the probate racket are supposed to forever tuck their tails. They're to keep their heads bowed (lest they make eye contact with an overlord like Senator Setzler), keep their mouths shut, hand over a chunk of their inheritance when told to, and tolerate any kind of disrespect South Carolina's corrupt power structure sees fit to hurl at a racket victim's deceased loved ones. Downright dirty shame that a lowly racket victim would have the audacity to stand in front of a prestigious, probate-dealing law firm's building and publicly object to such treatment after being stonewalled by the legislative gang (racket victims should be able to take a hint), and while mainstream media big shots like WIS-10 do their best to keep the probate racket quiet.
Quick, someone: Think of a way to persuade that pesky racket victim not to protest in front of our law firm. Racket victims aren't supposed to come around unless they're ready to hand over a portion of their inheritance.
I wish Tricky Nikki's law firm was more conspicuous, more "out in the open" so to speak, faced a road with a higher traffic count, and vehicles didn't pass by the joint quite so fast. Don't get me wrong: Senator Setzler's firm - the guy is one callous, conniving little jerk if ever there was - is quite suitable for picketing. But for my primary intents and purposes, protesting the probate racket in front of Williams, Stitley, and Brink's firm is the hands down better choice, and they might wanna look at it this way: They're performing a charitable service by preventing other probate-dealing law firms from being bothered by an uncooperative racket victim.
Who knows? Maybe Williams, Stitely, and Brink can even come up with a tax deduction.
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.
3/31/2017 update - 3/30/2017 article exposes Senator Setzler as "Public officials report private sources of income for 1st time." There's a profound CONFLICT OF INTEREST when attorney-legislators support laws that help to provide private income.
3/29/2017 updates -
> Protested in front of Williams, Stitley, Brink for 5 hours. GREAT encouragement from motorists, a million thanks to the many who signaled support. BLOG VISITS HAVE SOARED.
> Senator Setzler introduced a bill (See S. 589) similar to the one introduced last year by Kenny Bingham. It's another watered-down effort at reform, probably destined to die in committee. The objective isn't to introduce bills, the objective is to simplify the probate process, and ELIMINATE time limits on wills. I was notified of Senator Setzler's bill by someone in his office, and replied accordingly. Where is mainstream media? Why isn't the public being informed of what's going on? This update was delayed because I took time to confirm the authenticity of the notification I received.
3/27/2017 updates -
> Sent Senator Setzler a link to this post via SC Legislature Online and Twitter.
> Tweeted a link to Governor McMaster as Twitter.
One of downtown Lexington's high falutin, probate-dealin' law firms - Williams, Stitely, and Brink - is not happy about a victim of the probate racket standing in front of their building directing folks to this blog. Some of them came out (dressed fit to kill, I might add), and Mr. Williams kindly informed me (never in a million years had I realized) that I was "standing in front of a law firm." It seems his wife - and by extension Mr. Williams himself - were unhappy about my presence, and never mind my first amendment rights or the fact that I'm not touching their property. Mr. Williams thought it would be better if I protested in front of the South Carolina Statehouse (better for me, 'cause "you can't change anything here in Lexington"), or that I should at least move back to my former location across the street, where I would be "nearer to the probate court." He absurdly mentioned the word "ripoff" being on one side my sign (it's presented as part of this blog's address), admitted that they handled probate cases, but emphasized that they didn't "rip anyone off." I wuz glad to hear that.
Watchin' 'em squirm was reminiscent of that movie about the lawyer who was suddenly bewitched by honesty and had to tell the truth. "Liar Liar," starring Jim Carrey, is one of the best films ever.
I chose the new location for best exposure, but told 'em I thought their law firm provided a nice backdrop for my efforts. I suggested they call Senator Setzler and tell him to clean up the probate racket and reply to my email. But alas. They didn't think Tricky Nikki wuz gonna "do anything." In other words, all they can figure out to do regarding the probate racket is to rake in profits. They never evidenced any concern for the plight of folks who had lost loved ones being treated like dirt, or the fleecing of inheritances. This blog - which Mr. Williams claimed to have visited - was "interesting," which of course is a nice, non-committal way of putting it from folks who are satisfied with the status quo.
Here's the deal:
Victims of the probate racket are supposed to forever tuck their tails. They're to keep their heads bowed (lest they make eye contact with an overlord like Senator Setzler), keep their mouths shut, hand over a chunk of their inheritance when told to, and tolerate any kind of disrespect South Carolina's corrupt power structure sees fit to hurl at a racket victim's deceased loved ones. Downright dirty shame that a lowly racket victim would have the audacity to stand in front of a prestigious, probate-dealing law firm's building and publicly object to such treatment after being stonewalled by the legislative gang (racket victims should be able to take a hint), and while mainstream media big shots like WIS-10 do their best to keep the probate racket quiet.
Quick, someone: Think of a way to persuade that pesky racket victim not to protest in front of our law firm. Racket victims aren't supposed to come around unless they're ready to hand over a portion of their inheritance.
I wish Tricky Nikki's law firm was more conspicuous, more "out in the open" so to speak, faced a road with a higher traffic count, and vehicles didn't pass by the joint quite so fast. Don't get me wrong: Senator Setzler's firm - the guy is one callous, conniving little jerk if ever there was - is quite suitable for picketing. But for my primary intents and purposes, protesting the probate racket in front of Williams, Stitley, and Brink's firm is the hands down better choice, and they might wanna look at it this way: They're performing a charitable service by preventing other probate-dealing law firms from being bothered by an uncooperative racket victim.
Who knows? Maybe Williams, Stitely, and Brink can even come up with a tax deduction.
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.
3/31/2017 update - 3/30/2017 article exposes Senator Setzler as "Public officials report private sources of income for 1st time." There's a profound CONFLICT OF INTEREST when attorney-legislators support laws that help to provide private income.
3/29/2017 updates -
> Protested in front of Williams, Stitley, Brink for 5 hours. GREAT encouragement from motorists, a million thanks to the many who signaled support. BLOG VISITS HAVE SOARED.
> Senator Setzler introduced a bill (See S. 589) similar to the one introduced last year by Kenny Bingham. It's another watered-down effort at reform, probably destined to die in committee. The objective isn't to introduce bills, the objective is to simplify the probate process, and ELIMINATE time limits on wills. I was notified of Senator Setzler's bill by someone in his office, and replied accordingly. Where is mainstream media? Why isn't the public being informed of what's going on? This update was delayed because I took time to confirm the authenticity of the notification I received.
3/27/2017 updates -
> Sent Senator Setzler a link to this post via SC Legislature Online and Twitter.
> Tweeted a link to Governor McMaster as Twitter.
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.
Monday, October 17, 2016
Election time, and the probate/trust gang is laughing all the way to the bank. Or to church...
12/28/2017 update: The SC Sec of State says SC Policy Council president Ashley Landess' salary for 2016 was $104,681. Nuthin' like a "charitable" organization - no wonder they need donations.
"A worse criminal government has never existed. Yet, Americans remain subservient to the criminals that they have placed in power over themselves." - from an article by Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Ya can't really blame the probate/trust gang for those peals of laughter. Election time, and not one word about South Carolina's probate/trust racket. The money-grubbing scum who make life miserable - and expensive - for the bereaved have got to be rolling in the aisles as a cowardly public quietly submits to abuse and lines the pockets of probate attorneys and trust operations all across the state.
This is not how democracy is supposed to work.
America has degenerated into a sleazy little rat hole of pervasive corruption in both the public and private sectors, promoted by a presstitute mainstream media that "knows better" than to "tell it like it is." The very idea of "lawmakers" quietly passing probate laws designed to pad their own pockets, assured that we no longer have a free press offering any oversight.
As attorney-legislators do everything possible to nullify wills, someone said a friend of theirs from Kentucky was told that because a will written in that state had a "death with dignity" clause, the will wouldn't be valid in South Carolina. More evidence - none was needed - that probate attorneys are no longer satisfied to be paid exorbitant fees to draw up wills. They now want to also be paid gobs of moolah to administer estates, and the more wills that get nullified, the more profitable it is for members of the probate/trust racket. The scam works best, of course, when an unsuspecting public remains unaware of absurd laws designed to enrich the bank accounts of the probate/trust gang. Never underestimate the shock when a bereaved taxpayer suddenly discovers that "their" government has turned on them like a mad dog.
There wuzza time when slobs who betrayed the public trust ran the risk of being tarred, feathered, and ushered out of town on a rail. But no more. If anything, Americans have reduced themselves to name-droppin', social-climbin' morons who consider it an honor and a privilege not only to re-elect, but also to do business with high-falutin' thugs who hold political office. Amerika may be many things - the home of the brave it's not.
If kicking people around who are struggling through the process of bereavement weren't so brutal and cowardly, it would be a hoot watching the likes of Governor Nikki Haley, the South Carolina Policy Council, and "news" organizations like WIS-10 (promoting itself as SC's news "leader") refuse to address the probate/trust racket. The only "news" about probate is blabber extolling the virtues of setting up a trust, like a guy from Ensemble Capital that I heard on the radio program "Health, Wealth, and Happiness." Never any mention, of course, of how probate got to be so untenable for the taxpaying public. Corruption reigns supreme, and the "insouciance" of western peoples has indeed assigned their democracies to the trash bins of history. Another person I spoke with about the probate/trust racket immediately noted the connection between such corruption and the record-setting low voter turnout - I quit voting long ago - for South Carolina's last mid-term election.
I'll betcha every gang member involved in the probate/trust racket makes it a point to show up in church every Sunday without fail. Nuthin' like devotion to the Golden Rule...
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 4/19/2017 - AFTER the election, Senator Setzler's CONFLICT OF INTEREST was exposed. It's now a matter of public record that Tricky Nikki receives income from his probate-dealing law firm.
Update 3/11/2017 - Probate attorney Nikki Setzler - re-elected again - is no doubt glad mainstream media keeps things quiet about the probate racket. Wonder if trust firms like Caldwell, Inc. contribute to Setzler's campaigns.
Update 11/17/2016 - Unconfirmed news accounts say Gov. Haley is being considered for a position in the Trump administration. Let's hope not - just sent the president-elect a tweet to that effect with a link to this blog.
Update 1/9/2017 - News reports have by now long been confirmed: Trump wants an "ambassador" (Gov. Haley) who treats the bereaved like dirt.
"A worse criminal government has never existed. Yet, Americans remain subservient to the criminals that they have placed in power over themselves." - from an article by Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
Ya can't really blame the probate/trust gang for those peals of laughter. Election time, and not one word about South Carolina's probate/trust racket. The money-grubbing scum who make life miserable - and expensive - for the bereaved have got to be rolling in the aisles as a cowardly public quietly submits to abuse and lines the pockets of probate attorneys and trust operations all across the state.
This is not how democracy is supposed to work.
America has degenerated into a sleazy little rat hole of pervasive corruption in both the public and private sectors, promoted by a presstitute mainstream media that "knows better" than to "tell it like it is." The very idea of "lawmakers" quietly passing probate laws designed to pad their own pockets, assured that we no longer have a free press offering any oversight.
As attorney-legislators do everything possible to nullify wills, someone said a friend of theirs from Kentucky was told that because a will written in that state had a "death with dignity" clause, the will wouldn't be valid in South Carolina. More evidence - none was needed - that probate attorneys are no longer satisfied to be paid exorbitant fees to draw up wills. They now want to also be paid gobs of moolah to administer estates, and the more wills that get nullified, the more profitable it is for members of the probate/trust racket. The scam works best, of course, when an unsuspecting public remains unaware of absurd laws designed to enrich the bank accounts of the probate/trust gang. Never underestimate the shock when a bereaved taxpayer suddenly discovers that "their" government has turned on them like a mad dog.
There wuzza time when slobs who betrayed the public trust ran the risk of being tarred, feathered, and ushered out of town on a rail. But no more. If anything, Americans have reduced themselves to name-droppin', social-climbin' morons who consider it an honor and a privilege not only to re-elect, but also to do business with high-falutin' thugs who hold political office. Amerika may be many things - the home of the brave it's not.
If kicking people around who are struggling through the process of bereavement weren't so brutal and cowardly, it would be a hoot watching the likes of Governor Nikki Haley, the South Carolina Policy Council, and "news" organizations like WIS-10 (promoting itself as SC's news "leader") refuse to address the probate/trust racket. The only "news" about probate is blabber extolling the virtues of setting up a trust, like a guy from Ensemble Capital that I heard on the radio program "Health, Wealth, and Happiness." Never any mention, of course, of how probate got to be so untenable for the taxpaying public. Corruption reigns supreme, and the "insouciance" of western peoples has indeed assigned their democracies to the trash bins of history. Another person I spoke with about the probate/trust racket immediately noted the connection between such corruption and the record-setting low voter turnout - I quit voting long ago - for South Carolina's last mid-term election.
I'll betcha every gang member involved in the probate/trust racket makes it a point to show up in church every Sunday without fail. Nuthin' like devotion to the Golden Rule...
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 4/19/2017 - AFTER the election, Senator Setzler's CONFLICT OF INTEREST was exposed. It's now a matter of public record that Tricky Nikki receives income from his probate-dealing law firm.
Update 3/11/2017 - Probate attorney Nikki Setzler - re-elected again - is no doubt glad mainstream media keeps things quiet about the probate racket. Wonder if trust firms like Caldwell, Inc. contribute to Setzler's campaigns.
Update 11/17/2016 - Unconfirmed news accounts say Gov. Haley is being considered for a position in the Trump administration. Let's hope not - just sent the president-elect a tweet to that effect with a link to this blog.
Update 1/9/2017 - News reports have by now long been confirmed: Trump wants an "ambassador" (Gov. Haley) who treats the bereaved like dirt.
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.
Monday, May 23, 2016
Maybe Senator Setzler didn't get my email...
Update 4/25/2017 - The senator's CONFLICT OF INTEREST (he derives income from his probate-dealing law firm) has now been exposed. I no longer support H.5196, giving probate judges authority to decide when a time limit on wills should be extended. The time limit on wills should be eliminated.
Update 5/25/2016 - Yesterday at 5:19 PM, I received the following e-mail from Senator Setzler after I protested in front of his corrupt, probate-dealing law firm:
Mr. Boyd,
Thank you for cantacting me with your support of H.5196 along with your more recent email regarding this same matter. The bill was just recently introduced in April and has not made it to the Senate for review. Any similar legislation along with this legislation will be reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Upon receipt of your email from two weeks ago, I reviewed the language and have been in communication with others. We are in the last several weeks of this legislative session, and my email responses may be delayed relative to this issue. I am, however, inclined to support Representative Bingham's bill.
Nikki Setzler
______________________________________________________________________________
I'll say one thing about Nikki Setzler, the South Carolina state senator from my district who owns a law firm that invites probate cases: His law firm sure has a nice suite of offices. Plush carpeting, hardwood floors, the works. I was a bit put off when I first saw the note at the front door telling visitors to make sure they didn't have any grease on their shoes, but once I stepped inside...
I can understand a guy lookin' out for his interests.
Monday two weeks ago, I tried to send an e-mail to Senator Setzler, politely inquiring about what he's done, or plans to do, to simplify South Carolina's probate process. I pointed out that uncalled-for complexities have turned the process into a nightmare for anyone attempting to probate an inheritance, and that it takes an average of one year to complete. I also encouraged him to support Kenny Bingham's efforts to give probate courts discretion regarding when to apply South Carolina's 10 year limit on wills.
I didn't expect a very long list of efforts on his part to simplify the process, or even a willingness to support Kenny Bingham's bill. But I can't find any reply whatsoever.
Maybe Senator Setzler didn't get my e-mail. Come to think of it, Senator, there are several other things I'd like to get your thoughts on.
When I spoke with an attorney who works in one of your fancy office suites, he implied that the funeral home should have informed me of South Carolina's 10 year limit on wills. Do you and the lawyers in your firm think that would be the appropriate time to discuss such matters?
As I mentioned in my e-mail, the probate process has become a nightmare. In fact, Senator, it has all the trappings of a racket, whereby people struggling through the process of bereavement are treated like dirt.
Tell me, Senator: What is it going to take for the taxpaying public to get some fundamental decency out of this government? Has the time come for massive displays of non-violent civil disobedience? In what sense do we have a democracy when a gang of so-called "legislators" look out for their own selfish interests instead of the legitimate interests of the people they are charged with representing?
I'll try again on the e-mail, with a link to this post, and I'll send a link to Governor Haley on Twitter. Hopefully, they'll both get the message.
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 5/23/2016 - Many thanks to all those who signaled support as I picketed this afternoon in front of Nikki Setzler's law firm. The senator remains conveniently silent about South Carolina's probate racket.
Update 5/25/2016 - Yesterday at 5:19 PM, I received the following e-mail from Senator Setzler after I protested in front of his corrupt, probate-dealing law firm:
Mr. Boyd,
Thank you for cantacting me with your support of H.5196 along with your more recent email regarding this same matter. The bill was just recently introduced in April and has not made it to the Senate for review. Any similar legislation along with this legislation will be reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Upon receipt of your email from two weeks ago, I reviewed the language and have been in communication with others. We are in the last several weeks of this legislative session, and my email responses may be delayed relative to this issue. I am, however, inclined to support Representative Bingham's bill.
Nikki Setzler
______________________________________________________________________________
I'll say one thing about Nikki Setzler, the South Carolina state senator from my district who owns a law firm that invites probate cases: His law firm sure has a nice suite of offices. Plush carpeting, hardwood floors, the works. I was a bit put off when I first saw the note at the front door telling visitors to make sure they didn't have any grease on their shoes, but once I stepped inside...
I can understand a guy lookin' out for his interests.
Monday two weeks ago, I tried to send an e-mail to Senator Setzler, politely inquiring about what he's done, or plans to do, to simplify South Carolina's probate process. I pointed out that uncalled-for complexities have turned the process into a nightmare for anyone attempting to probate an inheritance, and that it takes an average of one year to complete. I also encouraged him to support Kenny Bingham's efforts to give probate courts discretion regarding when to apply South Carolina's 10 year limit on wills.
I didn't expect a very long list of efforts on his part to simplify the process, or even a willingness to support Kenny Bingham's bill. But I can't find any reply whatsoever.
Maybe Senator Setzler didn't get my e-mail. Come to think of it, Senator, there are several other things I'd like to get your thoughts on.
When I spoke with an attorney who works in one of your fancy office suites, he implied that the funeral home should have informed me of South Carolina's 10 year limit on wills. Do you and the lawyers in your firm think that would be the appropriate time to discuss such matters?
As I mentioned in my e-mail, the probate process has become a nightmare. In fact, Senator, it has all the trappings of a racket, whereby people struggling through the process of bereavement are treated like dirt.
Tell me, Senator: What is it going to take for the taxpaying public to get some fundamental decency out of this government? Has the time come for massive displays of non-violent civil disobedience? In what sense do we have a democracy when a gang of so-called "legislators" look out for their own selfish interests instead of the legitimate interests of the people they are charged with representing?
I'll try again on the e-mail, with a link to this post, and I'll send a link to Governor Haley on Twitter. Hopefully, they'll both get the message.
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 5/23/2016 - Many thanks to all those who signaled support as I picketed this afternoon in front of Nikki Setzler's law firm. The senator remains conveniently silent about South Carolina's probate racket.
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...
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Bill to help victims of 10 yr limit on wills inexcusably delayed
Update 1/20/2017 - Rep. Bingham has retired, and I've heard nothing further about the bill he introduced.
Update 5/13/2016 - I inquired, and attorney Emma Dean says the bill remains in the Judiciary Committee - it's now been there over a month - and I "will be notified IF (emphasis mine) it receives a hearing." If the bill doesn't pass during the current legislative session, it will have to be reintroduced next session. Looks like a case of "too little, too late."
It's not as though the bill makes any earthshaking changes. All it does is give probate courts discretion in deciding whether to apply South Carolina's 10 year limit on probating wills.
The bill was introduced in the House April 12, 2016, and continues to "reside" in the Judiciary Committee. I understand the procedure, and that it takes time for a committee to examine a bill. But this bill is as simple and straightforward as it gets, the current legislative session ends in early June, and any delay is inexcusable. If those involved had the best interests of South Carolinians at heart, the bill would have been passed posthaste.
Point is, there was never a need to have time limits on wills. Many other states don't have such limits, neither should South Carolina. Time limits on wills serve the interests of nobody other than probate attorneys, many of whom have wormed their way into the South Carolina legislature and have turned the probate process into nothing more than a money-making racket.
I'll reiterate what I previously wrote:
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 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 - I inquired, and attorney Emma Dean says the bill remains in the Judiciary Committee - it's now been there over a month - and I "will be notified IF (emphasis mine) it receives a hearing." If the bill doesn't pass during the current legislative session, it will have to be reintroduced next session. Looks like a case of "too little, too late."
It's not as though the bill makes any earthshaking changes. All it does is give probate courts discretion in deciding whether to apply South Carolina's 10 year limit on probating wills.
The bill was introduced in the House April 12, 2016, and continues to "reside" in the Judiciary Committee. I understand the procedure, and that it takes time for a committee to examine a bill. But this bill is as simple and straightforward as it gets, the current legislative session ends in early June, and any delay is inexcusable. If those involved had the best interests of South Carolinians at heart, the bill would have been passed posthaste.
Point is, there was never a need to have time limits on wills. Many other states don't have such limits, neither should South Carolina. Time limits on wills serve the interests of nobody other than probate attorneys, many of whom have wormed their way into the South Carolina legislature and have turned the probate process into nothing more than a money-making racket.
I'll reiterate what I previously wrote:
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 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.
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.
Monday, April 4, 2016
10 year limit for probating wills is one of many horrors facing heirs
Update 4/26/2017 - Senator Nikki Setzler, one of South Carolina's most influential lawmakers, has NOW BEEN EXPOSED for his CONFLICT OF INTEREST. He derives income from his probate-dealing law firm.
"In most areas of this country, the probate process is a scandal, a form of tribute levied by the legal profession upon the estates of its victims both living and dead." - editorial by Norman F. Dacey, author of How to Avoid Probate. (Updated in 1984 and 1990)
It's been kept remarkably quiet - everyone I've mentioned it to is shocked and dismayed - but South Carolina has a 10 year limit - beginning on a decedent's date of death - for probating a will. The law allows no exceptions and was passed in 1986, the year the legislature ushered in a slew of lawyer-serving complexities - effective 7/1/87 - for anyone attempting to claim an inheritance. Enter a sadistic little "gotcha" game, whereby unsuspecting heirs are told that a decedent's will is no longer valid, "Deeming" a decedent to have died without a will opens up a lawyer's smorgasbord of legal complexities, including court appearances, court fees, intricate filing requirements (ever tried filing a lis pendens with a circuit court?), and the preparation of documents you won't find on the Internet. The matter - petitioning the Court for a Determination of Heirs - is suddenly beyond the expertise of most folks, and attorney fees to settle the simplest of such situations are in the $2,000 range. After considering what's involved - make a mistake and the entire process starts over again - if you still dare to attempt to exercise your right to represent yourself, don't be surprised if you're pressured by court personnel to hire an attorney.
The 10-year scam - many states (including Florida, Oregon, and Virginia) have no time limits for probating wills, and Pennsylvania has a limit of 21 years - is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to legislation promoting the interests of attorneys. Lexington County affords a good example. People attempting to probate estates - even if there's a will - are immediately clobbered with thick packets of multi-colored forms that are written in legalese, demand mind-boggling detail (the "Inventory and Appraisement" form, for example, is a product of the SC Tax Commission) and each form has to be notarized. You may be hit with additional forms depending on your situation. Miss any filing deadlines, and an Executor (now called a Personal Representative) is subject to paying penalties. A person must even file a written, notarized application to be appointed Personal Representative regardless of whether or not the person is named Executor or Personal Representative in a will. Here again, if you make an error on any of the forms, the entire form must be filled out again and notarized again. The "message," of course, is to hire an attorney, and to drive the point home, each form has a place for an attorney's signature. If you go that route, even for the simplest of cases, prepare to shell out in the vicinity of $700.
Don't think you'll escape the probate nightmare simply because the names of heirs are listed on a real estate deed. A Supreme Court decision closed that threat to the probate process. If your deed doesn't include the phrase "with right of survivorship" or similar language, you're out of luck. J. Kristi Hood, author of Probate Pirates, sums things up in her title to chapter one: "It's all about the money all of the time."
In past years, probating an inheritance in South Carolina was relatively simple, but now the process averages an entire year. Some estates have allegedly been tied up in probate for 10 years and are still unresolved. As for trusts, they've been turned into yet another money-making scheme for lawyers offering to "protect" consumers from the "horrors of probate." Talk about a racket. In his book, "Of the Sharks, By the Sharks, For the Sharks - The Death of Justice," Paul Sharp offers an apt summary regarding Trusts. As things now stand in South Carolina, the "probate pirates" have "gotcha" one way or the other.
Meanwhile, as allegations of public corruption in the SC General Assembly make headlines, news media - most notably, perhaps, the South Carolina Policy Council - continue to keep things quiet about the state's probate racket.
Remember: YOUR TAX DOLLARS pay for probate, and it should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts.
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 4/5/2016 - A million thanks to the many folks who signaled their support as I picketed in front of Lexington County Probate Court yesterday afternoon. Probate rackets exploit the vulnerabilities of people struggling through the bereavement process, and mainstream media keeps things quiet.
Update 4/8/2016 - Thanks to everyone who offered support as I picketed again yesterday.
"In most areas of this country, the probate process is a scandal, a form of tribute levied by the legal profession upon the estates of its victims both living and dead." - editorial by Norman F. Dacey, author of How to Avoid Probate. (Updated in 1984 and 1990)
It's been kept remarkably quiet - everyone I've mentioned it to is shocked and dismayed - but South Carolina has a 10 year limit - beginning on a decedent's date of death - for probating a will. The law allows no exceptions and was passed in 1986, the year the legislature ushered in a slew of lawyer-serving complexities - effective 7/1/87 - for anyone attempting to claim an inheritance. Enter a sadistic little "gotcha" game, whereby unsuspecting heirs are told that a decedent's will is no longer valid, "Deeming" a decedent to have died without a will opens up a lawyer's smorgasbord of legal complexities, including court appearances, court fees, intricate filing requirements (ever tried filing a lis pendens with a circuit court?), and the preparation of documents you won't find on the Internet. The matter - petitioning the Court for a Determination of Heirs - is suddenly beyond the expertise of most folks, and attorney fees to settle the simplest of such situations are in the $2,000 range. After considering what's involved - make a mistake and the entire process starts over again - if you still dare to attempt to exercise your right to represent yourself, don't be surprised if you're pressured by court personnel to hire an attorney.
The 10-year scam - many states (including Florida, Oregon, and Virginia) have no time limits for probating wills, and Pennsylvania has a limit of 21 years - is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to legislation promoting the interests of attorneys. Lexington County affords a good example. People attempting to probate estates - even if there's a will - are immediately clobbered with thick packets of multi-colored forms that are written in legalese, demand mind-boggling detail (the "Inventory and Appraisement" form, for example, is a product of the SC Tax Commission) and each form has to be notarized. You may be hit with additional forms depending on your situation. Miss any filing deadlines, and an Executor (now called a Personal Representative) is subject to paying penalties. A person must even file a written, notarized application to be appointed Personal Representative regardless of whether or not the person is named Executor or Personal Representative in a will. Here again, if you make an error on any of the forms, the entire form must be filled out again and notarized again. The "message," of course, is to hire an attorney, and to drive the point home, each form has a place for an attorney's signature. If you go that route, even for the simplest of cases, prepare to shell out in the vicinity of $700.
Don't think you'll escape the probate nightmare simply because the names of heirs are listed on a real estate deed. A Supreme Court decision closed that threat to the probate process. If your deed doesn't include the phrase "with right of survivorship" or similar language, you're out of luck. J. Kristi Hood, author of Probate Pirates, sums things up in her title to chapter one: "It's all about the money all of the time."
In past years, probating an inheritance in South Carolina was relatively simple, but now the process averages an entire year. Some estates have allegedly been tied up in probate for 10 years and are still unresolved. As for trusts, they've been turned into yet another money-making scheme for lawyers offering to "protect" consumers from the "horrors of probate." Talk about a racket. In his book, "Of the Sharks, By the Sharks, For the Sharks - The Death of Justice," Paul Sharp offers an apt summary regarding Trusts. As things now stand in South Carolina, the "probate pirates" have "gotcha" one way or the other.
Meanwhile, as allegations of public corruption in the SC General Assembly make headlines, news media - most notably, perhaps, the South Carolina Policy Council - continue to keep things quiet about the state's probate racket.
Remember: YOUR TAX DOLLARS pay for probate, and it should be an inexpensive, viable alternative to setting up trusts.
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 4/5/2016 - A million thanks to the many folks who signaled their support as I picketed in front of Lexington County Probate Court yesterday afternoon. Probate rackets exploit the vulnerabilities of people struggling through the bereavement process, and mainstream media keeps things quiet.
Update 4/8/2016 - Thanks to everyone who offered support as I picketed again yesterday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)