something else i may be able to try is to sue the estate to pay down my student loan, as i have plenty of evidence, in form of emails, of promises to do so. i would essentially be setting myself up as a creditor, which gets around any technical issues of inheritance. and, that may mean suing somebody directly.
as mentioned: my understanding is that everything was in her name anyways, so there wasn't even much of anything to transfer. i have not been informed of any kind of probate process, nor have i been informed of the opening of any kind of estate, leading me to believe that the will was joint, and won't execute until she dies.
but, it's long past due that i actually see it.
Sunday, December 23, 2018
see, i think i'm dealing with something like this:
https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/wills-trusts/joint-wills-married-couples.html
i don't know for sure.
i need to see it...
frankly, i'd be better off waiting 20 years, anyways. and, i'm still not certain that i can't argue my way into another disability term....
https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/wills-trusts/joint-wills-married-couples.html
i don't know for sure.
i need to see it...
frankly, i'd be better off waiting 20 years, anyways. and, i'm still not certain that i can't argue my way into another disability term....
at
11:16
but, let's...
i wasn't, like, disinherited, or cut out, or anything - it was just not the right way to support me. and, that created a fiduciary responsibility to the people involved, which has been horribly broken.
if i have to go down that path, it's going to really harm their financial standing. but, i can hardly be faulted for not caring. at all.
i wasn't, like, disinherited, or cut out, or anything - it was just not the right way to support me. and, that created a fiduciary responsibility to the people involved, which has been horribly broken.
if i have to go down that path, it's going to really harm their financial standing. but, i can hardly be faulted for not caring. at all.
at
10:48
i mean, it's kind of the explanation to this, right?
who makes a promise to their dying husband to be a fiduciary to his disabled child, only to break it five days later, besides a psychopath on the autism spectrum?
and, it's kind of a constant in her behaviour. for years, i thought she was horribly immoral; in hindsight, she might actually just not be fully capable of really understanding what she's even doing. it's this inability to give a fuck; it's clinical, clearly, but it seems like something is missing rather than that something is off balance.
if we're going to go through this, it would be better for her to give me the rest of the $500/month up front. as i say - that $50,000 number has been bandied around. maybe, we cut it off there. i dunno.
who makes a promise to their dying husband to be a fiduciary to his disabled child, only to break it five days later, besides a psychopath on the autism spectrum?
and, it's kind of a constant in her behaviour. for years, i thought she was horribly immoral; in hindsight, she might actually just not be fully capable of really understanding what she's even doing. it's this inability to give a fuck; it's clinical, clearly, but it seems like something is missing rather than that something is off balance.
if we're going to go through this, it would be better for her to give me the rest of the $500/month up front. as i say - that $50,000 number has been bandied around. maybe, we cut it off there. i dunno.
at
09:21
i would imagine the joint estate was probably worth around $500,000, and that she probably contributed at least 60% of it. i know that most of their wealth was tied into property, but i don't know how much debt they had. they lived above their means.
i wouldn't expect that he got any insurance money for brain cancer beyond what could be claimed directly.
i don't know exactly how old she is, but she's actually a few years older than he would have been. by now, she's in her mid to late 60s.
a complicating factor is that i believe she was placed on leave and forced into early retirement due to a mental illness. i kind of deduced she was probably bipolar, but it was never clearly explained to me. when i was younger, i was told she has an "imbalance"; the last couple of years of his life, he just called her retarded. he was constantly apologizing for her...
"i'm sorry that she smashed your guitar. what do you want me to tell you? she's retarded."
and, frankly, i think it might have been closest to the truth - she may be on the autism spectrum. so, what do you do when you have an autistic person with a fiduciary duty over somebody with a stress disorder, who refuses to carry it out?
it's a messy situation. clearly. so, it would be easier if i could just get the odsp check. sadly, that's closing down as a reality....
but, i don't know what kind of retirement income she gets, or how much of that money she can claim as necessary for her own retirement.
i may end up suing my sister, instead.
we'll see what i'm able to learn - i'll need to call the lawyer first, and then the court house.
i wouldn't expect that he got any insurance money for brain cancer beyond what could be claimed directly.
i don't know exactly how old she is, but she's actually a few years older than he would have been. by now, she's in her mid to late 60s.
a complicating factor is that i believe she was placed on leave and forced into early retirement due to a mental illness. i kind of deduced she was probably bipolar, but it was never clearly explained to me. when i was younger, i was told she has an "imbalance"; the last couple of years of his life, he just called her retarded. he was constantly apologizing for her...
"i'm sorry that she smashed your guitar. what do you want me to tell you? she's retarded."
and, frankly, i think it might have been closest to the truth - she may be on the autism spectrum. so, what do you do when you have an autistic person with a fiduciary duty over somebody with a stress disorder, who refuses to carry it out?
it's a messy situation. clearly. so, it would be easier if i could just get the odsp check. sadly, that's closing down as a reality....
but, i don't know what kind of retirement income she gets, or how much of that money she can claim as necessary for her own retirement.
i may end up suing my sister, instead.
we'll see what i'm able to learn - i'll need to call the lawyer first, and then the court house.
at
09:13
but, via the agreement, and as of right now, my step-mother owes me $32500 + interest, and counting - and if i have to, i'll sue her for it.
time's up.
at
08:49
i'm also going to need to look into my father's will, or lack thereof.
i was supposed to get a $500/month check for the foreseeable future, which would give me $6000/year in gifts, which is the maximum amount under the law to maintain benefits. that was the plan, here. we set up an agreement days before he died....and then she just didn't follow through with it.
iirc, she said it wasn't binding because he was half-retarded. the second part was true (after three invasive brain surgeries), but the first part wasn't, as what was set up was a fiduciary duty - it was her agreement that was important, not his.
i probably should have asked for a copy; it didn't cross my mind that she'd bail. i was planning a move, dealing with my father's death...it was just something that didn't cross my mind. but, in hindsight, it should have crossed my mind....
i haven't pursued anything because i don't expect that the dollar figures are worth pursuing. i was told for years that everything would be left in her name, with the assumption that she would fairly distribute it - up to her discretion. and, the same thing was true the other way, although she doesn't have any children. but, how much money is available here, given that she could have another 20-30 years ahead of her?
the number $50,000 has been thrown around a little, and the fact is that that's not a lot of cash.
if i had 50 years left in 2013, i'd have needed to be looking at dollar figures around $1000000 to make any kind of action worthwhile, and that didn't strike me as likely at all. $50,000 is only going to buy me 4 or 5 years. i'd be better off staying on odsp, and biding my time to make a legal case when i'm 55.
but, the situation has now changed - it now makes sense to figure out what i should have got, and sue for it. and, given that i'm not aware of any probate process, and was not informed if one did exist, i may have an argument to reopen it - or at least to sue for unjust enrichment.
i'll repeat: my understanding is that the entire estate went to my step-mother. a $500/month check for an unlimited period is basically exactly what i wanted, and i wouldn't have had much use for a lump sum much less than $1000000, which is probably completely unrealistic. so, it seemed like a waste of time.
but, i don't know, really - i need to see what the will actually says, and what my options are around it.
i was supposed to get a $500/month check for the foreseeable future, which would give me $6000/year in gifts, which is the maximum amount under the law to maintain benefits. that was the plan, here. we set up an agreement days before he died....and then she just didn't follow through with it.
iirc, she said it wasn't binding because he was half-retarded. the second part was true (after three invasive brain surgeries), but the first part wasn't, as what was set up was a fiduciary duty - it was her agreement that was important, not his.
i probably should have asked for a copy; it didn't cross my mind that she'd bail. i was planning a move, dealing with my father's death...it was just something that didn't cross my mind. but, in hindsight, it should have crossed my mind....
i haven't pursued anything because i don't expect that the dollar figures are worth pursuing. i was told for years that everything would be left in her name, with the assumption that she would fairly distribute it - up to her discretion. and, the same thing was true the other way, although she doesn't have any children. but, how much money is available here, given that she could have another 20-30 years ahead of her?
the number $50,000 has been thrown around a little, and the fact is that that's not a lot of cash.
if i had 50 years left in 2013, i'd have needed to be looking at dollar figures around $1000000 to make any kind of action worthwhile, and that didn't strike me as likely at all. $50,000 is only going to buy me 4 or 5 years. i'd be better off staying on odsp, and biding my time to make a legal case when i'm 55.
but, the situation has now changed - it now makes sense to figure out what i should have got, and sue for it. and, given that i'm not aware of any probate process, and was not informed if one did exist, i may have an argument to reopen it - or at least to sue for unjust enrichment.
i'll repeat: my understanding is that the entire estate went to my step-mother. a $500/month check for an unlimited period is basically exactly what i wanted, and i wouldn't have had much use for a lump sum much less than $1000000, which is probably completely unrealistic. so, it seemed like a waste of time.
but, i don't know, really - i need to see what the will actually says, and what my options are around it.
at
08:47
and, is assad a war criminal?
well, i think it's not really his fault - he was fighting a war thrust upon him by outside forces, using obsolete technology as a result of decades of sanctions. we wouldn't sell him modern weapons, then we condemned him for defending himself using what he had.
he's done some awful things, but the responsibility for it is largely with the saudis.
self-defence is a strong legal argument. you could get him for manslaughter, perhaps. but, it would be hard to convict him of war crimes, i think.
that said, i do agree that he needs to be phased out - not because of what he did but because of what is inevitable. i've made this argument here, repeatedly: if you leave the regime in place (and assad himself is of least concern, it's the generals that need to be removed) then there is no future but retaliation - the syrians will go after the saudis as soon as they can, to avenge what has been done to them. and, who can blame them for that?
and, yes - i'm in favour of regime change in saudi arabia, but not at the hands of bashar al-assad, or his generals.
well, i think it's not really his fault - he was fighting a war thrust upon him by outside forces, using obsolete technology as a result of decades of sanctions. we wouldn't sell him modern weapons, then we condemned him for defending himself using what he had.
he's done some awful things, but the responsibility for it is largely with the saudis.
self-defence is a strong legal argument. you could get him for manslaughter, perhaps. but, it would be hard to convict him of war crimes, i think.
that said, i do agree that he needs to be phased out - not because of what he did but because of what is inevitable. i've made this argument here, repeatedly: if you leave the regime in place (and assad himself is of least concern, it's the generals that need to be removed) then there is no future but retaliation - the syrians will go after the saudis as soon as they can, to avenge what has been done to them. and, who can blame them for that?
and, yes - i'm in favour of regime change in saudi arabia, but not at the hands of bashar al-assad, or his generals.
at
00:49
this conflict is so complex and confusing that it has got everybody spun around and supporting things they normally wouldn't, in terms of hard to work out lesser evils. everything is a least-harm calculation. there's no right answer.
but, an imperialist occupation that is illegal under international law is not much of a way forward to building an autonomous worker-run society, and any thinking that it ever was was delusional on it's face to begin with.
but, an imperialist occupation that is illegal under international law is not much of a way forward to building an autonomous worker-run society, and any thinking that it ever was was delusional on it's face to begin with.
at
00:43
the kurds should really be grateful that the americans aren't actively trying to destroy them, which is what they normally do in this scenario.
at
00:38
whatever one thinks of rojava, they should have seen an american withdrawal coming. lessons for the revolution; it's cliched, but it's the blunt truth. it's not like they had much of a choice, but they should have known from the start that they were eventually going to need to defend themselves.
there's not a contradiction in supporting some kind of kurdish self-determination inside syria, and supporting an american withdrawal - for the same reason that there's not a contradiction in supporting the withdrawal, and leaving the remaining fighting up to the russians.
the bottom line is that i don't think it's reasonable to call for american imperialism to protect anarchists in a fictional kurdistan. it's a nice idea; it's not very rooted in reality.
there's not a contradiction in supporting some kind of kurdish self-determination inside syria, and supporting an american withdrawal - for the same reason that there's not a contradiction in supporting the withdrawal, and leaving the remaining fighting up to the russians.
the bottom line is that i don't think it's reasonable to call for american imperialism to protect anarchists in a fictional kurdistan. it's a nice idea; it's not very rooted in reality.
at
00:37
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)