Questionable statements and behavior from my lawyer

Status
Not open for further replies.

Falcon28

New Member
Jurisdiction
Illinois
This post is rather long, and I apologize for that. Nevertheless, it would be well worth your time to read the entire post.


This legal situation is in Cook County, Illinois.


From 2008 to 2016, my mother and I lived together in a single-family home, and she was the sole owner of the home. In 2016, she added me to the title, and we became Joint Tenants with Right of Survivorship. So, she basically gifted half of the house to me. We continued to live in the house together.

I have a significant amount of money to my name, but she has a lot more money. So, she always paid the property taxes, the electricity bill, the gas bill, and the land-line bill. And, of course, she always paid the bill for her own personal cell phone.

At some point, a number of years ago, she set up auto-pay for the electricity bill, the gas bill, and both phone bills. That means that, every month, money was automatically debited from her checking account to pay these bills.


In 2018, she began to act strangely. She began to see her deceased relatives (her husband, her parents) in our home. I immediately suspected that she had dementia, but her idiot doctor dismissed her hallucinations as depression or anxiety.

In March 2021, she had a mental episode, and she was hospitalized for 6 days. During these 6 days, she was diagnosed with dementia. Unfortunately, the 6-day hospitalization itself ACCELERATED her dementia. Before the hospitalization, she was mostly able to live in our single-family home and take care of herself. She could prepare her own food and eat the food, get her own medications, walk up and down the stairs, etc. After the hospitalization, she was mostly unable to do those things. In just one week, her life was turned upside down.

Since early April 2021, she has lived in two memory-care facilities. I have continued to live in the home that we own together.


I obtained a probate attorney, and this attorney helped me to obtain guardianship of my mother via the Cook County Circuit Court (Probate Division). I am the guardian of my mother's estate (financial situation) and person (health situation). Basically, I am in charge of her entire life.


As her guardian, I have to submit, to the probate-court judge, a budget for the first year of guardianship. This budget will describe how I intend to spend my mother's money during that first year. According to the law, I can spend her money only on things that benefit her directly.

Remember those bills for electricity, gas, the land-line phone, and the cell phone? The bills that were being paid via automatic withdrawals from my mother's checking account? Well, these withdrawals have been continuing while my mother has been living outside of our home and in those memory-care facilities.

Also, earlier this year, while my mother was still living in our home, she paid the 1st installment of our home's 2020 property tax. (In Cook County, the 2019 property tax is paid in two installments in 2020, the 2020 property tax is paid in two installments in 2021, etc.) Recently, the 2nd installment of the 2020 property tax had to be paid, and I went to the property-tax website and arranged for that 2nd installment to be paid via electronic debit from my mother's checking account.

So far, no budget has yet been submitted to the judge, and the judge has not yet made any rulings on how my mother's money can or can not be used. So, I have allowed the auto-pay payments to continue, and I used my mother's money to pay the 2nd installment of the 2020 property tax. Basically, I have continued the status quo.


When my probate lawyer and I spoke about the budget, the lawyer said that her research has shown that our particular judge is very strict when it comes to making sure that the guardian spends money only on things that directly benefit the ward (the person being taken care of by the guardian). In this case, the ward is my mother.

The lawyer believes that, because my mother no longer lives in our home, my mother is no longer directly benefiting from the property taxes, the electricity, the gas, or the land-line phone. Furthermore, because my mother's personal cell phone is in our home, in my safe custody, and not in her custody at the memory-care facility, my mother is no longer directly benefiting from the cell phone. Therefore, the judge will probably not allow the continued use of my mother's money to pay for these things.


I believe that a legal argument can be made that my mother is indirectly benefiting from the phones. For example, her friends and relatives found out about her plight with dementia and her living in memory care, when they called her on these phones and I answered the phones and I told them what was happening to her. And, from time to time, these people call me on these phones and ask me for updates about her and ask me to pass along messages to her. So, she is indirectly communicating with her friends and relatives via these phones.

[By the way, I do have my own cell phone that I pay for. My mother's cell phone is used only for communicating with her friends and relatives.]


Also, it may be possible to make legal arguments in favor of using my mother's money to pay for electricity, gas, and property taxes.


I told my lawyer that she should ask the judge to maintain the status quo. I said to the lawyer that, even if the judge denies our motion, there is no harm in asking for the status quo, right? The worst that the judge can do is to say "no", correct? Well, the lawyer said that there could be harm in asking. She said that, if the judge is pissed off about my request, the judge can order me to pay monthly rent to my mother's bank accounts.

I would pay rent to my mother when we both own the home under Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship? I asked the lawyer whether this rent practice is legal and whether there is any legal precedent for this practice. She said that she doesn't know. She simply assumes that the judge can perpetrate this rent practice just because he is the judge. Also, the lawyer is afraid that, if my request pisses off the judge, then the judge will hold some kind of grudge against the lawyer when she comes before him on behalf of other clients.

It seems that she is too scared of this judge to zealously represent my interests. I see criminal-defense lawyers asking judges for probation for convicted murderers. So, shouldn't my probate lawyer represent me as zealously?


Also, the lawyer said that she wants to do what is best for my mother and what is best for me, in that order. So, obviously, the lawyer feels that the status quo is not what is best for my mother. Well, I thought that the client was always the lawyer's first priority. It seems to me that my lawyer may have some type of conflict of interest here. But, then again, even though my lawyer represents me, her services will be paid for by my mother's assets. That is actually the law here in Cook county. So, is my lawyer supposed to be representing me or my mother?


My lawyer feels that, instead of asking the judge for the status quo, we should do the following:

1) Tell the judge about the auto-pay payments and about my mother's indirect communications with her friends and relatives via the phones, and ask the judge what he thinks should be done with the auto-pay payments.

2) Propose to the judge that, going forward, I will pay for half of the property tax and my mother's money will pay for the other half of the property tax.


So, here are my questions:

1) Can the judge punish me for just for asking that my mother's money be used as it has always been used (to pay for property taxes, electricity, gas, and the phones)? Can the judge force me to pay rent under Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship?


2) Should my lawyer be more concerned with my mother's interests or with my own interests? Who is her client in this situation?


3) Is my lawyers's idea (asking the judge what he thinks should be done about the auto-pay payments, my offering to pay for half of the property taxes) a good idea?


Thank you for any answers.
 
My lawyer feels that, instead of asking the judge for the status quo, we should do the following:

1) Tell the judge about the auto-pay payments and about my mother's indirect communications with her friends and relatives via the phones, and ask the judge what he thinks should be done with the auto-pay payments.

2) Propose to the judge that, going forward, I will pay for half of the property tax and my mother's money will pay for the other half of the property tax.


So, here are my questions:

1) Can the judge punish me for just for asking that my mother's money be used as it has always been used (to pay for property taxes, electricity, gas, and the phones)? Can the judge force me to pay rent under Joint Tenancy with Right of Survivorship?


2) Should my lawyer be more concerned with my mother's interests or with my own interests? Who is her client in this situation?


3) Is my lawyers's idea (asking the judge what he thinks should be done about the auto-pay payments, my offering to pay for half of the property taxes) a good idea?


You have a lawyer.

It is unethical for other lawyers to advise you.

It is foolish to seek FREE, legal advice from strangers.

If you feel your present lawyer isn't assisting you properly, HIRE another lawyer with that SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY you allege you possess.
 
You have a lawyer.

It is unethical for other lawyers to advise you.

Why is it unethical for other lawyers to advise me when I have solicited this advice?

Do you want me to ask my lawyer to advise me as to whether her behavior is appropriate? Do you think that my lawyer will give me an objective opinion on that?

It is foolish to seek FREE, legal advice from strangers.

Then what is the purpose of this message board?

If you feel your present lawyer isn't assisting you properly, HIRE another lawyer with that SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY you allege you possess.

I do not know whether my lawyer is assisting me properly. Maybe my lawyer is correct and the judge DOES have the authority to make me pay rent. Or, maybe my lawyer is totally wrong. If I find out for certain that she is totally wrong, then maybe I will hire a different lawyer.
 
Why don't you pay your own bills and stop free loading off the elderly.

Might be what your lawyer is saying, but you should call to confirm.
 
Why don't you pay your own bills and stop free loading off the elderly.

Might be what your lawyer is saying, but you should call to confirm.

Actually, sir, before my mother got sick, we had a nice division of responsibility. She paid some bills, and I paid some bills. Because she had more money, her share of the expenses was more than mine.

Because my mother has dementia, the bills that she was paying have become a legal issue. There is no legal issue about the bills that *I* have been paying.

Furthermore, sir, I have been on various legal forums for about 15 years, and I have seen many threads get derailed by people like you, people who wish to go outside of the legal issue and make some moral pronouncements. I respectfully request that the answers to my questions be confined to legal information. I do not want to see this thread get derailed.

I do not need to hear any criticisms about freeloading, etc. I am very well aware of the fact that my mother has accumulated more money in her life than I have in mine. I do not need to be reminded of that. But even "freeloaders" like me have the right to be zealously represented by our attorneys, and to not be given false information about what judges can or can not do.

Thank you.
 
ROFL, yes FREELOADERS like you have all the rights.

unbelievable, and then you wonder why you are not getting FREE ADVICE.

this is the best laugh I have had on this forum.

Thank you,

RM
 
But, then again, even though my lawyer represents me, her services will be paid for by my mother's assets. That is actually the law here in Cook county. So, is my lawyer supposed to be representing me or my mother?

Your lawyer represents you in your role as guardian/conservator for your mother. And part of her job is advising you how to do that guardian job correctly. You have a fiduciary duty to your mother to spend her money for her benefit, not yours. Paying the full real estate taxes from her funds when you are a co-owner of the place and living there is usually going to be seen as benefiting yourself with her money, and that can cost you. Since you own half the property and live there you should be paying your half of the bills. The same is true of the other bills you mentioned that she's paying that benefit you. Simply continuing the status quo is generally not a compelling argument. Once you became her guardian, you took on certain responsibilities that you did not have before.

By all means, if you think your lawyer isn't fighting hard enough for you, fire her and hire someone else. Just understand that it is not the lawyer's job to tell you what you want to hear. It's the lawyer's job to tell you what you need to know and provide you his/her objective opinion about your options.
 
Your lawyer represents you in your role as guardian/conservator for your mother. And part of her job is advising you how to do that guardian job correctly.

In Cook County, Illinois, we have what is called a Guardian ad Litem (GAL). The GAL is an attorney who is the judge's eyes and ears. The GAL makes sure that my mother's interests are represented. So, I was under the impression that *my* lawyer was representing *my* interests. But, both my lawyer and the GAL are paid for their work by my mother's assets (as per the law). Naturally, for me, this is a confusing situation.

Also, just to put things into financial perspective, it would cost only about $1000 to pay for electricity for the home for 1 year. Meanwhile, the GAL will be paid $1700 for doing only 6 hours of work (including interviewing my mother for 1 hour). The judge will most likely approve the $1700 for the GAL, but the judge may have a big objection to giving me $1000 for 1 year of electricity. Interesting, huh?

My mother has a LOT in cash reserves. She has enough cash reserves to satisfy her own direct interests and my interests as well. This is not necessarily an either/or situation.


Since you own half the property and live there you should be paying your half of the bills.

As I mentioned in a previous post, before my mother's dementia accelerated, I was paying some bills, and she was paying some bills. So, we did have a nice division of responsibility.

Paying the full real estate taxes from her funds when you are a co-owner of the place and living there is usually going to be seen as benefiting yourself with her money, and that can cost you.

What do you mean by "cost you"? Are you saying that the judge can , indeed, penalize me just for asking for too much? If I am asking for too much, can't the judge simply say "no" and move on?

My lawyer thinks that the judge can force me to pay rent to my mother in a JTWROS situation. Can the judge do that?

Just understand that it is not the lawyer's job to tell you what you want to hear. It's the lawyer's job to tell you what you need to know and provide you his/her objective opinion about your options.

Well, the lawyer told me that, if I ask for the status quo, the judge will probably rule against me, and I believe my lawyer. But I would like to roll the dice and ask for the status quo and maybe get lucky. As I said, my mother has a LOT of money, and that money can definitely satisfy both her needs and mine.

I should mention that my mother and I did not anticipate that she would become incapacitated and lose control over her mind and her finances overnight. We did not know that she could have established some kind of "living will" that would dictate how her money would be spent if she were to be alive but incapacitated. For what it's worth, if my mother and I had known about something like this, my mother would definitely have stipulated that, in the event of her incapacitation, her vast amounts of money should be used to at least pay for some basic utilities for me.
 
The judge will most likely approve the $1700 for the GAL, but the judge may have a big objection to giving me $1000 for 1 year of electricity. Interesting, huh?


Not really, but that is how it works. The judge likely be concerned about her money going to benefit you. That raises fiduciary obligation issues.

My mother has a LOT in cash reserves. She has enough cash reserves to satisfy her own direct interests and my interests as well. This is not necessarily an either/or situation.

You're not getting it, then. It doesn't matter how much money she's got. It's HER money to be used to pay HER expenses, not yours. She could be Bill Gates sitting on billions of dollars and it'd still be a problem if some of that is being used by you for your benefit.


What do you mean by "cost you"? Are you saying that the judge can , indeed, penalize me just for asking for too much? If I am asking for too much, can't the judge simply say "no" and move on?

You can ask, though what reaction the judge will have is impossible to predict. But what I was getting at is that if you end up breaching your fiduciary duties to your mother the court can penalize you for that.

My lawyer thinks that the judge can force me to pay rent to my mother in a JTWROS situation. Can the judge do that?

Potentially, yes. The the problem arises here that if you weren't living there, thus benefiting yourself, you could rent the place and split the rent. That is what would be the prudent management of her assets, and as her fiduciary you have to prudently manage her assets. If she ends up losing rent because you choose to live there instead, the judge could require you to pay her half of fair market value rent on the place.
 
I disagree with you and with OP's attorney. Although I can't find a case that is on point, the fact is that OP is a joint tenant in the house and doesn't have to pay rent to live in a house he owns.

As to the taxes and other bills that were paid by the mother, that was by agreement between OP and mother for many years and there is nothing to indicate that the mother had changed her mind about paying those bills before her disability.

If I were OP I would be talking to other attorneys.
 
I disagree with you and with OP's attorney. Although I can't find a case that is on point, the fact is that OP is a joint tenant in the house and doesn't have to pay rent to live in a house he owns.

That's true, in general one co-owner need not pay rent to another for use of the property. That is not a rule that is universal, however. There are some situations in which one owner of property may indeed owe rent to the other. So if he were not the guardian of the other owner and living there exclusively I'd agree with you. But those two facts are significant. He has a fiduciary duty to the mother that is not being met when he does not seek to generate rent from the property she has. And living there exclusively he's benefiting from the mother's share of the property in denying her the opportunity to rent out her interest. As a result, a judge could find that he owes her rent for his exclusive use of the home.

As to the taxes and other bills that were paid by the mother, that was by agreement between OP and mother for many years and there is nothing to indicate that the mother had changed her mind about paying those bills before her disability.

But again, that's before he became her guardian and thus assumed fiduciary obligations with respect to her. He didn't have to become her guardian, but he did and thus took on certain responsibilities. While a judge might allow some or all of those expenses to be paid as before if the judge is convinced that's what she'd want, the judge doesn't have to do that. The judge can insist on ending the use of her funds to benefit the OP.

If I were OP I would be talking to other attorneys.

It can't hurt for him to get another opinion, certainly.
 
This post is rather long, and I apologize for that. Nevertheless, it would be well worth your time to read the entire post.

My, you have an exalted opinion of your little life. No, it was not well worth my time.

How did you select your lawyer? Did you have initial consults with other lawyers, as part of that process? If not, then it would have been well worth your time to do so.

Have you considered what will happen to the accounts when your mother dies? Automatic debits are a problem if the accounts are frozen. You should be gradually transferring the accounts into your name.

None of us know the judge. I suspect that the judge would be more suspicious of new financial burdens than burdens that are "status quo". However, since you live in the house, just start taking over those burdens.
 

You can ask, though what reaction the judge will have is impossible to predict. But what I was getting at is that if you end up breaching your fiduciary duties to your mother the court can penalize you for that.



Well, I certainly will not disobey any official orders from the judge.


The the problem arises here that if you weren't living there, thus benefiting yourself, you could rent the place and split the rent. That is what would be the prudent management of her assets, and as her fiduciary you have to prudently manage her assets. If she ends up losing rent because you choose to live there instead, the judge could require you to pay her half of fair market value rent on the place.

Renting the home to other people means that the owner takes on the responsibility of a landlord. And neither I nor my mother ever had any intentions of taking on such responsibilities.
 
Renting the home to other people means that the owner takes on the responsibility of a landlord. And neither I nor my mother ever had any intentions of taking on such responsibilities.

Then from your mother's perspective it would likely be better to sell the home, take her half of the proceeds, and prudently invest them as she is not getting the benefit of either living there or getting rental income.
 
Then from your mother's perspective it would likely be better to sell the home, take her half of the proceeds, and prudently invest them as she is not getting the benefit of either living there or getting rental income.

So, now you're saying that the judge can force me to sell the home against my will?

And is the judge going to tell me how to invest my mother's share of the money? Is he going to micromanage my mother's investment portfolio?
 
This thread has served it's purpose.
closed1.gif
It has suddenly become confrontational.

@Falcon28

It is in your best interests NOT to open another thread involving the same or similar topics.


closed1.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top