# Accepting Power Of Attorney in Nova Scotia - What am I liable for?



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

Not sure if anyone can help, but advice/previous experience would be helpful.

I currently have the power of attorney and am named the executor of the will for an extended family member who lives in Nova Scotia. I live in Ontario. 

My family member is now living in a retirement home with no immediate family. He still currently owns a house that has been vacant for close to a year. The insurance company found out the house is now vacant and has revoked his insurance on the house. Because of location and age of the house, I am unable to find another company willing to insure the house nor provide liability on the home. I really do not care too much about the home but definitely care about someone getting hurt while on the property.

My family member has left the house in his will to a friend, however, he refuses to give the house to his friend until he passes. He has questioned if he should sell the home. Due to the condition and location of the house, the house is not worth very much (20-30K if I was lucky), and it would take years to sell if I could even find a buyer.

I am nervous about liability on the home. If someone gets hurt while on the property without insurance, what can happen? Am I, as the power of attorney, held liable?

Thanks for any advice.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

The first question is whether you have an Enduring Power of Attorney, or simply a Power of Attorney for specified purposes. Also, does the geezer have his cognitive abilities or is he becoming mentally incapacitated? All of these things matter for us to provide more clarity.

Whether you can be held liable as a power of attorney MAY depends on how diligent you have been to insure the property or otherwise dispose of it. Ask a lawyer. If you have the authority, I'd immediately put the property up for sale, especially if the owner has also raised the question about whether to do that. It may take forever, but you are showing judicious intent. Clearly, the liability exposure is greater than the minimal money the property would get. I find it unusual that you cannot find someone just to provide 3rd party liability insurance. That is what I've done in the past for recreation land with (and without) a derelict cabin on it. Go to an insurance broker and they will find someone.

Added: As part of your powers as a POA, I think you have the right to get an hour of legal advice (if you need it) chargebable to the owner to clarify best course of action.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

I do have Enduring POA. I can essentially do everything and anything on behalf of my family member. He was diagnosed with early dementia, however, he still has his cognitive abilities, as much as expected for an elder person. He gets a little frustrated when trying to make decisions and prefers not to make any, but now that he is in a retirement home and getting medication consistently, I feel his cognitive abilities has improved.

We've tried getting the insurance renewed with the previous company and they suggested we contact an insurance broker. We've contacted an insurance broker who has told us due to the age and location of the home, they were unable to get us insurance. We were very clear that liability insurance is the most important for us. The house is in a small city with already a lot of abandon homes. The insurance broker claims this is why we cannot get insurance.

Thanks for the feedback. It sounds a lot more complicated then I was hoping for and I will probably need to seek the advice of a lawyer.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

trillian said:


> We've tried getting the insurance renewed with the previous company and they suggested we contact an insurance broker. We've contacted an insurance broker who has told us due to the age and location of the home, they were unable to get us insurance. We were very clear that liability insurance is the most important for us. The house is in a small city with already a lot of abandon homes. The insurance broker claims this is why we cannot get insurance.(


I'd try to market it for whatever you can get for it. Otherwise, boarding the place up (at the owner's expense) may be the only choice, subject to getting the right permit from the municipality I imagine. I assume some utilities have been cut off?


----------



## Rebecca (Aug 10, 2014)

I can't help you answer the liability issue, but I had a terrible time trying to get insurance for a relative's home a few years ago when it too, became vacant due to the relative moving into a retirement facility. The old insurer refused to insure more than 90 days after it became vacant and then I called several other brokers (my own included), and none would take on the home. I eventually found a high-risk broker, who issued a type of policy that was covered by more than one insurer (can't remember the term for it). If you like, you can PM me and I'll give you the broker's name (I'm in Toronto, and have no idea if this gentleman insures out of province though, but you could certainly ask). The high-risk policy cost about four times that of her old insurer, but it gave me peace of mind until I was able to sell the property a few months later.


----------



## fraser (May 15, 2010)

Dump the property before someone torches it and the estate has to pay for demolition/removal. Chances are the value will only decrease while you are paying property tax and trying to secure insurance.

Ask the friend in the will if he/she wants to buy it. You may discover that the friend has more interest in the money than the house.

Consult a lawyer in Nova Scotia and find out exactly what you, as executor, are liable for. The estate will pay for this consult.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

fraser said:


> Ask the friend in the will if he/she wants to buy it. You may discover that the friend has more interest in the money than the house.


The geezer won't hand the home over to the friend while the geezer is still alive. But you have a good idea. There may be an opportunity to sell it to the friend for $1 or some very low price....given the friend was going to eventually receive it some day in an estate.



> Consult a lawyer in Nova Scotia and find out exactly what you, as executor, are liable for. The estate will pay for this consult.


This is not an estate. This is a liability concern of someone with the power of attorney.


----------



## fraser (May 15, 2010)

Estate or no estate... like others have said get advice from a lawyer in Nova Scotia. 

My experience is that it is folly to depend on armchair advice when there are serious matters at hand. You need to determine what if any liability you may have and how best to move forward. Any time that we have paid for legal or financial advice it has proven to be worth much more than we paid for it.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

I would say there is no need to sweat the liability issue.

Most, if not all, Canadian provinces have an Occupiers Liability Act (even if different nomenclature is employed). It is the application of that legislation that governs liability for premises such as a house.

In BC, the Act defines "occupier" thus:

"occupier" means a person who

(a) is in physical possession of premises, or
(b) has responsibility for, and control over, the condition of premises, the activities conducted on those premises and the persons allowed to enter those premises,
and, for this Act, there may be more than one occupier of the same premises.

So, Trillian, ask yourself: Is that me? Plainly, you are not in occupation. Do you have control and responsibility for the premises? Maybe, if it was understood between you and your principal that part of undertaking under the POA was to be the property manager. But I doubt that such was your mutual understanding. But you should know.

In the absence of some kind of express provision in the POA imposing on you some kind of duty in respect of the particular property, I am certain that in no case could liability flow simply by virtue of your holding a POA. If that were so, then your liability could be open-ended and indeterminate. For example, you could be held liable if the principal’s dog, living somewhere not under your control, bit someone. 

Here is a link to a BC case that gives some insight into how courts apply the Act:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/ca/97/00/c97-0061.txt

Even if I am wrong in the foregoing analysis, I am not wrong when I say that the duty to a trespasser is low. The most likely scenario of someone being injured on your principal’s vacant property would involve a trespass. Here’s a link to a case illustrating the modest duty of care owed a trespasser:

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/97/04/s97-0419.txt


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Still, as per my first post, get some legal advice. The $300-500 will be worth it.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

trillian said:


> He still currently owns a house that has been *vacant for close to a year.* The insurance company found out the house is now vacant and has revoked his insurance on the house. Because of location and age of the house, I am unable to find another company willing to insure the house nor provide liability on the home. I really do not care too much about the home but definitely care about someone getting hurt while on the property.
> 
> left the house in his will to a friend, however, he refuses to give the house to his friend until he passes. He has questioned if he should sell the home. Due to the condition and location of the house, *the house is not worth very much (20-30K* if I was lucky), and it would take years to sell if I could even find a buyer.
> 
> I am nervous about liability on the home. If someone gets hurt while on the property without insurance, what can happen? Am I, as the power of attorney, held liable?


From an insurance point of view, it's too easy for someone to set fire to an abandoned empty house, and then the owner to collect the fire insurance. That's why it will be be very hard for normal market insurance to insure it unless it is occupied by
somebody.

*No Trespassing* signs and boarded up is probably the only way to keep intruders (kids) from getting inside and setting a fire. If someone gets trapped in the house while the fire has started, it could be a liability issue if someone is injured by the fire., however the No Trespassing signs on the building and entrance
may be a way to get out of any liability claim. 

Then you have to deal with the municipality if it is boarded up. This is a difficult situation for sure.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

If the owner has not been declared mentally incompetent, the POA could have difficulty selling it if the owner is opposed. The owner can simply rescind the POA.

It may be time for the POA to consider abdicating, both as POA and executor. Most references on estates do not recommend that the executor be out-of-province, unless he appoints an agent in the province to settle the estate.

_He has questioned if he should sell the home._ If the owner is willing to sell, then by all means do so, regardless of the price. If the price is low enough, someone will buy it. Better to get it settled now. But he will have to revise his will too. If owner can express his wish to sell it clearly enough to a lawyer, the lawyer can draft a short codicil to the will.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

OhGreatGuru said:


> If the owner has not been declared mentally incompetent, the POA could have difficulty selling it if the owner is opposed. The owner can simply rescind the POA.
> 
> It may be time for the POA to consider abdicating, both as POA and executor. Most references on estates do not recommend that the executor be out-of-province, unless he appoints an agent in the province to settle the estate.


I was thinking about that too..except the OP said the owner does have dementia (to some degree). Still, if the owner is still sharp enough to disagree and potentially rescind POA, that might be a good thing in the end.... and even if not, kick off the process to adbicate. The advice stands... see a lawyer.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

Regarding insurance, on the face of it it seems strange no one will give you a quote on simple liability. But the problem may be their corporate HQ's have no idea how to set a premium for such coverage on a vacant, low-value property.

When you talk to lawyer, ask him/her if it would be worthwhile seeing if you can get an extension on your own liability insurance to cover your exposure.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

I am going to second the advice to see a lawyer but one in the province of jurisdiction ie nova Scotia. The nova Scotia bar may have a lawyer referral service where you can call and get a referral with 1/2 to 1 hour free consult.( perhaps can do this by phone after faxing lawyer copy of poa).
They will need to see the poa. Each prov has slightly different rules. 
Some poa's are in effect immediately and continue after an incompetence. Some have a triggering clause where they only become effective on a triggering event, like 2 Drs declaring him incompetent. Etc etc. Make sure you are clear.

Has the powers under the poa been activated? Is the OP acting under the poa now re bank transactions etc?
Does nova scotia require an accounting from the attorney?
If youhave already acted under the poa, it may not be possible to renege on the appointment and if there was a triggering event, the grantor may not be able to rescind his poa.

If there was a triggering event, the grantor no longer has any say in the control of his finances but you still have to act in his best interest.
If the powers under the poa have not been activated, you would have no liability. Once they are, you should keep track of all efforts you make as well as records of all transaction.

Good luck.


----------



## marina628 (Dec 14, 2010)

I am familiar with small town issues with empty homes and back home there is usually somebody looking for a cheap place to rent so is it possible you can get somebody to move in and care for the property ,the insurance issue is the property being vacant.My sister and her husband run a small caretaker business and they go into homes every 2-3 days to satisfy the terms of the clients home insurance.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

Thanks for all the feedback. I am sufficiently nervous about the whole situation 

Selling the house has more complications. He left the house to his friend in his will who lives near him. All his friendships are extremely dysfunctional, he has cluttered all his friendships with money, and in return he orders his friends around. He has been like this his entire life. His deepest need in life is to be in charge and so he throws his money around and in return gets whatever he demands.

He is using the house as his bargaining chip on having someone visit him regularly. I think he fears that if he gives the house now, the friend will stop seeing him. The friend knows the house is left to them. However, If we sell the house, the friend will know right away and they will most certainly stop seeing him. This will upset him even more as this is his only access to getting out for weekly outings and having his way. 

We have tried offering to get some professional help to assist him in weekly outings or errands, however, he does not want any of that. He simply wants his friends to do as he demands.

Although he did question selling the house in passing, I do not know if he truly wants to do that. What he really really wants is to keep the house as his bargaining chip to order his friend around. Unfortunately, he cannot afford to keep the house, even if we could get insurance. We have calculated that if he keeps spending the way he is now, he will run out of money in 10 years. We have explained this to him and he fails to care. However, I truly believe he is doing a lot better mentally now than prior to being admitted to the home, so I believe he understands and doesn't care.

Now, I am in a position where I either walk away or try to figure out how to get him to make a decision.

If I wanted to walk away, how can I arrange a new POW? What do I google for? Is there some company that I can hire to manage it all? I absolutely do not trust any of his friends to do this as prior to receiving POW things went missing while they were taking care of him

If I wanted to maintain POW, is there someone I can hire who can do all the leg work of closing the house, turning off utilities, and selling or giving the house away? What would I be googling?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

trillian said:


> Now, I am in a position where I either walk away or try to figure out how to get him to make a decision.
> 
> If I wanted to walk away, how can I arrange a new POW? What do I google for? Is there some company that I can hire to manage it all? I absolutely do not trust any of his friends to do this as prior to receiving POW things went missing while they were taking care of him
> 
> If I wanted to maintain POW, is there someone I can hire who can do all the leg work of closing the house, turning off utilities, and selling or giving the house away? What would I be googling?


Given the personality of this fellow, I won't ask why you ever agreed (and signed on) to be a POA for him in the first place, and additionally why when you are located out-of-province. This is complicated. Read the post by twa2w since he knows a lot about this sort of thing. He asks some simple questions: Are you acting formally today as this fellow's POA? And if so, presumably you are handling all his financial and legal transactions/affairs (but not personal care)? And if so, why is he still making spending decisions instead of you? Who is in control here? I see a lot of rather haphazard information in your response, a case of being half-pregnant. Not really possible. 

If you are formally acting as his Attorney, you have control, not him. You also cannot shed that responsibility BUT you can hire whoever you need via the fellow's funds/assets, to undertake whatever work is required, including for example, a property manager to care for the property. You, as the Attorney though, will have to be signing the paperwork for selling the place, etc. 

Sorry, but your information has become less clear than more clear.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

My apologies for not answering the questions. I got overwhelmed by everyone's responses




twa2w said:


> I am going to second the advice to see a lawyer but one in the province of jurisdiction ie nova Scotia. The nova Scotia bar may have a lawyer referral service where you can call and get a referral with 1/2 to 1 hour free consult.( perhaps can do this by phone after faxing lawyer copy of poa).


I'm starting to believe this is probably the best course of action. I will see what I can do.



twa2w said:


> Some poa's are in effect immediately and continue after an incompetence. Some have a triggering clause where they only become effective on a triggering event, like 2 Drs declaring him incompetent. Etc etc. Make sure you are clear.
> 
> Has the powers under the poa been activated? Is the OP acting under the poa now re bank transactions etc?
> Does nova scotia require an accounting from the attorney?
> ...


I do have POA. It's pretty thorough and I can pretty much do anything on his behalf, sell/buy property/investments, bank accounts, etc. The POA is effective immediately and has been activated in the sense that I am now listed on his bank accounts and have been paying his expenses/taxes, etc. I am able to act on his behalf for selling/buying property/investments, bank accounts, etc. Everything he can do, I can do. However, I never signed a contract agreeing to be his POA. The contract is simply his signature appointing me the POA

What does your second question on accounting from the attorney mean? Obviously, that might not be a good answer 

The grantor still has the ability to appoint a new the POA as he still has his cognitive abilities. However, any changes will need to be determined by a lawyer to decide if he is capable of making such decisions.





AltaRed said:


> Given the personality of this fellow, I won't ask why you ever agreed (and signed on) to be a POA for him in the first place, and additionally why when you are located out-of-province. This is complicated.


Unfortunately, he is family with no immediate family to help him. Never married or had children. Lived his entire life single.

Plus, I never realized how much of a complication the whole thing would become. However, the only main complication at the moment is dealing with the house. His every day finances has been ok to manage with online banking, etc.



AltaRed said:


> Read the post by twa2w since he knows a lot about this sort of thing. He asks some simple questions: Are you acting formally today as this fellow's POA? And if so, presumably you are handling all his financial and legal transactions/affairs (but not personal care)? And if so, why is he still making spending decisions instead of you? Who is in control here? I see a lot of rather haphazard information in your response, a case of being half-pregnant. Not really possible.
> 
> If you are formally acting as his Attorney, you have control, not him. You also cannot shed that responsibility BUT you can hire whoever you need via the fellow's funds/assets, to undertake whatever work is required, including for example, a property manager to care for the property. You, as the Attorney though, will have to be signing the paperwork for selling the place, etc.


I am confused on your suggestion that I am in complete control now, not him. Just because I am his POA, that does not mean he cannot make any financial decisions on his own or that I can do things against his wishes. As long as he still has his cognitive ability to make decisions, he can still make any financial decision he deems. I'm just the proxy to do the actual legwork instead of him. And because this is so messy, and despite it being difficult to have him make a decision, wouldn't it be in _my_ best interest to have HIM make the decisions on the house instead of me?

What I am hoping for is:
1) Surely there must be a way to forfeit being his POA. If there was no family involved, who would manage his estate? If his friends are untrustworthy and no family, there must be some company who would manage his estate? What are they called? 

2) If I wanted to maintain POA, but I didn't want to actually fly out there to board up the house, and/or sell/give the house, is there a company who would do all the legwork to help facilitate this where all that would be needed is my signature? Would property managers do this?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

trillian said:


> I am confused on your suggestion that I am in complete control now, not him. Just because I am his POA, that does not mean he cannot make any financial decisions on his own or that I can do things against his wishes. As long as he still has his cognitive ability to make decisions, he can still make any financial decision he deems. I'm just the proxy to do the actual legwork instead of him. And because this is so messy, and despite it being difficult to have him make a decision, wouldn't it be in _my_ best interest to have HIM make the decisions on the house instead of me?
> 
> What I am hoping for is:
> 1) Surely there must be a way to forfeit being his POA. If there was no family involved, who would manage his estate? If his friends are untrustworthy and no family, there must be some company who would manage his estate? What are they called?
> ...


I've never been, or known anyone, who was in a position as an Attorney and having the individual continue to make financial and legal decisions independently (in parallel). I've only known situations where an Attorney steps in when the individual no longer wants to, or is able to, make decisions. So I cannot answer that question..but a lawyer can. I wouldn't intervene and start acting as an Attorney unless I had complete control. I think that is what twa2w was getting at. On what basis did you start acting as his Attorney and why? And why would you continue to allow him to make financial and legal decisions that may not be in his best interests? It seems to me that you gradually got sucked into acting on his behalf due to your good intentions in wanting what was best for him and now it is a muddy mess. 

You will need to ask a NS lawyer to review the POA and also tell the lawyer how 'half pregnant' you have become in his affairs....and what you can now do about it to either take complete control or wash your hands of it all. Part of that decision involves your willingness to let the 'state' make decisions for him....if that is even possible. I know nothing about that, but it won't be pretty since a 'disinterested' party is not going to care much about what this fellow wants or is thinking.

Regarding the house, as I said before, you can always hire a property manager to manage the house, handle utility bills, insurance, get permits to board it up, etc. They will do all those things BUT it is only you who will be able to do the legal/financial responsibilities regarding signing purchase/sale documents. Anything regarding title will require your signature... which can be handled from a distance. The property manager may be able to facilitate that for you or get a notary/realtor to do that part. I've bought/sold properties several times from a distance. Just takes having a realtor and a lawyer located where the property is. Signatures can be handled by faxes and in some cases, a notary where you are located to witness your signature.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

trillian said:


> The grantor still has the ability to appoint a new the POA as he still has his cognitive abilities. However, any changes will need to be determined by a lawyer to decide if he is capable of making such decisions.


I don't understand that comment. If he still has his cognitive abilities, then how can that be a matter that needs to be determined? Nonetheless, any lawyer taking instructions for a will or a POA routinely asks questions and makes observations aimed at determining competence. When in doubt, a referral to a medical professional is the general rule.



trillian said:


> I am confused on your suggestion that I am in complete control now, not him. Just because I am his POA, that does not mean he cannot make any financial decisions on his own or that I can do things against his wishes. As long as he still has his cognitive ability to make decisions, he can still make any financial decision he deems. I'm just the proxy to do the actual legwork instead of him. And because this is so messy, and despite it being difficult to have him make a decision, wouldn't it be in _my_ best interest to have HIM make the decisions on the house instead of me?


I am also confused about the suggestion of you being in complete control. While, as a B.C. lawyer, I do not profess to be as knowledgeable in this matter as AltaRed and twa2w, it strikes me as odd that the law in any province ordains that upon granting a general POA, one has vested in the attorney all and exclusive decision-making capacity.



trillian said:


> What I am hoping for is:
> 1) Surely there must be a way to forfeit being his POA. If there was no family involved, who would manage his estate? If his friends are untrustworthy and no family, there must be some company who would manage his estate? What are they called?
> 
> 2) If I wanted to maintain POA, but I didn't want to actually fly out there to board up the house, and/or sell/give the house, is there a company who would do all the legwork to help facilitate this where all that would be needed is my signature? Would property managers do this?


As for "forfeiting" the POA, I take it you are speaking of resigning. Again, I'll venture that N.S. law is not much different from B.C. law. Here the POA Act provides, in part:

Resignation of attorney
25 (1) In this section, "close friend", in respect of an adult who has made an enduring power of attorney, means another adult who has a long-term, close personal relationship involving frequent personal contact with the adult, but does not include a person who receives compensation for providing personal care or health care to the adult.

(2) An attorney may resign by giving written notice to the adult and any other attorneys named in the enduring power of attorney.
(3) In addition to the persons referred to in subsection (2), if the adult is incapable of making decisions at the time the attorney resigns, the attorney must give written notice of the resignation to a spouse, near relative or, if known to the attorney, close friend of the adult.
(4) The resignation of an attorney is effective
(a) when notice has been given under this section, or
(b) on a later date specified in the notice.


As for having a "company" assume management of the estate, some individual person in said company would have to be given POA. Subject to what AltaRed and twa2a have to say, I do not think a corporation can be appointed attorney. The two exceptions in B.C. are set out in the POA Act, s. 18, and they are the Public Guardian and Trustee and "(c) a financial institution authorized to carry on trust business under the Financial Institutions Act."

Apart from the foregoing, I have never heard of anyone giving a POA to an attorney for hire. A novel proposition, for sure. If the person whose estate needs governance becomes incompetent, then, in the absence of someone with an enduring POA available to act, the court must appoint a committee, usually a close friend or relative of the incompetent person. Failing that, it usually falls to the Public Trustee (now, in B.C., the Public Guardian and Trustee. I guess the old title, which served for decades, left an undesirable lacuna in the description.)


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

Sorry if my first post was not clear. What I was getting at was if you had taken over and assumed all decision making because your relative was no longer able.
It is fairly common for a POA to look after some affairs, like banking, while the grantor is still competent but may not be mobile etc. I did not intend to suggest you take over all decision making if the the grantor was still competent.
If he is still competent, he should be making the decisions on the house, with your leg work.
There are property management companies that will look after renting properties or doing regular inspections for insurance purposes. However I get the impression the house is rundown and not an acceptable risk even if occupied - is that correct?
If you resign as POA, and the grantor is not competent to appoint another, then one of two things will happen. Another relative would have to make application to the court to have him declared incompetent and be named 'commitee' which is the name given to the person deemed to be his guardian from then on.
If no one comes forward, he would be declared a ward of the state and then his affairs would be administered by the official guardian.( a government dep) 
Remember procedures/terms/names/ titles vary from prov to prov and I am not familiar with Nova Scotia termsetc.
A corporation can be named POA for financial affairs in some provinces, I believe only trust companies, but they will not accept a mandate unless there sufficient assets to make it worth their while. Usually high 6 to low 7 figures at a minimum.
Please don't confuse poa duties of looking after his financial affairs while he is alive with looking after his estate after he passes. You could resign the POA but still be executor of his will.
The reporting requirements I spoke of are that some province require a POA to file a report to some government body each year if the grantor is incompetent and an interested party requests it. The report would show assets and liabilities of the grantor as well as a tfinancial transaction report of what you did for him. This is to prevent a poa from defrauding etc.
I don't believe this is the case in novascotia and in any event the grantor is still deemed competent for now.
The real reason I asked all those questions in my previous post was to give you some questions for the lawyer you should see rather than rely on the Internet. I admit my knowledge is rusty and I am not familiar with Nova Scotia law. And rules can change from the time us posters dealt with our issues. As mukhang points out rules are similiar but remember they may be just different enough make a difference.
I understand your moral obligation and sense of familial duty.
Consult with a lawyer to clarify your responsibilities and your liability under law.
I would suggest, as long as the grantor is capable and you are letting him make all the decisions, you would have little liability as you are just transacting banking for him and doing some legwork for him.

If I missed anything hopefully mukhang or AltaRed will catch it and address it. Or ask again.
HOWEVER
None of us responding to your posts are familiar with your exact circumstances so anything we say is at best general in nature and may not be applicable to your situation.

I think Mukhang is a lawyer or at least very familiar and smart with the law and I believe he will likely agree for you to get legal advice from a Nova Scotia lawyer.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

From an earlier post, it seems the OP is okay with being the guy's Attorney as defined within the POA as it relates to financial and legal decisions... but not in dealing with the risks and headache of the property. Unfortunately, I know of no situation where the two really can be separated if the POA appoints the OP as his General (or Enduring) Power of Attorney in all financial and legal matters. I think the OP would have to resign from all, or take on all. As I said earlier, a property manager can be hired to manage the property until it sells but that same property manager cannot handle the legal paperwork to effect a sale, i.e. title change. The OP has to do that. 

Perhaps, subject to a chat with a NS lawyer, the following might be the appropriate action to allow the OP to extricate himself from the RE mess:
1. Tell the owner that while he is willing to be his Attorney on financial and legal matters, he is not willing to continue dealing with the RE property in the current situation
2. That either the property be managed by a third party with its attendant costs, or it be sold for whatever the market will bear...may be next to nothing
3. If the geezer is not willing to make a satisfactory decision on the property, tell the geezer that either he will take action to sell the property on his own as Attorney, or he will resign as Attorney.
4. Give him 30 days in writing to make up his mind and then per Mukhang pera, actually proceed to the next step (put the property up for sale, or initiate the process to resign as Attorney)

Sometimes tough love is what it takes to get people out of their box.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

twa2w said:


> I think Mukhang is a lawyer or at least very familiar and smart with the law and I believe he will likely agree for you to get legal advice from a Nova Scotia lawyer.


I went to law school in Ontario and was called to the bar in B.C. While I was in active practice in B.C. for a number of years, I also worked for corporations and government. Now, I no longer live in a big city and no longer commute to an office. Instead, I am an online employee in the field of legal research and writing. A few times a year I have to show up for meetings in Vancouver, but apart from that, I am fairly autonomous. So, as twa2w comments, I am familiar with the law. I admit I have no specialized knowledge of other than B.C. law. However, the law does not vary all that widely across provinces in general, except for Quebec. But, I say "in general", and yes, I agree with the notion that in trillian's case, a bit of time spent consulting with a N.S. lawyer might prove beneficial.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

Mukhang pera said:


> I don't understand that comment. If he still has his cognitive abilities, then how can that be a matter that needs to be determined? Nonetheless, any lawyer taking instructions for a will or a POA routinely asks questions and makes observations aimed at determining competence. When in doubt, a referral to a medical professional is the general rule.


I only meant that we've had to go to the lawyer twice and each time the lawyer wanted to ask questions to determine his competence of making such decisions. So he still has the ability to change his POA, he would just need to make sure the lawyer agrees he is competent to be able to do so. I assume if the lawyer cannot determine this it would be escalated to a medical professional.




Mukhang pera said:


> As for having a "company" assume management of the estate, some individual person in said company would have to be given POA. Subject to what AltaRed and twa2a have to say, I do not think a corporation can be appointed attorney. The two exceptions in B.C. are set out in the POA Act, s. 18, and they are the Public Guardian and Trustee and "(c) a financial institution authorized to carry on trust business under the Financial Institutions Act."
> 
> Apart from the foregoing, I have never heard of anyone giving a POA to an attorney for hire. A novel proposition, for sure. If the person whose estate needs governance becomes incompetent, then, in the absence of someone with an enduring POA available to act, the court must appoint a committee, usually a close friend or relative of the incompetent person. Failing that, it usually falls to the Public Trustee (now, in B.C., the Public Guardian and Trustee. I guess the old title, which served for decades, left an undesirable lacuna in the description.)


Without going into too much detail, my main concern is I do not trust any of his close friends to act in his best interest with regards to his POA. Upon gaining POA, the family did a review of his assets over the last few years and things don't add up. I have no proof which individual, if any, took the things missing but when asking my relative, he does not recall when or why it would have happened. At least one friend had unofficial access to his assets with no paper trail whatsoever. The friends have no recollection and point fingers at one another. However, it would be extremely difficult to prove any of this and all they would have to say is he gave it to them. He has trouble remembering things, more so during this time prior to being admitted into the retirement home.



twa2w said:


> There are property management companies that will look after renting properties or doing regular inspections for insurance purposes. However I get the impression the house is rundown and not an acceptable risk even if occupied - is that correct?


The house is run down and based on the age of the home, the wiring in the home, and the location, it was extremely difficult to find an insurance company willing to insure the house while it was occupied. Now that it's vacant, all insurance companies refuse to insure it now. It would cost a fair change of money to repair to become acceptable for renting, probably more than the house is even worth. Equivalent homes in the area are listed for 20-30K, have upgraded the wiring in the home, and they seem in better shape than this house. Since we've lost the insurance on the home, I feel even more reluctant to have any renovations done on the home in case of an injury. Since he can no longer live in the home, my main concern is making sure his money survives him. As it stands, he will outlive his money if he does not reduce his spending, so I feel the house is a lost cause. The sooner we can ditch it the better.




twa2w said:


> If you resign as POA, and the grantor is not competent to appoint another, then one of two things will happen. Another relative would have to make application to the court to have him declared incompetent and be named 'commitee' which is the name given to the person deemed to be his guardian from then on.
> If no one comes forward, he would be declared a ward of the state and then his affairs would be administered by the official guardian.( a government dep)


The whole family is actually in agreement on the decisions he needs to make. Sadly, I got stuck with the POA as everyone else is old with their own health issues and are unable to perform the duties. If he refuses to reduce his spending, everyone is willing to walk away. However, if he appoints one of his friends, we feel it will not be in his best interest. We know he might not be better off with a third-party individual, but if there is a process and forced accountability, it cannot be worse than what has already happen to him while his friends were taking care of him.



twa2w said:


> A corporation can be named POA for financial affairs in some provinces, I believe only trust companies, but they will not accept a mandate unless there sufficient assets to make it worth their while. Usually high 6 to low 7 figures at a minimum.


His net work is only low 6 figures.




twa2w said:


> The reporting requirements I spoke of are that some province require a POA to file a report to some government body each year if the grantor is incompetent and an interested party requests it. The report would show assets and liabilities of the grantor as well as a tfinancial transaction report of what you did for him. This is to prevent a poa from defrauding etc.
> I don't believe this is the case in novascotia and in any event the grantor is still deemed competent for now.


That makes sense. No one has instructed me on this, but we are doing our best to keep proper records on decisions.



twa2w said:


> The real reason I asked all those questions in my previous post was to give you some questions for the lawyer you should see rather than rely on the Internet.


That's absolutely fair and I completely understand professional advice is in my best interest. I appreciate having the questions, advice and perspectives. It does help to figure out what I should be asking.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

AltaRed said:


> 3. If the geezer is not willing to make a satisfactory decision on the property, tell the geezer that either he will take action to sell the property on his own as Attorney, or he will resign as Attorney.
> 4. Give him 30 days in writing to make up his mind and then per Mukhang pera, actually proceed to the next step (put the property up for sale, or initiate the process to resign as Attorney)


This is what the entire family is planning to do. We're just not sure how to go about doing so.

I did have a conversation with my relative today telling him he needs to make a decision very soon and I warned him that if he does not make a decision, the entire family is willing to walk away as it's too much of a liability risk. He said his preference was to keep the home for another year but I told him that was not an option. He needs to decide to either sell the house or to give it to his friend. He wants another day or two to decide. I feel for him as he lived in this home his entire life and has never lived anywhere else. He has a lot of family history in this house. He still wants to get out of the retirement home and go back to his house. But in all honesty, that is not a viable option. If he did not agree to go into the retirement home, he was very very close to being forced to leave his house. And now that he is in the retirement home, he is actually in much better health than when he was living by himself.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

Trillian, that is a common response among the elderly who are moved to a retirement residence or nursing home. They often feel better due to better meals, social interaction etc, then they feel they want to move back home and be independant..
I applaud you for dealing with this.
Is it a problem if he outlives his money? Does not the government in Novascotia have gov funded retirement residences or spaces. They would take a majority of his OAS and CPP and leave him a little spending money. Sort of geared to income. I am sure they do not throw them out onto the street.

A suggestion I have for the house is to have the local authority - County, town etc- send an inspector. Not sure if this is a health inspector or building inspector. They do an assessment and declare the house unfit ( if repairs needed before inhabitation) or condemned if it should be torn down.
If you explain a senior wants to live in house alone and they are starting to have cognitive problems and you want to make sure it is safe and inhabitable, I am sure that would get someone out to the house.
If it is indeed deemed unfit or needing substantial repairs, thst may convince your friend to not want to move in and to sell. 
On the other hand IIRC, CMHC and some provinces have low cost loans and grants to upgrade homes for seniors that could provide some repairs to improve house for sale and insurance


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

twa2w said:


> A suggestion I have for the house is to have the local authority - County, town etc- send an inspector. Not sure if this is a health inspector or building inspector. They do an assessment and declare the house unfit ( if repairs needed before inhabitation) or condemned if it should be torn down.


I;'ve been reading the responses on this thread with interest.

If it came to tearing it down due to uninhabitable circumstances, ( and it will cost money to tear it down), why not just put the place up for auction and sell to the highest bid? 
That is one way of getting rid of the house and the land that it is built on. I assume that there are still some kind of property taxes applicable and tearing it down would still incur "unimproved lot" taxes, although vacant land taxes are not the same as if a building is on it.


----------



## Itchy54 (Feb 12, 2012)

From the BC POA act

(3) An attorney must do all of the following:
(a) to the extent reasonable, give priority when managing the adult's financial affairs to meeting the personal care and health care needs of the adult;
(b) unless the enduring power of attorney states otherwise, invest the adult's property only in accordance with the Trustee Act;
(c) to the extent reasonable, foster the independence of the adult and encourage the adult's involvement in any decision-making that affects the adult;
(d) not dispose of property that the attorney knows is subject to a specific testamentary gift in the adult's will, except if the disposition is necessary to comply with the attorney's duties;
(e) to the extent reasonable, keep the adult's personal effects at the disposal of the adult.

I am my fathers POA and know that everything I do must be approved by him first. I will absolutely NOT do a thing with out his consent. Although he suffers some memory issues he is not incompetent. I believe a bank can be appointed POA but check the specific province.
You absolutely can resign as POA, you cannot resign as executor once you start.

Best of luck. This job has been very hard for me, a huge learning curve...but it is all good now.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Itchy, Nova Scotia POA Act may be different, but the BC one provides good insight. Point (e) could be a bit problematic if it is also in the Nova Scotia act unless the property can be condemned.

Based on the OP's post, it seems the house is beyond repair, i.e more money would be sunk into it than what it could be sold for. I wonder if the municipality would condemn it. Touch base with the fire department and have them look at it (could be a free service, or with minimal cost). You kind of need to know that even if you auction the property "as is" with any sale being title inspection only. No other conditions.

It does cost money to tear something down, but that may be the better ultimate choice.

Added for info: This link regarding POA Act for Nova Scotia. http://nslegislature.ca/legc/statutes/powers.htm

Added: See Section II(a) regarding out-of-province jurisdiction http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/4599...Outside+The+Jurisdiction+They+Are+Executed+In


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Itchy54 said:


> From the BC POA act
> 
> You absolutely can resign as POA, you cannot resign as executor once you start.


Itchy, given your reference to the BC POA Act, I'll take it you are in B.C. 

You make an interesting comment about an executor having no ability to renounce "once you start". I was unaware of that one. Are your sure? Can you cite some authority in support? The only statutory provision of which I am aware, touching upon the matter is found in the Wills, Estates and Succession Act, which provides, in part:

_Renunciation of executorship
104 (1) A person named as executor in a will may renounce his or her appointment as executor.

(2) The renunciation of executorship, unless a court otherwise orders, terminates the executorship of the person renouncing it, and the administration of the estate passes as if the person had never been appointed executor.
_
That provision is silent as to timing of renunciation. It does not say anything about a prohibition on renunciation "once you start". I put those words in quotation marks as it is not altogether certain what amounts to "starting". Perhaps filing for letters probate?

I have not overlooked that the Act also contemplates that a "personal representative" may apply to be "discharged". The Act does not define "personal representative", so one must have resort to the Interpretation Act. It provides: 

_"personal representative" includes an executor of a will and an administrator with or without will annexed of an estate, and, if a personal representative is also a trustee of part or all of the estate, includes the personal representative and trustee._

The Wills, Estates and Succession Act seems to contemplate a court application being necessary for a personal representative to be discharged: 


_Personal representative may apply to be discharged
157 (1) The personal representative of a deceased person may apply to the court to be discharged from the office of personal representative._

So, arguably, an executor is a "personal representative" hence a person who must apply for discharge. But, again, the Act is silent about timing. If s. 157 is intended to apply to executors, then what is the purpose of s. 104 which allows renunciation without a chambers application? It's a trite rule of statutory interpretation that the specific takes precedence over the general and I would say that s. 104 is a specific provision dealing with executors and it prevails.

I have probably read virtually every wills and estates case handed down in BC since 1979 and I have never seen, that I can recall, a case of an executor making formal application to renounce. Is it that they all accept the proposition you state, i.e., that once one dons the mantle of executor, one must see it through and a court application would be futile? I have seen a number of cases where beneficiaries are unhappy with executors and have applied for their removal and replacement, but the proposition you posit is different. 

Finally, s. 104 suggests an executor is at liberty to renounce "unless a court otherwise orders". So that suggests that if one purports to renounce, the court (presumably _ex mero moto_) may say: "Hey, come back here you and do your job, whether you like it or not." I think I would prefer not to be the beneficiary of an estate where the executor is a hostage.

Itchy, I find the point you have made to be interesting and hope you can add to the topic.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

None of this helps or is necessarily applicable to Nova Scotia.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> None of this helps or is necessarily applicable to Nova Scotia.


Well, sorry so much to be so unhelpful, but I think the OP has derived about all he's gonna' get from this thread and, as you yourself have urged more than once, the universal advice now seems to be to consult with a Nova Scotia lawyer before going much further. 

Itchy raised an interesting point and yes, while it strays from the focus of the initial query, I do not see it that I have hijacked this thread and rendered nugatory the helpful thoughts you and others have already provided. Kindly indulge my brief foray into a tangential issue, should Itchy care to come back and share some further thoughts on that side issue.


----------



## Itchy54 (Feb 12, 2012)

Sorry for the hijack. This is where I saw the executor info.....I did no further research as I am not executor for dad.

http://retirehappy.ca/duties-of-an-executor-an-executor-s/

Alta red, yes it is imperative to find the documents for each province in question. There seems to be huge differences between the provinces legislations.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

AltaRed said:


> Itchy, Nova Scotia POA Act may be different, but the BC one provides good insight. Point (e) could be a bit problematic if it is also in the Nova Scotia act unless the property can be condemned.
> 
> .....
> 
> ...


I believe point e refers to personal property, not real property.

The out of province reference, if I understand it correctly, does not refer to appointing an attorney who lives out of province. I believe it refers to the grantor in this case having his poa drawn in Novascotia and supposing he also owns property in Manitoba. His poa may not have validity in Manitoba, thus his attorney may not be able to deal with the assets in Manitoba, regardless of where the attorney himself actually lives.
Although not relevant in this case, I think most provinces recognize poa's (and wills)drawn in a competent jurisdiction. It may take an application to the applicable court to have it recognized.

Mukhang, I too have heard that an Executor must renounce before he starts any work and once an executor starts his duties, he must finish or apply to the courts to withdraw/ resign. I have no reference for this either nor can I remember the source of my info. Maybe one of tjose things that gets repeated often enough we take it for 'fact' 

I suspect this thread will drift as threads often do. Hopefuly the OP keeps us posted as to his decisions/ progress. I always take something away from these things. 
I usually also learn new things even when threads drift providing they don't deteriorate into rants, rambles, complaints, politics, etc.

I also appreciate when knowledgeable folks like Mukhang and AltaRed share their wisdom and experiences so freely. Thank you.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Itchy, Nova Scotia POA Act may be different, but the BC one provides good insight. Point (e) could be a bit problematic if it is also in the Nova Scotia act unless the property can be condemned.
> 
> Based on the OP's post, it seems the house is beyond repair, i.e more money would be sunk into it than what it could be sold for. I wonder if the municipality would condemn it. Touch base with the fire department and have them look at it (could be a free service, or with minimal cost). You kind of need to know that even if you auction the property "as is" with any sale being title inspection only. No other conditions.
> 
> I*t does cost money to tear something down, but that may be the better ultimate choice*.



Tearing anything down these days requires proper disposal of the debris. That could cost as much as $100 a ton to excavate and haul the debris away.

So for even a small derelict house,even if it's a straight tear down and haul away, it could be several thousand dollars as the foundation has to be removed and clean fill hauled in to fill the basement hole (if it even has a basement). 
You also need a demolition permit from the city or township. 

In Ottawa, commercial dumping is *Residential, Commercial, Demolition and Construction garbage	$106/tonne.
Perhaps other municipality (such as in Nova Scotia) charge less or allow you to dump demlition debris for free,
but in any case..it could be more than a thousand or two.

While it may be one of the ultimate choices, it does cost money to tear down a derelict house. First of all you need the permission from the township as the property tax rolls need to be amended from a property with a building on it (assessed for property tax purposes *AS IF the owner on title is actually living there*. 

It doesn't matter if the owner on title is in a chronic care facility or has rented out the premises ..the tax assessed is still the tax payable by the owner.
If the township inspector finally inspects the lot and is satisfied with what has been done, and there is no safety hazards
present, such as electrical wiring from the hydro pole to where the house was, then a final report has to be issued
to amend the property to be taxed as an UNIMPROVED (Vacant) Lot..but taxes still apply.
BTW..I went through all this in Ontario when I bough some nice property a few years ago planning to build on.

Why not just stop paying property taxes?
Now here is a thought..in Ontario at least, you can go 3 years (I believe) without paying taxes before the city or township has a judge issue a writ? within the 4 year period (with letters of warning) to seize the property for tax arrears + interest. Once that happens, the property goes on the auction block and sold to pay for the back taxes arrears and the remainder from the sale, after legal and other paperwork is done, is then paid to the rightful owner at the time as a final payment. 

The property changes title to the new owner,who can do as they wish..tear it down and build something on it...residential zoning or leave it as an unimproved lot.


Tax sale properties can often be bought at prices far below market value. *This is because a municipality does not have to obtain market value for these properties.* They only have to obtain the amount of taxes owing (including interest and penalties), plus their costs in conducting the tax sale.

http://www.ontariotaxsales.ca/how-to-buy/what-is-a-tax-sale/


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Carverman, I agree that going the condemnation route has its own costs and issues. I didn't say, but what I was thinking at the time I wrote my post, was that if, for example, the Fire Dept. condemned the property OR listed tens of thousands of dollars of repairs that would be necessary to make the property inhabitable, that would be the reality check the owner needs to get out of denial and recognize that: a) no one was going to go back there to live, neither the owner, nor the so called friend the property is willed too, and b) it needs to be disposed of for whatever one can get out of it. Sometimes it takes a disinterested 'authority' to shake someone out of their denials. 

I had not thought of the property tax arrears angle. That is perhaps a good one but not one I would pursue without first talking to a NS lawyer about whether that would be neglect of Attorney duties. I would be worried about potential litigation from the friend that was supposed to get the house someday via the Estate. There is also no guarantee the current owner wouldn't step back in and pay the property tax bills IF he still has sufficient cognitive skills to recognize his Attorney hasn't been paying the bills. Again, the questions all come back to needing a chat with a NS lawyer.

Re: twa2w - Per your reference, I agree I misread the cross-jurisdictional issue on POAs. The POA issue has to do with out-of-province location of property, especially Real Property.. I've read articles about how difficult disposing of real estate can be in some jurisdictions. That does not apply here. 

My mistake regarding point 3(e). I meant to say point 3(d). I think disposing of property that is specifically mentioned in the will falls within a legitimate concern IF it applies in Nova Scotia. 

Added: As someone mentioned earlier, perhaps an 'as is' auction accomplishes the same thing as failing to pay the property taxes. But that will likely take the agreement of the owner IF he has sufficient cognitive abilities left to know what is going on.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

Itchy54 said:


> Sorry for the hijack. This is where I saw the executor info.....I did no further research as I am not executor for dad.
> 
> http://retirehappy.ca/duties-of-an-executor-an-executor-s/


Thanks, Itchy, for the link. Thank you too twa2w for your further comment. Following Itchy's link, the material there supports the view that the executor must complete the task unless relieved by court order. The author, a financial advisor, does not say whether his words apply Canada-wide or what. I spent some time on his site, but was unable to find out where he is based. LinkedIn says he's in Edmonton.

Thinking about the matter a bit further, in B.C. (and elsewhere with similar legislation), I suppose it makes little difference whether an executor can simply renounce under s. 104 of the Wills Act or must apply for discharge under s.157. A new executor will have to be appointed if the estate has not been wound up and that will take a court order. At that time, as a matter of "housekeeping", I would expect the court to order the discharge of the recalcitrant executor.

Thanks for the interesting diversion. I lament that my short attention span and inability to stay on point offended AltaRed. Again, I offer my apology, especially to the OP, trillian, who would be the one most entitled to offer rebuke for my contumelious behaviour.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

trillian said:


> I did have a conversation with my relative today telling him he needs to make a decision very soon and I warned him that if he does not make a decision, the entire family is willing to walk away as it's too much of a liability risk.
> 
> He said his preference was to keep the home for another year but I told him that was not an option. He needs to decide to either sell the house or to give it to his friend. He wants another day or two to decide.
> 
> I feel for him as he lived in this home his entire life and has never lived anywhere else. He has a lot of family history in this house. He still wants to get out of the retirement home and go back to his house. But in all honesty, that is not a viable option. If he did not agree to go into the retirement home, he was very very close to being forced to leave his house.




i believe your actions above - telling your relative that you cannot continue as attorney until the troublesome house issue is resolved - ie the house must be sold or auctioned or gifted in the very near future - these actions are the right way to go.

the above text shows that you've already embarked on this path. Good for you. 

the text also shows how compassionate you are & how you've been doing the best possible job in very trying circumstances.

it appears to me that your relative's unreasonable determination to keep his house may have a lot to do with a conscious or sub-conscious hope that some day he will be able to leave the retirement establishment & return to his childhood home. Perhaps that's why he is unwilling to give the dwelling to his friend right now - at some level he's still hoping he'll be able to live there once again himself.

we can all stop for a moment & feel real human sympathy for this man's loss of the only home he's ever had. But move on the old boy must do. He has no other option.
.
trillian you've mentioned that there is already a Nova Scotia lawyer on this case - the one who always questions the old boy about his competence at each visit. Your references sounded as if you had been present yourself at those sessions. 

right now appears to be a critical time, because the old boy's attitudes have to be modified fairly rapidly. I'd keep the lawyer informed that you are taking a firm must-dispose-of-house stance, because everyone with any influence over the old boy should act in concert.

this circle of influence should include others who are present right there in nova scotia & who see the old boy either regularly or from time to time. The doctor who prescribes his medication. The nurses or nursing supervisor who administers it. The director of his retirement home. The caretakers working in the home. Is there not a social worker on this case? there should be, given the old boy's social isolation. Also the lawyer.

most of the above professionals are likely to know each other. All should function together as a kind of ad hoc committee. Trillian, you should be a key member of that committee. You'd want to keep a good communications loop going with the above persons. 

at least, that's how we do it in quebec. We don't interdict ailing seniors nor do we brutally strip them of all their civil rights in a court of law. We normally use a broad power of attorney. It's true that, in the case of a wildly acting-out senior who is doing uncontrollable harm to himself or others, a formal interdiction has to be sought. But it's an expensive process & it's rare. It doesn't appear to be necessary in this case.

the lawyer, the nursing home staff & any social worker on the case will absolutely back you up about getting rid of the house pronto. All will understand that any funds that can be obtained from its sale or auction (surely the land must be worth something) are needed to support your relative. All will understand that any problem causing a drain of money has to be eliminated from this gentleman's life ASAP.

lastly, if it were myself, i'd avoid inviting any municipal inspectors or fire inspectors to visit the property. Who knows what repairs or changes to the dwelling they might decide to force upon you. Absolutely the last thing you need right now is a building or fire inspector breathing down your neck about some wretched basement reinforcement or defective wiring or whatever.

best wishes, Trillian. This is such a trying situation. One way or another, working with the doctor, the lawyer, the nursing home director, hopefully a social worker, all of you should be able to get the old boy under better control without having to interdict him.

but you will have to be firm. If you feel you need a backbone booster from time to time, please do return here. You can see you have a cheering squad here!


.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> i believe your actions above - telling your relative that you cannot continue as attorney until the troublesome house issue is resolved - ie the house must be sold or auctioned or gifted in the very near future - these actions are the right way to go.


Whew!..long post there Humble. :biggrin:

The issue from what I understand it... (so far) is not about the senior placed in the retirement home because of the onset of dementia or unable to look after himself,
but what to do with his house that sits empty, therefore doesn't seem to be insurable from a (fire) liability POV 

It's not just a case of getting agreement from the senior to put it up for sale..it's questionable with the current wiring etc,
whether the house is saleable under any circumstances.

If all it needs is a wiring upgrade (new copper wires) and assuming it is still worth 30k-40k at todays market, AND nothing else
like the roof or foundation needs replacement, it may still be worth the (estimated $5k ) to upgrade the wiring so it can be sold.
If not, then selling it on a local auction (using a private auctioner ) with any sellable contents included may be one of the ways "out" for the person currently named POA.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

humble_pie said:


> i
> lastly, if it were myself, i'd avoid inviting any municipal inspectors or fire inspectors to visit the property. Who knows what repairs or changes to the dwelling they might decide to force upon you. Absolutely the last thing you need right now is a building or fire inspector breathing down your neck about some wretched basement reinforcement or defective wiring or whatever.


HP's post is such a storehouse of merit that to quote it in other than its entirety is perhaps to do it an injustice. 

I particularly agree with the advice against setting inspectors loose upon the property. Best to stay under their radar at this point. They could end up citing various bylaw infractions and insist on speedy remediation, all of which could prevent a sale pending remediation and which could cost a lot more than is worth investing in the property. As well, if down the road you are required to sign a property disclosure statement, you might find yourself constrained to reveal that which you might prefer not to reveal.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I also understand this fellow is living in a retirement home, not a nursing (assisted living) home, and is able to make most life decisions on his own, i.e. only minor cogniitive issues to this point. That is usually the most difficult stage of dealing with an individual because they are essentially capable except when they forget or get confused. I empathize with what the OP is going through as I went through that with my mother throughout her '80s until having to make more life decisions for her in her '90s. This is a more a case of general oversight, providing guidance when necessary and watching the financials in the early years of this stage.

Abdicating POA is what I understand the OP would rather not do...given the likely alternatives for Attorney are less likely to have the old man's interest in mind. But it may take that 'threat' to get the old man to cave. The problem is the old man may not cave, in which case, having the property inspected and potentially condemned may provide the impetus needed to get it sold or auctioned off. Us armchair quarterbacks cannot be the judge of which way to go. The OP will have to decide given his relationship and knowledge with the old man the best way to 'force' the house issue.

Added: As said before, I think the advice of a NS laywer is critical in how to approach the disposal of the property. The key issues are: 1) the house being part of specified property in the Will, 2) the likely unihabitable state of the property as it now stands, and 3) the inability to get insurance. Disposal is the only real choice. How to best do it is the decision at hand.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Mukhang pera said:


> HP's post is such a storehouse of merit that to quote it in other than its entirety is perhaps to do it an injustice.


Yes, she is "something else'.:biggrin:


> I particularly agree with the advice against setting inspectors loose upon the property. Best to stay under their radar at this point. They could end up citing various bylaw infractions and insist on speedy remediation, all of which could prevent a sale pending remediation and which could cost a lot more than is worth investing in the property. As well, if down the road you are required to sign a property disclosure statement, *you might find yourself constrained to reveal that which you might prefer not to reveal.*


Uh?..some skeltons in the closet? or dead bodies buried under the floorboards/basement? :biggrin:

If you want the place condemned to avoid paying full property taxes (just on the land instead of the land and building/shack/whatever, you do need the municipal tax assessor to come and inspect the property to change the property tax status.

However a Fire marshall visit may be optional, UNLESS it is a danger to surrounding house, depending on how close
they are.
. 
As i mentioned in my previous post; If the POA cannot find any insurance company to provide fire insurance, even at high risk premiums, then it's either a fast auction to be arranged, or boarded up with NO TRESPASSING SIGNs posted around it....otherwise, it could be a matter of time where a vacant building could catch fire due to "faulty electrical wiring'..

It cannot be left this way without insurance for much longer.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

AltaRed said:


> Added: As said before, I think the advice of a NS laywer is critical in how to approach the disposal of the property. The key issues are: 1) the house being part of specified property in the Will,


Ok, but the property to be part of the will has to be assessed at FMV..and my understanding is that is difficult to determine under the current circumstances, where certain repairs need to be done to bring it up to current building codes..as the inheritor of that house WILL have even more difficulty finding home insurance these days. 

So just waiting until the senior dies (which could be several years from now), will cause even more dilapidation in the building
and possibly more legal issues at the time, what to do with it. 



> 2) the likely unihabitable state of the property as it now stands, and 3) the inability to get insurance. Disposal is the only real choice. How to best do it is the decision at hand.


The "disposal"option is about the only way, IMO,and it has to be done soon. The senior's will,then would need a clause in his current will revoked, and a new codicil written to replace that clause, and signed by the senior that the house has to be disposed of and the monies from the "disposal" (if any) to be put in a trust and then bequeathed at the time of death as a gift. A lawyer can do that, even if it means travelling to the seniors LTC to establish whether he is still capable of making
that kind of decision OR the person with the POA can do that for him acting in that capacity.

This way all the legal stuff can be eliminated at the time, even if the house is the seniors principle residence.

PS: I am not a lawyer, or pretend to be, but given the opportunity, I would like to play one on TV.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> I also understand this fellow is living in a retirement home, not a nursing (assisted living) home, and is able to make most life decisions on his own, i.e. only minor cogniitive issues to this point. That is usually the most difficult stage of dealing with an individual because they are essentially capable except when they forget or get confused.



i don't believe the level of care matters. All seniors' homes in my province, including 100% privately owned & operated, are under at least some kind of government licensing regime if they are not, in fact, government subsidized. There are even some that are owned & operated by the gummint health care system itself. 

all seniors' homes have directors or managers, plus doctors & social workers on call. I don't know nova scotia but it's clear this relative is taking medication under supervision. In my province a registered nurse has to supervise this.

these are the people - plus the lawyer already on board - who should be collaborating with Trillian in creating a Plan of Arrangement for the old boy. Ten to one says that, if he's being this much bother for Trillian, then he's also bothering the staff at the seniors' home. Everybody will feel better when they get down to brass tacks together.





> Abdicating POA is what I understand the OP would rather not do...given the likely alternatives for Attorney are less likely to have the old man's interest in mind. But it may take that 'threat' to get the old man to cave.


me i don't see anything threatening about it whatsoever. It's a simple fact. No attorney could endure in Trillian's difficult circumstances. It's the old boy who has to change, not Trillian take on a horror house situation when she's already got her hands full.





> The problem is the old man may not cave, in which case, having the property inspected and potentially condemned may provide the impetus needed to get it sold or auctioned off.


why not cross that bridge when one gets to it though? meanwhile, this is a purely human interest story. Trillian has already gotten through to the old boy, on some level, that he has to give up his very understandable hope that, some day, some how, a miracle will occur & he will be able to return to his childhood home.

_"and I in dreams beheld the Hebrides ..."_

i don't see why any time or energy needs to be spend futzing around with fire inspectors, home repairs & demolition costs. All Trillian needs to do is get across to the old boy that either the house goes or she goes. She could mention that the next attorney - or public curator, as the case may be - might actually procure those fire inspections & deal with those home repairs or demolition costs. Which will be the end of his savings.

not that a single speech will do the job, as i recall from elderly relatives in the family. Constant dripping wears away stone. Is why enlisting the various professionals who are already working with the aging relative sur place, right there in nova scotia, will help. The more people whispering or crooning the lullaby, the faster the old boy will come around.





> As said before, I think the advice of a NS laywer is critical in how to approach the disposal of the property


there already is a lawyer, though. Trillian has mentioned in 2 different posts upthread how the old boy has been to see his lawyer recently on at least 2 different occasions. Both times the solicitor asked questions to determine his level of mental competence. The posts sounded as if Trillian accompanied the relative to these appointments. Please don't forget, the power of attorney itself would have had to be drafted by a lawyer.


.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

carverman said:


> The "disposal"option is about the only way, IMO,and it has to be done soon. The senior's will,then would need a clause in his current will revoked, and a new codicil written to replace that clause, and signed by the senior that the house has to be disposed of and the monies from the "disposal" (if any) to be put in a trust and then bequeathed at the time of death as a gift. A lawyer can do that, even if it means travelling to the seniors LTC to establish whether he is still capable of making that kind of decision OR the person with the POA can do that for him acting in that capacity.



horrors, what an elaborately twisted byzantine ziggarat of FUD .each:

there are no $$ there. Net worth in the low 6 figures. Everything is most likely going to have to be spent to maintain this senior relative during his lifetime.

trillian has already said how she is worried that the old boy is over-spending now & will run out of money fairly soon.

putting money in trust for the benefit of somebody else? who's going to pay for the trust? paying lawyers to run around the country to set up empty "trusts" that will eventually become "bequests" for a person who's already in a financially precarious condition? we are in the twilight zone here ...

imho all assets need to be conserved for the old age benefit of the relative. The "friend" could be offered the house as a gift if he'll take it immediatelly on an as-is basis. There'd have to be a document signed that he'd have no recourse if any latent defects appear, i suppose.

if the friend will not take the house off Trillian's hands immediately, it should be tough luck for the friend, he'll receive nothing under the will. A lawyer can easily prepare a simple codicil to the will to delete the article bequeathing the house to the friend. 

let's KISS on this case, it needs to be kept s.i.m.p.l.e.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> let's KISS on this case, it needs to be kept s.i.m.p.l.e.


On that point, I agree.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

carverman said:


> So just waiting until the senior dies (which could be several years from now), will cause even more dilapidation in the building
> and possibly more legal issues at the time, what to do with it.
> 
> The "disposal"option is about the only way, IMO,and it has to be done soon. The senior's will,then would need a clause in his current will revoked, and a new codicil written to replace that clause, and signed by the senior that the house has to be disposed of and the monies from the "disposal" (if any) to be put in a trust and then bequeathed at the time of death as a gift. A lawyer can do that, even if it means travelling to the seniors LTC to establish whether he is still capable of making
> ...


I think those posting here are in general agreement that retention of the house will create more issues than it will solve.

While an updated will is probably not a bad idea, should the testator die with his current will in force, it is unlikely much harm will ensue. The OP suggests that the testator might well require for living expenses whatever modest proceeds derive from any sale of the house. So, placing same in trust to be left as a legacy under the will might well not be an option. As an aside, I see no need to create a "trust" should there be a decision to reserve the sale proceeds for the friend. I won't say more on that score, since it seems unlikely that the funds won't be needed by the testator in his lifetime.

If the will is not revised and the house is sold, unless there is some overriding legislation in N.S. (a doubtful proposition), then the testamentary gift of the house (what lawyers call a "specific legacy") to the friend will be rendered ineffective by the doctrine of "lapse". The friend will have no claim against the estate in respect of the "missing" house. The friend won't get the house or any sale proceeds. Should any proceeds still exist, they would be distributed under any clause in the will disposing of the estate residue, if any. Failing an effective "basket clause" dealing with any residue, then there would be a partial intestacy with respect to any residue and that part of the estate would pass as provided under N.S. estate administration law. Again, an N.S. lawyer can advise fully as to local considerations. 

Another way that any remaining sale proceeds might be distributed would be to honour any cash legacies. Let's say the will has a clause providing thus: "To my dear friend trillian, I leave the sum of $5,000." Let's suppose that the estate lacks funds to pay that legacy, apart from funds left over from the house sale. Those funds - to the extent of $5,000 - would go to trillian, not to the friend who expected to receive the house. If only $2,000 can be rounded up to pay trillian's legacy, then the gift to him would be said to "abate" to the extent of $3,000. If there are multiple cash legacies and insufficient funds to pay all, then they would abate pro rata.

The only other issue I can conjure up if the house does not go to the friend is that the friend will feel betrayed. Trillian has said the testator has held out the promise of the house to the friend as a device to continue to “order him around”. So, if the friend has given consideration for the promise, has spent years and much effort, inconvenience and perhaps expense in following orders, he might be a tad miffed when the rug is pulled out. Given the nominal value of the house, the likely modest value of the estate and the significant costs of running a lawsuit, I would regard as unlikely the prospect of the friend bringing an action against the estate, pleading unjust enrichment or some such cause of action. But, in today's litigious landscape, it could happen. It could be carverman's first case in his new TV show, airing next fall. The simple title "Carverman, J.D." sounds as good as, for example "Marcus Welby, M.D.".


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

perhaps something like Marcus Carverman Henein, JD, BCL ?

c'est le canada ici, on est bilingue et biculturelle, faut respecter le code civil du quebec, c'est pas pareille à la loi d'Angleterre pour le reste du pays


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

Mukhang pera said:


> I think those posting here are in general agreement that retention of the house will create more issues than it will solve.
> 
> 
> The only other issue I can conjure up if the house does not go to the friend is that the friend will feel betrayed. Trillian has said the testator has held out the promise of the house to the friend as a device to continue to “order him around”. So, if the friend has given consideration for the promise, has spent years and much effort, inconvenience and perhaps expense in following orders, he might be a tad miffed when the rug is pulled out. Given the nominal value of the house, the likely modest value of the estate and the significant costs of running a lawsuit, I would regard as unlikely the prospect of the friend bringing an action against the estate, pleading unjust enrichment or some such cause of action. But, in today's litigious landscape, it could happen.





> It could be carverman's first case in his new TV show, airing next fall. The simple title "Carverman, J.D." sounds as good as, for example "Marcus Welby, M.D.".


Litigation and due process of law aside...
I rather like that. I remember a TV lawyer show from the late 60's/early 70s starring Raymond Burr. 'Ironside'. 
In it a lawyer with a disability similar to mine,relegated to wheelchair living, plays a very cool courtroom lawyer. Great episodes and never missed and episode..well almost never. These episodes have now being released as DVDs (8 seasons).


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> i don't believe the level of care matters. All seniors' homes in my province, including 100% privately owned & operated, are under at least some kind of government licensing regime if they are not, in fact, government subsidized. There are even some that are owned & operated by the gummint health care system itself.


God forbid that I should have to go to one of these gummint funded LTC...it is a slow death!




> i don't see why any time or energy needs to be spend futzing around with fire inspectors, home repairs & demolition costs. All Trillian needs to do is get across to the old boy that either the house goes or she goes. She could mention that the next attorney - or public curator, as the case may be - might actually procure those fire inspections & deal with those home repairs or demolition costs. Which will be the end of his savings.


If he has any savings left.



> not that a single speech will do the job, as i recall from elderly relatives in the family. *Constant dripping wears away stone.* Is why enlisting the various professionals who are already working with the aging relative sur place, right there in nova scotia, will help. The more people whispering or crooning the lullaby, the faster the old boy will come around.


Waxing poetic I see.



> there already is a lawyer, though. Trillian has mentioned in 2 different posts upthread *how the old boy has been to see his lawyer recently on at least 2 different occasions. Both times the solicitor asked questions to determine his level of mental competence. The posts sounded as if Trillian accompanied the relative to these appointments*. Please don't forget, the power of attorney itself would have had to be drafted by a lawyer.


The lawyer would need to be present in the company of "the old boy" to see if he is stable enough to "be of sound mind"..not sure about body, but to be able to answer questions and understand what he is signing..if anything.
If the old boy is deemed to be sound, then there is no need to have a POA drawn up for his financial affairs..at least yet, because it could end in arguments if the person with the POA makes any radical changes against their wishes.

Carverman (formally known as Ironside).


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

carverman said:


> If the old boy is deemed to be sound, then there is no need to have a POA drawn up for his financial affairs..at least yet, because it could end in arguments if the person with the POA makes any radical changes against their wishes.



but this is not true. In fact, the opposite is the case. A power of attorney must be granted *before* a grantor declines mentally.

a PA should not be granted after decline has set in, which is why a solicitor meeting a gray zone semi-confused client will ask those questions, in order to satisfy the requirements of the profession.

family members give each other powers of attorney all the time, when they are perfectly well & healthy. Spice have them cross drawn up for each other in case something happens to one of them. I've wound up with broad powers for each of my adult children, which they signed when they left the country to travel or study abroad. They never bothered to cancel them after they returned.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

carverman said:


> Litigation and due process of law aside...
> I rather like that. I remember a TV lawyer show from the late 60's/early 70s starring Raymond Burr. 'Ironside'.
> In it a lawyer with a disability similar to mine,relegated to wheelchair living, plays a very cool courtroom lawyer. Great episodes and never missed and episode..well almost never. These episodes have now being released as DVDs (8 seasons).



Actually carverman, I was going to suggest that name - Ironside, but I did not recall that Burr played the role of lawyer. I sorta' recalled that he had been a cop who was paralyzed by a bullet and assumed some crime-fighting role, but not as a lawyer. I saw some episodes, but don't remember much about them. I remember when I was a kid, my parents were devotees of Raymond Burr as lawyer in "Perry Mason". That show is probably still being shown in re-runs somewhere. 

So, being that the coming up lawyer show stars you, you get to choose "Ironside". Your friends at CMF will be watching!

BTW, I share your views on the gummint-funded LTC homes. I have instructed my wife that, when the time comes, she is to dispatch me humanely if I am unable to attend to it myself, and not waste money on a funeral. The ocean is right in front of the house and the crabs will appreciate the meal, even if a bit tough. If she's not up for that, then just plant me in the orchard or at the base of a big red cedar or Douglas fir.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

humble_pie said:


> but this is not true. In fact, the opposite is the case. A power of attorney must be granted *before* a grantor declines mentally.


Agreed. There are various types of POAs, the most common being an Enduring Power of Attorney which is effective on date of signature and remains effective once mental incapacity starts setting in...without resorting to a declaration of mental incapacity. Some POAs do not become effective until after mental incapacity takes place, but these take proactive effort to activate the provisions of the POA. Some people prefer the former, some the latter. It depends on how much the grantor trusts his/her designated Attorney to act only when necessary. I have always had Enduring POAs in place because I trust my Attorneys not to act on my behalf until in their judgement, I can no longer do so.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

Wow interesting twists and turns on this thread and some very interesting interpretations.
I suggested an inspection of the property, to see if it could be declared uninhabitable, in order to influence the grantor of the poa to sell( and stop him from moving back). In the event it was declared unfit, I would expect the home to be listed and sold as is. The inspecting authority cannot enforce repairs like new wiring unless the home is going to be inhabited. The most I have ever seen them do is post notices on the house and in one case, had the power disconnected. Unless the house poses a danger to others, which I doubt, there would be little or no cost and no need to do any repairs. The poa just has to make sure the grass is cut and the exterior appearance is somewhat maintained in order not to run afoul of any local town by-laws.
If the grantor of the poa agrees to sell it there are no problems with the will - as noted by mukhang. The grantor may also, rather than sell, decide to give to the person noted in the will.
In any event the OP was asking about his legal liability re not being able to insure the house. We suggested he contact a lawyer. The old boy is still capable, according to the OP, so the OP has IMHO, no liability as the old boy is making the decisions. The OP is merely acting as a poa of convenience for banking etc.
However the inspection and house being declared unfit may relieve him of some anxiety about not having the house insured. If the house has no little or no value, little need for insurance, although as other posters have stated, he should try to obtain some liability insurance. Again, though this is the old guys decision ultimately until the OP takes over the fully as poa.


----------



## Mukhang pera (Feb 26, 2016)

twa2w said:


> Wow interesting twists and turns on this thread and some very interesting interpretations.
> I suggested an inspection of the property, to see if it could be declared uninhabitable, in order to influence the grantor of the poa to sell( and stop him from moving back).


Interesting indeed, twa2w. I share HP's apprehension about drawing too much attention from municipal authorities, but you have a valid point about using a declaration of inhabitability as a lever. I accept as well that you are probably right about inspectors taking no action if the place is to remain empty. Someone in tune with the local authorities and how they approach these things might have some ideas.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

twa2w said:


> However the inspection and house being declared unfit may relieve him of some anxiety about not having the house insured. If the house has no little or no value, little need for insurance, although as other posters have stated, he should try to obtain some liability insurance. Again, though this is the old guys decision ultimately until the OP takes over the fully as poa.


If the house has little or no value and can be a possible liability (fire), then NO insurer will issue liability insurance on a 24/7 365 day policy basis. Good luck with that! Too many fires have mysteriously started in unoccuopied buildings and insurers
know this very well.

For straight liability insurance for events ,where there is humans presence and the chance of someone doing something wrong and injuring or killing somebody, there is event liability insurance, but the premiums are "through the roof". 

In the case of an abandoned shack, (excuse me for using these words for the seniors former domicile), the liability part ($1,000,000 today) is part and parcel of the homeowners insurance package WITH THE UNDERSTANDING of the insurer that the homeowner is present and occupies that building AND the building is worth FMV in case of rebuild so the
owner can re-occupy the house again.

Left unoccupied, it's only a matter of time until "something" happen, and the insurance company would not want to take on that kind of risk.

There aren't too many options here..either fix up the wiring, (not to be a fire hazardand meet the current regulations and code) and find some tenants to occupy it for very little rent.
Yes, he will have to pay insurance based on tenants occupying the building, but still better than leaving it unoccupied for the rats and firestarters.

Since the owner is capable of still making his decisions, the POA for finance/property may have to be reconsidered. 
This is NOT a good situation for the person who agreed to take on that responsibility, unless there is "something' in there for
them in his will.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> but this is not true. In fact, the opposite is the case. A power of attorney must be granted *before* a grantor declines mentally.


True. The grantor (testator) must be of sound mind to ensure that the person in mind is willing to take on the responsibility and execute those powers within the boundaries of their POA faithfully. 



> family members give each other powers of attorney all the time, when they are perfectly well & healthy. Spice have them cross drawn up for each other in case something happens to one of them. I've wound up with broad powers for each of my adult children, which they signed when they left the country to travel or study abroad. They never bothered to cancel them after they returned.


This would be for the POA to do with one's health decisions, if so incapacitated due to accidental causes?

As a testator of my will, I named the same person as having POA for my financial and personal health decisions. 
But it doesn't have to be the same person for both.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

carverman said:


> True. The grantor (testator) must be of sound mind to ensure that the person in mind is willing to take on the responsibility and execute those powers within the boundaries of their POA faithfully.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just to expand on that...

Your poa for financial affairs, your poa for personal care, and your executor can all be the same person or all different or you may name multiple persons to each. (which can lead to a number of issues).

If you name multiple people to one poa, you can stipulate that they must act together, or that they can act alone. You should also name alternates of course in the event your first choice is unable or unwilling to serve.

Most lawyers, when they prepare wills, also do poa's as a matter of course. I am not sure if all provinces have legislation for poa's for Personal Care yet (called personal directives among other names depending on the province). Of course you may combine financial and personal care poa's in one document.

My spouse and I have poa's for each other. This would facilitate any transactions if one of us is out of town, say for instance we were selling a house or one of our vehicles. ( IIRC in some provinces you need either a special poa to sell property and/or have your poa registered with land titles office.)

This brings up a point for the OP. Was there an alternate named in the poa if he decides to resign.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

Thanks everyone for all your posts. I've been busy trying to put out some fires on my end. There are quite a bit of posts and I'm afraid I cannot reply to them all. But I have read them all and I truly appreciate all the advice. (And I don't mind if the thread goes off topic as you guys have brought up some interesting points)

Someone asked about alternate POA. The POA is actually a joint POA with my only sibling. We've flown out to NS to see the lawyer with my relative twice, first time to get initial POA (which lawyer made an AND, despite my request to make it an OR and him claiming the banks would be ok). A year later, recently, we got it amended to an OR. The AND was a difficult PITA for both of us to manage, especially without online banking. Our last trip out there, we had an appointment with the original lawyer, and he knew we were flying out specifically for this appointment, and yet he called in sick the day of the appointment. We had to beg for the office to get another lawyer as we were flying out the following day. Sadly, the second lawyer caused an issue that now has the relative lose trust in us. Upon visiting the office, all three of us were waiting in the lobby. The lawyer greeted us but then asked to speak to my sibling and I privately, leaving my relative in the lobby. Being a very prideful man, this upset him greatly. The lawyer then asked to speak to the relative privately while we were waiting in the lobby. Although the relative signed the new POA, AND the lawyer apologized to my relative and tried explaining to my relative that this was his choice to break us up, the relative simply will not forgive the situation. From my perspective, the lawyer was simply trying to protect my relative by separating us, checking if our story matches his and ensuring we are not pressuring the relative for the POA. Despite explaining this to the relative repeatedly, he simply cannot let the issue go.

This relative has always been trying during his healthy years and now with him in his current state and the amount of time and effort the whole family has put in to ensure he is taken care of without an ounce of recognition or appreciation, the entire family is ready to walk.

My last conversation with the relative was his wish to rent the house. There are quite a few repairs that need to be done to the house. The roof is leaking in two places (been like that for many many years), the basement steps are extremely unstable, the foundation of the house is possibly cracking/bending, but definitely needs to be jacked up again, knob and tube wiring, and not a single renovation has been done to the house in the last 50+ years (walls pealing paint/cracked). I don't have a clue how much it will cost to make all these repairs and I simply do not have the time to figure it out. We've tried calling a few contractors down there with promises of them showing up only to cancel last minute. Finding reliable people in this town has been a lot of work. On top of that, we would have to hire a property manager (will he be a flake?) to manage the house and find tenants as I cannot commit to renting out his house. For what? For a house my relative will never live in again and it costs way too much to maintain and the worries about what other repairs will need to be done to the home besides what's visible. I simply do not see it being financially sustainable and will take years to break even (if that) plus a lot more headaches than I'm prepared to commit too. And in the meantime, the house is uninsured and sitting as a liability waiting to happen.




humble_pie said:


> i believe your actions above - telling your relative that you cannot continue as attorney until the troublesome house issue is resolved - ie the house must be sold or auctioned or gifted in the very near future - these actions are the right way to go.
> 
> the above text shows that you've already embarked on this path. Good for you.
> 
> the text also shows how compassionate you are & how you've been doing the best possible job in very trying circumstances.


Thank you!



humble_pie said:


> it appears to me that your relative's unreasonable determination to keep his house may have a lot to do with a conscious or sub-conscious hope that some day he will be able to leave the retirement establishment & return to his childhood home. Perhaps that's why he is unwilling to give the dwelling to his friend right now - at some level he's still hoping he'll be able to live there once again himself.


I do believe there is truth in that. He's been asking recently for the staff to take him on walks. Due to age and a bad knee surgery (and refusal to do exercises after the surgery), he is now in a wheelchair. I believe he thinks if he can walk, he can go back into his house. I do not see that happening since when he was living alone (friend was taking care of him and did not tell the family how bad it was), he fell numerous times left on the floor for hours and was starting to hallucinate and waiting for his parents to return home (who have passed more than 30 years ago). So with the onset of dementia, he should not live alone.



humble_pie said:


> right now appears to be a critical time, because the old boy's attitudes have to be modified fairly rapidly. I'd keep the lawyer informed that you are taking a firm must-dispose-of-house stance, because everyone with any influence over the old boy should act in concert.
> 
> this circle of influence should include others who are present right there in nova scotia & who see the old boy either regularly or from time to time. The doctor who prescribes his medication. The nurses or nursing supervisor who administers it. The director of his retirement home. The caretakers working in the home. Is there not a social worker on this case? there should be, given the old boy's social isolation. Also the lawyer.


He does have a social worker. I can speak with her and see if she can offer some advice or support.




humble_pie said:


> lastly, if it were myself, i'd avoid inviting any municipal inspectors or fire inspectors to visit the property. Who knows what repairs or changes to the dwelling they might decide to force upon you. Absolutely the last thing you need right now is a building or fire inspector breathing down your neck about some wretched basement reinforcement or defective wiring or whatever.


I agree. I cannot really deal with the stress of that right now.



humble_pie said:


> but you will have to be firm. If you feel you need a backbone booster from time to time, please do return here. You can see you have a cheering squad here!
> .


Thanks very much for your post! It's greatly appreciated!


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

trillian said:


> This relative has always been trying during his healthy years and now with him in his current state and the amount of time and effort the whole family has put in to ensure he is taken care of without an ounce of recognition or appreciation, the entire family is ready to walk.


Then why are you doing this? (accepting responsibility as a POA). if MY relative had the same history of being crusty, I wouldn't hesitate to just walk away..unless there is something you are not telling the forum.


> My last conversation with the relative was his wish to rent the house. There are quite a few repairs that need to be done to the house. The roof is leaking in two places (been like that for many many years), the basement steps are extremely unstable, the foundation of the house is possibly cracking/bending, but definitely needs to be jacked up again, knob and tube wiring, and not a single renovation has been done to the house in the last 50+ years (walls pealing paint/cracked). I don't have a clue how much it will cost to make all these repairs and I simply do not have the time to figure it out. * We've tried calling a few contractors down there with promises of them showing up only to cancel last minute.* . On top of that, we would have to hire a property manager (will he be a flake?) to manage the house and find tenants as I cannot commit to renting out his house.
> For what? For a house my relative will never live in again and it costs way too much to maintain and the worries about what other repairs will need to be done to the home besides what's visible. *I simply do not see it being financially sustainable *and will take years to break even (if that) plus a lot more headaches than I'm prepared to commit too. And in the meantime, the house is uninsured and sitting as a liability waiting to happen.


As mentioned previously, with these kind of defects, (roof/wiiring/foundation/etc) NO insurer is going to provide homeowners insurance to a house that needs a lot of repair and is not up to reasonably current building code. 

No wonder the contractors decided not to show up. Collecting payment for their work, even if possible would require
someone of authority to be there to pay them immediately after the work is done. That is the way most contractors require payment..right after the work is performed as nobody wants to wait for days or months to receive payment for materials and labour that the contractor has to pay for out of his own pocket. The local contractors probably know this situation
quite well, and prefer not to get involved as it could turn out to be a big waste of their time, if the bill for the repairs
is not agreeable to the homeowner and POA.

Knob and tube wiring and fuses have been known to start fires. Rats can chew through the wiring in places (like the attic) and start a fire. NO INSURER is going to give liability insurance on a home that has existing knob and tube and fuses. 
The same situation applies to any old houses of that age (even in Toronto)that has knob and tube. 

The old wiring has to be disconnected if not removed and new wiring and breaker panel installed and in most cases a new standpipe to bring the wiring into the house...typically a $5,000 to $8000 job,depending on how much work is involved.

If the foundation is rotten and the house looks unstructured, no contractor is going to risk injury to their workers
and have to make claims to their liability insurance working in or on an unsafe structure, so they will avoid it. 

The insurance agent would ask you to fill out a questionnaire first and all defects or conditions as they are have to be TRUTHFULLY stated. Misrepresentation to an insurer could result in cancellation of any (possible) insurance policy and if there is a fire, gives the insurer the reason to back out without paying a dime.

From what it sounds from your latest description of the relative's house...there are a LOT of things wrong with it and renting it out (even if it's possible at a very low rental) will, no doubt cause further problems down the line for you.
From a property manager?... who will be difficult to find, for collecting the rent, if no repairs have been done to the place )AND the type of tenants that such a place would attract on below market rental. 




> So with the onset of dementia, he should not live alone.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

trillian i'm glad that things are moving along in the right direction.

i've got my fingers crossed that you've been able to contact the social worker & she has turned out to be someone you can trust & count upon.

it's possible that your relative might temporarily be behaving worse, since - poor soul - at some level he probably does understand that his house must be disposed of, so it would not be surprising if he puts up a fierce struggle.

do you feel it would help if the social worker could pay him a visit on the housing issue? a persuasive social worker would be another authoritative voice with the identical message ... IE the house must be disposed of immediately because there is no insurance ... the house cannot be rented in present condition ... yourself as attorney are poised to resign because of the liability ...

next couple of weeks will be critical while the poor old boy digests this issue.

another thought: since his mobility is so limited, who is giving him the cash that you say he is spending? how is he managing to withdraw any $$ from a bank? there is no other POA, i'm assuming his bank will never release cash from your relative's account to some stranger who might show up, claiming to be a messenger.

it's true that your relative could give his bank card plus its PIN number to one of his "friends" & the friend has been obtaining cash from ATMs. However i'm inclined to believe that your relative is not up to this complexity. One way to know is to monitor the bank account, are you seeing any unauthorized withdrawals?

it's also possible that the party advancing the cash is the retirement home itself, which distributes cash to your relative when he gives them a cheque for that purpose.

oh dear, another thing to worry about! in any event, the cash trail should be drastically reduced. Not totally blocked though, since having a few dollars on hand will cheer the old boy up.

it's possible that, in that nova scotia setting, the social worker will have suggestions about how to transmit small amounts of cash safely & controllably to your relative. I don't see that he should be in possession of much more than a few $10 bills at any one time, given the fact that he can easily lose the same so putting cash in his hands is really a lost cause.

take care now, best of luck with everything.



.


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

humble_pie said:


> next couple of weeks will be critical while the poor old boy digests this issue.


A play on words no doubt?...................................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



> i One way to know is to monitor the bank account, are you seeing any unauthorized withdrawals?


Another defined job of the person agreeing to take on the POA for financial matters. It seems that we had
this discussion in another thread where a relative was in a LTC facility and the person (who was SUPPOSED to be)
in charge of the financial matters..hadn't looked at the bank acct of the senior and found after 6 MONTHS HAD PASSED,
that $30,000 was missing from the seniors bank account. Very suspicious that someone in the LTC facility had befriended
the senior enough to get the PIN and the bank card. This can happen very easily.



> it's also possible that the party advancing the cash is the retirement home itself, which distributes cash to your relative when he gives them a cheque for that purpose.


I would want to see that in writing..leaving it as a verbal agreement is setting a dangerous precedent..as anything could
happen to that money. POA for financial affairs is not to be taken lightly. The paperwork for defined responsibilities must be agreed to in writing and signed....otherwise...



> oh dear, another thing to worry about! in any event, the cash trail should be drastically reduced. Not totally blocked though, since having a few dollars on hand will cheer the old boy up.
> I don't see that he should be in possession of much more than a few $10 bills at any one time, given the fact that he can easily lose the same so putting cash in his hands is really a lost cause.


What does he need cash for in an all inclusive extended care facility? 
I spent 3 days in a 'retirement villa" after being released from hospital for convalesces most of the residents were incapable of making any financial decisions.
So, unless you decide to go shopping on the facility bus, or give tips, or buy smokes/alcohol, you really can manage without cash on hand.


----------



## twa2w (Mar 5, 2016)

Given your description of the state of the home, not only will you not be able to insure it, even if occupied, I doubt any property management firm would take it on. I also suspect, if this is a small town, that most of the local contractors know your relative and perhaps he has a reputation. While knob and tube wiring can be ok and is still working in many homes, I would not risk it. New roof, new wiring and panel, new steps, basemen/ foundation needing to be jacked would be minimum repairs and depending on size of home may vary but 15,000 minimum in my estimation. Plus any extra work that may be needed on foundation, plus anything that may be found in a more detailed inspection, plus cosmetic work like painting etc. I suspect you are looking at upwards of 20 k.
In addition, what is heating system? If a 50 year old furnace would need replacing.
This house would likely not pass any type of occupancy test.
I assume that your relative will be immune to any suggestions the house is not liveable due to the fact he lived in it in its present condition and ' how dare you suggest my house is not liveable'. 
This will make it tough but I think you have to confront him.
Put it in writing... This is the condition of house, it will have to be made safe to occupy it and we are concerned for your safety and for any possible tenant. We cannot insure it unoccupied, we cannot put you or a tenant in it in good conscience in its existing condition and without insurance. This will be costly to repair( give estimates if you can get them). Repairs may not significantly improve the value. Current value estimated at say 25,000. With 25,000 in repairs it will only be worth 35,000. You are being well looked after in home, regular meals, company etc. We(the OP and his sister) may have a liability issue if the home is uninsured and unrepaired and we can't take the risk of being sued if something happens so we have to make decision soon. We may have to resign as powers of attorney. You really want to help him but feel you just cannot take the risk. You are a smart guy and we need to discuss this and come to a decision that is in everyones best interest.
Make sure you have a list of insurance companies you contacted, the list of repairs you think it needs and any estimates if you can get them and perhaps a valuation from a real estate agent( make sure they know the extent of issues)
Hopefully he will get the hint.
Alternatively, you may also want to talk to the social worker about his state of mind ie competency. If she feels he is deteriorating, h
Ask her and dr to asses him and if they feel he is not competent, have them put it in writing. Then proceed in his best interests.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

carverman said:


> Then why are you doing this? (accepting responsibility as a POA). if MY relative had the same history of being crusty, I wouldn't hesitate to just walk away..unless there is something you are not telling the forum.


Simply because he is a family relative who has no immediate family of his own and his friends are completely untrustworthy. There is no other reason. I'm dumb. 

Having said that, the family has reached their tipping point. The relative has turned really really nasty and in one breath accusing us of lying and the next breath demanding us to call people and ensure things are done (which if he didn't trust us he could check for himself to see if we were lying) My sibling is currently trying to book an appointment with a lawyer to remove ourselves from being POA. If he's like this now, it's only going to get nastier in the years to come with the onset of dementia. In the meantime, I'm desperately trying to keep the peace and calm everyone else down as the last thing I need is my family members to jeopardize their own failing health due to stress.



carverman said:


> That is the way most contractors require payment..right after the work is performed as nobody wants to wait for days or months to receive payment for materials and labour that the contractor has to pay for out of his own pocket. The local contractors probably know this situation
> quite well, and prefer not to get involved as it could turn out to be a big waste of their time, if the bill for the repairs
> is not agreeable to the homeowner and POA.


It's possible this might be a fear of theirs, however, we did make it clear there would be someone there to greet them AND to pay them immediately.



humble_pie said:


> it's true that your relative could give his bank card plus its PIN number to one of his "friends" & the friend has been obtaining cash from ATMs.


This has stopped since we took over POA. Right now, his expenses are his outings with his friend, which are frequent, but he insists on going out and insists on paying for everything. The friend makes the payment and keeps the receipts. We pay them every couple of months. This is in character with how the relative has always been. I don't like that he is paying for everything nor trust all receipts are indeed for the relative but he protects his friends and he insists on paying. He's entitled to spend his money as he pleases. We've been closely monitoring all transactions through the bank and his main expense that we can cut is the house. 



humble_pie said:


> it's also possible that the party advancing the cash is the retirement home itself, which distributes cash to your relative when he gives them a cheque for that purpose.
> .


He has a trust fund where he can withdraw money. When he set it up, he wanted $200 dollars in his room. They advised him this was not a good idea but he insisted (we were there helping him set it up). Shortly after, it went missing from his room. Since then, it's been $50 a month. Again, not a big expense and he is entitled to do as he pleases. Also, we get monthly bills with all his expenses, the rent to live there, the concession stand purchases and advances from the trust fund.




carverman said:


> What does he need cash for in an all inclusive extended care facility?


He is a spoiled brat who spends his money frivolously. Has always been like that. He's never had to spend a single dime on major living expenses and blew most of his money on cars throughout his life. Right now, he doesn't like being in the home so he wants to be taken out as frequently as possible. In return, he pays for everything.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Trillian, it certainly appears you are doing all you reasonably can (more like above and beyond) AND this fellow is in that 'difficult to handle' stage where he has enough capacity to manipulate but not enough to apply (or at least want to apply) common sense. Clearly a mess on your hands. I wouldn't stress much about how this fellow spends his money. It is his after all and you are being as prudent as you can be as POA. Given what you have shared, I would be looking to abdicate being his Attorney as well. 

Without knowing all the dynamics, I would do one last thing before actually setting foot in the lawyer's office to resign as well. Tell the old man that you and sibilng have done your best to manage his affairs with prudency, but his lack of cooperation and appreciation for your efforts leaves you no choice but to resign and let the government take over with an appointee of their choice.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

.
yes i thought he would behave worse for the time being. He knows the house has to go, he knows he'll never go home again, this uproar for the moment is his only way of dealing with it.

he accuses you of lying? this is quite mild, actually. Many in dementia will accuse their relatives - even their own adult children - of stealing from them.

the uproar is undoubtedly being spread around in the retirement home where he lives as well. The manager, the nurses, possibly the doctor already know about it. The doctor if the old boy is acting out to a point where they have to extra-medicate him (believe me, they will.)

trillian you've sometimes evidenced a marked streak of dislike for this individual. Over & above the annoyance & the frustration that's normal for the situation. 

the only thing that might keep you going is to consider how you might feel if you abandon him.

if you stay, i do believe you would have to toughen up. I've glanced at the old boy's cash arrangements as you've just described them, for example. If his net worth is in the low 6 figures as you've mentioned, then those frequent cash disbursements to frivolously entertain others would have to be cut back (not right away, though) (offing the house is the immediate priority) (one thing at a time.)

a network involving the social worker & the retirement home manager could support you. They've been through all this, many times over.


----------



## trillian (Feb 3, 2011)

humble_pie said:


> .
> yes i thought he would behave worse for the time being. He knows the house has to go, he knows he'll never go home again, this uproar for the moment is his only way of dealing with it.


.

It would be nice to think this was due to dementia. But unfortunately, this is who he is. He wants what he wants and does not care about the consequences. He thinks everyone is at his beck and call and no one in his life has ever told him no. He's not about to change now.



humble_pie said:


> .
> trillian you've sometimes evidenced a marked streak of dislike for this individual. Over & above the annoyance & the frustration that's normal for the situation.


.

Being the youngest in the family, I never really experienced or saw his true colors directed specifically at me. And the family sheltered me from most of the drama. However, I have witnessed his treatment to close family members and it's astonishing. I always always try to give people the benefit of doubt, so I've actually tried defending him or empathize with him on numerous occasions throughout his lifetime, and due to the distance, we didn't have to deal with him besides the holidays so it was easy to just grin and bear it for the short periods. However, it's extremely difficult to try to protect someone when they show absolutely no respect or gratitude for the work that you do for them, accuse you of lying and in the same breath demand more and more from you. He's absolutely furious with the family because we were unable to get him a telephone book from another province and because of the treatment he experienced at the lawyer. This might seem trivial but this is an item of an endless long list of demands of things we have been able to accommodate. He doesn't care that the family has given up vacation and time to fly down there to make sure his finances are in order. He doesn't care that we all have our own personal lives and responsibilities to manage. He just remembers the one thing we couldn't do. Again, this is _not_ dementia. I wish it was dementia because maybe he'd let the grudge go. It's also hard witnessing him abuse family who has gone beyond the call of duty to help and protect him and then he defends and protects his friends who take advantage of him. The family highly suspects he is lying to test us. He told me one thing on the phone, twice on two different occasions, then denies ever saying it to other family members.



humble_pie said:


> .
> the only thing that might keep you going is to consider how you might feel if you abandon him.


.
I will really feel like utter crap to abandon him as I truly believe if his friends gain POA, he will be out of money quickly. I am worried about him running out of money simply because where he is at is a decent retirement home, with lots of people he knows, and he has a nice private accommodations. If he runs out of money and cannot afford the place, I cannot see the government picking up the tab. Sure, they won't throw him out on the street, but he might be moved into cheaper shared accommodations with no one he knows. And he won't be able to afford the luxuries of going out as often as he likes. But there is no way to get through to him. We've told him this on numerous occasions. We try our best to reason with him but because of the telephone book, and now because of the lawyer, he does not trust the family. Sadly, he is capable of making decisions. A doctor will not think he's incapable of making decisions yet, and until that happens my hands are tied. And this can only get worse from here.



humble_pie said:


> .
> if you stay, i do believe you would have to toughen up. I've glanced at the old boy's cash arrangements as you've just described them, for example. If his net worth is in the low 6 figures as you've mentioned, then those frequent cash disbursements to frivolously entertain others would have to be cut back (not right away, though) (offing the house is the immediate priority) (one thing at a time.)


As soon as I try to cut back his spending, it will get 1000 times worse. It's nasty already. I really do not want family members to get a heart attack over this.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Trillian, you cannot be his banker against all odds. If he insists on spending his money and he craps on anyone who tries to cut him back, then cut the cord and let him go. At this point, you are in a no win and thus sometimes you just have to let people self-destruct. A sad way to finish off life but it seems he didn't court any brownie points with anyone that might have cared for him anyway. I'd walk...


----------



## carverman (Nov 8, 2010)

trillian said:


> He is a spoiled brat who spends his money frivolously. Has always been like that. He's never had to spend a single dime on major living expenses and blew most of his money on cars throughout his life.* Right now, he doesn't like being in the home *so he wants to be taken out as frequently as possible. In return, he pays for everything.


I spent 3 days..only 3 days of the 30 days I was SUPPOSED to stay during my convalescence after being released from the hospital. I would not regard those 3 days a pleasant experience for me, but at least I had a good warm home to go to and a cat that was anxious to see me after 11 days in the hospital.

Needless to say, most people there were in their 80s and most had some form of dementia...so they didn't engage in conversation very much. It was very boring for me.
I couldn't stand it after 3 days of staying in my room watching tv and going down to the main floor for meals. I like hobbies and doing things at home including making my own meals..so I checked myself out early Monday morning and went home with a friend picking up all my personal belongings.

Would I ever stay there again?...absolutely not!..from a economic and self preservation point, but then I'm only 70 and no signs of dementia, and I can look after my financial affairs and run a budget. So the old crusty curmudgeon has a point...he still wants to continue independent living..... and maybe he should. 
Living in his old house, regardless of how many repairs it needs, is still his home....a retirement home is someone else's home..it will never be your own.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

so sorry to hear all this. A very sticky wicket indeed.

whether you stay or whether you go, you should never feel badly about all that you have done to care for your aging relative. You & sib have totally done your utmost.

if perchance you stay, i'd have another suggestion or 2, but won't encumber this message.

trillian whatever you decide, you've acted nobly. Thanks for sharing here.


----------

