How does someone overcome the heartbreaking and emotional drain of dealing with legally approved corruption? If there was a simple answer for that question, it is the need to raise awareness of an unsafe and unjust system. It has been awhile since my last article on this topic. Aside from the general busyness of the holiday season, I found myself exhausted on some unexplained level. The mere thought of having to discuss anything further about the final few years of Dorothy Wilson’s challenged life had a nauseating effect on me. There were many times when I would quietly ponder how anyone would allow another human being to be stripped of their rights; literally, figuratively and financially. This was even more troubling because Dorothy had more viable, loving and much happier options available to her.
You would think that considering all of the grief that Dorothy’s law guardian, Mary Giordano, caused both Dorothy and Diane; the only child fighting for her happiness; that when Mrs. Wilson passed into spirit that Mary would have stopped her nonsense. Instead, Diane, who was rightfully assigned as the executrix of the meager estate left after Mary Giordano was given free reign to financially plunder several hundred thousand dollars through a reverse mortgage and other ways, with the approval of Judge Joel Asarch, is still fighting for the pittance of money that was left. Mary Giordano has had no trouble forwarding the bills associated with the cost of maintaining Dorothy’s home and previous care. However, she has not released the funds to pay for it. All of her actions continue to highlight how unscrupulous, callous and greedy she is.
Perhaps one of the aspects of this law guardian abuse case; as in many others, is the complete lack of concern for anyone else who is affected. This holds true for family, friends and even more. Once Diane was put in charge of her Mom’s estate--as Dorothy had wanted from the onset--she started to find more and more of the absurd care that was taking place. The house was already put up for sale, but once Diane was allowed into it she spent hours and hours of her own time cleaning and organizing things to make it presentable. Diane and witnesses found certain things that were glaringly improper. We could begin by wondering why a binder with the order from Judge Asarch approving Dorothy’s relocation was found in the freezer. Could it be simply because it was in clear violation of Article 81? How many honest lawyers file their client’s documents in the back of a freezer?
Under the care of Anne Recht, the healthcare manager, Dorothy’s medicines and medical waste, including used needles, were found scattered throughout the home. They were in file cabinets, dresser drawers, a sewing machine cabinet, upstairs in a room where the aides slept, in the garage and in the refrigerator. People were coming and going in this house, including children, as Mary Giordano had put it up for sale without authorization. I can only speak for myself, but I would not be comfortable having inquisitive children stumble across a box of needles that were not properly stored. Many of the needles were pre-filled with medicine. There was even an IV pole with several needles and medicine connected to it that was left out in the open. Anyone could have been poked or injured by them.
In addition to the medicine, hundreds of dollars of expired food had to be thrown away because of the parade of aides. While some were very good to Dorothy, others would not take the time to go through the cabinets to see what was available to cook. The amount of wasted money would be unacceptable by most households, but under the “care” of Mary Giordano and Anne Recht, Dorothy’s funds were routinely misused. I personally remember the smile on Dorothy’s face one time when she attended a prayer and meditation meeting I held. The only requirement ever requested was that whoever comes to these meetings has to bring food for the pantry. She was more than happy to do that with Diane.
If the populace does not awaken to the fact that situations like Dorothy Wilson are taking place all around the country, then the actions of lawyers and judges who elect to scam the families who are caught up in it will continue to take place. What I have found with my inquiries and conversations with numerous people is that the majority of society seems to be intimidated by the judges and guardians responsible for the illegal and immoral activities. They are generally “well-connected” people and can make the lives miserable for those who stand up to them. Since they are in positions of power, they feel confident in trampling the civil rights of those they deem they should control, not to mention that they feel safe from prosecution because of the standard “old boys club” that still exists today.
This problem will persist unless enough citizens raise their voices and get the media—social and mainstream—to start putting a spotlight on many of the cases around the country. It makes no difference if the victim is someone’s mother, as in the case of Dorothy Wilson, or a husband like Gary Harvey, whose rights were taken away from him and his wife, Sara, when a guardian was put in charge. These are only two examples. The list goes on and on when it comes to the vulture-like attacks that take place from many guardians who greedily profit from an unchecked system that needs to be seriously addressed. Law guardian abuse seems to attack the elderly frequently, but is no stranger to the mentally impaired or physically challenged. Estates are systematically stolen from their rightful owners and family. What will it take for you to feel angered or passionate enough to take a stand and begin to hold the politicians accountable, who also want to hide behind legalities, mostly out of fear that it will hurt their career path? They have the power to change the laws, but many are either unaware of the rampant disintegration of civil rights, or they have chosen to be a part of the problem by ignoring or partaking in it. Often times, those who know about it do not take action because it is their colleagues, friends or acquaintances that are part of the corruption.
It would benefit an array of struggling victims to know that their voices are not being discarded by society. Let your compassion and the gauge that all people have that tells them the difference between right and wrong land on the right point. In this way, you will become a pillar of support for the meek and not a lamb led to slaughter by those who abuse the power that they wield.
Jim Fargiano
Showing posts with label Dirty Tricks of Guardianships. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dirty Tricks of Guardianships. Show all posts
Monday, January 9, 2012
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Cooper's Corner
This is a website of Bev Cooper's Programs on Elder Abuse and Guardianship Abuse. They're must see TV.
Her link is here - North Shore Live
My all time favorite show is here. Because Bev looks absolutely stunning. I think green is her signature color.
Her link is here - North Shore Live
My all time favorite show is here. Because Bev looks absolutely stunning. I think green is her signature color.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Investigative Report - Guardian Abuse
This is old but reminds me of Josh Mitzen. At the end, it shows a personal injury lawyer turned guardian. I wonder what kind of law Josh studied? He talks like a criminal attorney and suspects everyone of exploiting the elderly and disabled. You see and meet people exactly like yourself. What you suspect in others or what you're suspicious of are the same things you'd do to the elderly. Josh had a very long list of dirty tricks.
It also says at the end that the family had to buy their loved one back. It's so sad.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Predators in Advocates Clothing
These predators appear in a variety of “disguises”, but are as guilty of exploitation as the predators within the probate courts where C/G are adjudicated. They, too, are wolves in sheep clothing, sociopaths who believe their own lies (until exposed) and used the same tactics that the probate court utilizes in their efforts to exploit and ruin, while always proclaiming themselves “saviors”; all the while positioning themselves in a an attempt to take credit for anything accomplished by those with sincere motives.
Most of them have re-written history or “created a history” for themselves (utterly false information to infiltrate the ranks which is just one trait of the con artist), in the form of bogus resumes, curriculum vitae, made up stories proclaiming being a victim of abuse (in C/G), false claims of prior successes, a certain amount of knowledge of C/G to “talk the talk”, and the list goes on.
Read the rest.... here.
(C/G Conservator/Guardianship)
Most of them have re-written history or “created a history” for themselves (utterly false information to infiltrate the ranks which is just one trait of the con artist), in the form of bogus resumes, curriculum vitae, made up stories proclaiming being a victim of abuse (in C/G), false claims of prior successes, a certain amount of knowledge of C/G to “talk the talk”, and the list goes on.
Read the rest.... here.
(C/G Conservator/Guardianship)
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
People In the Know Speak Out about Guardianship Abuse and Fraud
"This [guardianship] is an area ripe for fraud and where most fraud abuse has in fact occurred." — Karleen F. DeBlaker, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Pinellas County, Florida (4/2004)
Reports of guardians stealing from their wards' bank accounts and other wise abusing guardianship powers are surfacing with disturbing regularity. 'This problem is going to get bigger and bigger,' says E. Bentley Lipscomb, AARP's Florida state director and a former state secretary of elder affairs. — GUARDIANS DRAWING INCREASED SCRUTINY, AARP Bulletin
It is a system that in practice often serves lawyers over clients. Even as the court's lax oversight allows guardians to neglect their responsibilities, it also permits some lawyers to take unnecessary control of people's lives. — Washington Post, 2003
Judges and their favored professional conservators and guardians, expert witnesses and court investigators have unspoken agendas: money, power and control. When an elderly individual is brought into court and forced to prove his or her competence, we soon see that the system does not work. We have a system rife with court-sanctioned abuse of the elderly. Why? Judges override protections that have been put in place in the codes. It happens every day. Judges disregard durable powers of attorney — the single most important document each of us can create to determine our care should we become incapacitated. Judges ignore our lists of pre-selected surrogate decision-makers. The current system does not work. This reality is most apparent when a wealthy individual falls victim to these involuntary proceedings and his or her wealth becomes a ripe plum to be shared by the Judge’s favorites. — Diane G. Armstrong, Ph.D., excerpt of prepared statement before the U.S. Senate's Special Committee on Aging, February, 2003. Author of The Retirement Nightmare: How to Save Yourself from Your Heirs and Protectors: Involuntary Conservatorships and Guardianships
The denial of these rights is the consequence of a court determination that an individual is legally "incompetent" or "incapacitated" and the appointment by the court of a guardian to act as surrogate decision maker on the person's behalf. The real tragedy is that mounting evidence suggests that many of these individuals having been stripped of their right to self-determination are being poorly served, and even victimized and exploited by the very persons or agencies appointed to protect them and to make decisions on their behalf. — House of Representatives, Select Committee on Aging Report
...guardianship can divest an elderly person of all the rights and freedoms we consider important as citizens. — Chairman of the Senate Special Committee, Larry Craig
"Ironically, the imposition of guardianship without adequate protections and oversight may actually result in the loss of liberty and property for the very persons these arrangements are intended to protect. — Chairman of the Senate Special Committee, Larry Craig
“Instead of serving to protect the assets of incapacitated persons, the existing guardianship system presents the opportunity for unscrupulous guardians to loot the assets of their wards and enrich themselves with impunity.” — New York Grand Jury
Elderly people are routinely stripped of basic rights in court hearings. — Detroit Free Press
"Outside of execution, guardianship is the most radical remedy we have." — Elias Cohen, Philadelphia Attorney and Gerontologist
The gulag of guardianship: the legal system meant to protect our elderly is a national disgrace. — Money Magazine
"... older Americans are being robbed of their freedom and life savings by a legal system created for their protection." and "Although relatives are the most common exploiters, the damage they cause generally stays within the confines of their own families. By contrast, greedy professional guardians can wreak havoc on a far larger scale. In many states, there are few prerequisites for entering the guardianship business: no special training, no licensing process, no enforceable professional standards." — AARP: The Magazine, January/February 2004
"These are not isolated, occasional blips. This constitutes a significant portion of the cases out there. They were flat-out rip-off situations." — Robert L. Aldridge, elder law attorney and a member of ElderLawAnswers.com
Re: forced incompetency: Visit assisted-living facilities [and retirement communities] and establish employee contacts; obtain voluntary limited financial guardianship; if there is money in the estate, do paperwork to force an evaluation of competency; get control over everything and the ward [senior] loses all rights. — Pinellas County Internal Auditor, Robert W. Melton, "Dirty Tricks of Guardianships – The Need for Change." April/2004
Once judged incompetent and placed under a conservatorship [or guardianship], a citizen becomes a nonperson, with fewer rights than a convicted felon in a penitentiary. Your income goes to the conservator, who also controls your assets. You can't write a check, use a credit card, or make an ATM withdrawal. — Robert Casey, Editor, Bloomberg Wealth Manager
"This is something that ought not to be taken lightly. Seniors have become victims of the legal process. When you become old, you should not, by the action of a court, automatically lose your rights just because some family member or impersonal administrator calls you incompetent." — Senator Larry Craig, Chairman, U.S. Senate's Special Committee on Aging. (February, 2003)
"[O]ne startling conclusion about the whole process of incompetency was drawn from the realization that in almost every case examined the aged incompetent was in a worse position after he was adjudicated incompetent than before. The study could identify no particular benefit which flowed to the incompetent that he could not have received without a finding of incompetency." G. Alexander & T. Lewin, The Aged and the Need for Surrogate Management, 136
Reports of guardians stealing from their wards' bank accounts and other wise abusing guardianship powers are surfacing with disturbing regularity. 'This problem is going to get bigger and bigger,' says E. Bentley Lipscomb, AARP's Florida state director and a former state secretary of elder affairs. — GUARDIANS DRAWING INCREASED SCRUTINY, AARP Bulletin
It is a system that in practice often serves lawyers over clients. Even as the court's lax oversight allows guardians to neglect their responsibilities, it also permits some lawyers to take unnecessary control of people's lives. — Washington Post, 2003
Judges and their favored professional conservators and guardians, expert witnesses and court investigators have unspoken agendas: money, power and control. When an elderly individual is brought into court and forced to prove his or her competence, we soon see that the system does not work. We have a system rife with court-sanctioned abuse of the elderly. Why? Judges override protections that have been put in place in the codes. It happens every day. Judges disregard durable powers of attorney — the single most important document each of us can create to determine our care should we become incapacitated. Judges ignore our lists of pre-selected surrogate decision-makers. The current system does not work. This reality is most apparent when a wealthy individual falls victim to these involuntary proceedings and his or her wealth becomes a ripe plum to be shared by the Judge’s favorites. — Diane G. Armstrong, Ph.D., excerpt of prepared statement before the U.S. Senate's Special Committee on Aging, February, 2003. Author of The Retirement Nightmare: How to Save Yourself from Your Heirs and Protectors: Involuntary Conservatorships and Guardianships
The denial of these rights is the consequence of a court determination that an individual is legally "incompetent" or "incapacitated" and the appointment by the court of a guardian to act as surrogate decision maker on the person's behalf. The real tragedy is that mounting evidence suggests that many of these individuals having been stripped of their right to self-determination are being poorly served, and even victimized and exploited by the very persons or agencies appointed to protect them and to make decisions on their behalf. — House of Representatives, Select Committee on Aging Report
...guardianship can divest an elderly person of all the rights and freedoms we consider important as citizens. — Chairman of the Senate Special Committee, Larry Craig
"Ironically, the imposition of guardianship without adequate protections and oversight may actually result in the loss of liberty and property for the very persons these arrangements are intended to protect. — Chairman of the Senate Special Committee, Larry Craig
“Instead of serving to protect the assets of incapacitated persons, the existing guardianship system presents the opportunity for unscrupulous guardians to loot the assets of their wards and enrich themselves with impunity.” — New York Grand Jury
Elderly people are routinely stripped of basic rights in court hearings. — Detroit Free Press
"Outside of execution, guardianship is the most radical remedy we have." — Elias Cohen, Philadelphia Attorney and Gerontologist
The gulag of guardianship: the legal system meant to protect our elderly is a national disgrace. — Money Magazine
"... older Americans are being robbed of their freedom and life savings by a legal system created for their protection." and "Although relatives are the most common exploiters, the damage they cause generally stays within the confines of their own families. By contrast, greedy professional guardians can wreak havoc on a far larger scale. In many states, there are few prerequisites for entering the guardianship business: no special training, no licensing process, no enforceable professional standards." — AARP: The Magazine, January/February 2004
"These are not isolated, occasional blips. This constitutes a significant portion of the cases out there. They were flat-out rip-off situations." — Robert L. Aldridge, elder law attorney and a member of ElderLawAnswers.com
Re: forced incompetency: Visit assisted-living facilities [and retirement communities] and establish employee contacts; obtain voluntary limited financial guardianship; if there is money in the estate, do paperwork to force an evaluation of competency; get control over everything and the ward [senior] loses all rights. — Pinellas County Internal Auditor, Robert W. Melton, "Dirty Tricks of Guardianships – The Need for Change." April/2004
Once judged incompetent and placed under a conservatorship [or guardianship], a citizen becomes a nonperson, with fewer rights than a convicted felon in a penitentiary. Your income goes to the conservator, who also controls your assets. You can't write a check, use a credit card, or make an ATM withdrawal. — Robert Casey, Editor, Bloomberg Wealth Manager
"This is something that ought not to be taken lightly. Seniors have become victims of the legal process. When you become old, you should not, by the action of a court, automatically lose your rights just because some family member or impersonal administrator calls you incompetent." — Senator Larry Craig, Chairman, U.S. Senate's Special Committee on Aging. (February, 2003)
"[O]ne startling conclusion about the whole process of incompetency was drawn from the realization that in almost every case examined the aged incompetent was in a worse position after he was adjudicated incompetent than before. The study could identify no particular benefit which flowed to the incompetent that he could not have received without a finding of incompetency." G. Alexander & T. Lewin, The Aged and the Need for Surrogate Management, 136
Friday, January 7, 2011
Janna Dutton - Is She Crooked?
A lot of you are telling me that you wouldn’t even consider hiring her firm because you’re afraid that she’s going to introduce Josh Mitzen (private paid guardian at $100 an hour for his professional services) into your life then you’d lose custody of your loved one. Because of these comments, I want to clear this up in regard to what happened to me.
First of all, when Ludwig hired Janna, she was a good advocate for him. I didn’t know this at the time (because I was only doing what Ludwig asked) but she was a good advocate for me as well since I was his Power of Attorney over healthcare. I never thought of her as supportive to me but in retrospect, she was.
"Snipped" (September 2008), she became a very poor advocate for her client because Josh is self-serving and wasn’t concerned about Ludwig at all. But she became a good advocate for Josh who neglected Ludwig.
My problem with Janna is that she set Ludwig up with a Living Trust which is another word for “Predatory Trust.” Snipped and the day after Ludwig transferred his money to Devon Bank, Sally Griffin (bank trustee) told me she can’t figure out whether or not she wants to keep me on since she hired Josh for my position (and I didn't know she meant as his Power of Attorney over healthcare at the time). She also couldn't figure out how to give Ludwig his own money.
Snipped.
I wrote Janna exactly that. (I have the letter. I also know she read it because Sally mentioned it when she told us that Devon Bank has ATM cards and she’s giving Ludwig one. Believe me, Janna had something to do with her little epiphany.) So,Snipped BUT she told them to knock it off.
Why didn’t she help them steal Ludwig’s estate from the get go if she’s so crooked? Was it too soon? Would it look like funny business was going on if she assigned her friends too quickly?
Do you want to know what I think Janna's problem is? She can’t remember her clients. If she’s not crooked, then she has a very poor memory so they (trustees at Devon Bank) laid low for a few months, thought up a lie to tell her (in order to get Josh assigned) and Janna fell for it hook, line and sinker. Ludwig’s entire estate and life went to hell in a hand basket overnight. (I found out this is common practice at Devon Bank. They have a three month thing with their clients, probably write it on their calendars. Ludwig opened his trust in June, three months later, they assigned Josh Mitzen. Same thing after they threw me out. Three months later, Snipped. I've also noticed this in some of their other clients. After setting up a trust account, snipped).
Which is my second problem with Janna. She doesn’t investigate anything on her own. She doesn’t check facts or rely on her own common sense. I also told her (before I moved) that Devon Bank would throw out Ludwig’s entire estate and the extraordinary measures I took to help her keep track of it. (Lucky for her, she has me to inventory it.) But I’m telling her (the entire time) that she’s surrounding Ludwig with professional gold diggers and yet she did nothing about it other than make sure he was he was really secure in their clutches. She was NOT his advocate. Far from it.
In other words, the will Ludwig wrote means that he bequeathed his entire life savings and all his personal possessions to the two trustees at Devon Bank. Janna Dutton set it up for him that way and did nothing to protect her client. She made her friends wealthy.
That said, if you hired Janna to set up a power of attorney (or guardian), she’s not going to invite Josh Mitzen into your life. Why would she? He’s an attorney that took the public guardian quiz. That’s how he makes a living and inviting him into your life would be a conflict of interests. He's an interloper. In my opinion, he can't establish his own loving relationships so he steals yours.
But this is what has me so confused about Janna Dutton’s credibility. She set up a Predatory Trust (January 2008), she knew the vultures were circling (June of 2008), forced Ludwig into public guardianship (September 2008), knew they were squandering his estate (and I can't tell you how many times I mentioned this to her but it was constant) THEN in February 2009, she looked me dead in the eye and told me that she doesn't know what's going on. She only knows what Sally Griffin and Josh Mitzen tell her (and basically tells me that she does as she's told). But this is not true because I told her myself (I can prove it). Does she have a poor memory or is she also self-serving? My conclusion? Does it make a difference? Just ask yourself if you want her to set up your future and have her looking after you. THAT is what you should concern yourself with in regard to hiring this attorney, not whether or not she's going to introduce Josh Mitzen. (This is what I thought several months ago when I wrote it. Janna DOES invite Josh into the lives of her clients when she knows it's a conflict of interests because he makes her money. She can churn the bill because he causes chaos and animosity among family members and everyone else. So, if you hire this law firm, put several zeroes behind the amount she quotes you.)
Make sure that NO ATTORNEY sets you up with a living (or predatory) trust. That’s Rick Block’s dream come true and I’m sure he’s not the only trustee that gets off on one.
First of all, when Ludwig hired Janna, she was a good advocate for him. I didn’t know this at the time (because I was only doing what Ludwig asked) but she was a good advocate for me as well since I was his Power of Attorney over healthcare. I never thought of her as supportive to me but in retrospect, she was.
"Snipped" (September 2008), she became a very poor advocate for her client because Josh is self-serving and wasn’t concerned about Ludwig at all. But she became a good advocate for Josh who neglected Ludwig.
My problem with Janna is that she set Ludwig up with a Living Trust which is another word for “Predatory Trust.” Snipped and the day after Ludwig transferred his money to Devon Bank, Sally Griffin (bank trustee) told me she can’t figure out whether or not she wants to keep me on since she hired Josh for my position (and I didn't know she meant as his Power of Attorney over healthcare at the time). She also couldn't figure out how to give Ludwig his own money.
Snipped.
I wrote Janna exactly that. (I have the letter. I also know she read it because Sally mentioned it when she told us that Devon Bank has ATM cards and she’s giving Ludwig one. Believe me, Janna had something to do with her little epiphany.) So,Snipped BUT she told them to knock it off.
Why didn’t she help them steal Ludwig’s estate from the get go if she’s so crooked? Was it too soon? Would it look like funny business was going on if she assigned her friends too quickly?
Do you want to know what I think Janna's problem is? She can’t remember her clients. If she’s not crooked, then she has a very poor memory so they (trustees at Devon Bank) laid low for a few months, thought up a lie to tell her (in order to get Josh assigned) and Janna fell for it hook, line and sinker. Ludwig’s entire estate and life went to hell in a hand basket overnight. (I found out this is common practice at Devon Bank. They have a three month thing with their clients, probably write it on their calendars. Ludwig opened his trust in June, three months later, they assigned Josh Mitzen. Same thing after they threw me out. Three months later, Snipped. I've also noticed this in some of their other clients. After setting up a trust account, snipped).
Which is my second problem with Janna. She doesn’t investigate anything on her own. She doesn’t check facts or rely on her own common sense. I also told her (before I moved) that Devon Bank would throw out Ludwig’s entire estate and the extraordinary measures I took to help her keep track of it. (Lucky for her, she has me to inventory it.) But I’m telling her (the entire time) that she’s surrounding Ludwig with professional gold diggers and yet she did nothing about it other than make sure he was he was really secure in their clutches. She was NOT his advocate. Far from it.
In other words, the will Ludwig wrote means that he bequeathed his entire life savings and all his personal possessions to the two trustees at Devon Bank. Janna Dutton set it up for him that way and did nothing to protect her client. She made her friends wealthy.
That said, if you hired Janna to set up a power of attorney (or guardian), she’s not going to invite Josh Mitzen into your life. Why would she? He’s an attorney that took the public guardian quiz. That’s how he makes a living and inviting him into your life would be a conflict of interests. He's an interloper. In my opinion, he can't establish his own loving relationships so he steals yours.
But this is what has me so confused about Janna Dutton’s credibility. She set up a Predatory Trust (January 2008), she knew the vultures were circling (June of 2008), forced Ludwig into public guardianship (September 2008), knew they were squandering his estate (and I can't tell you how many times I mentioned this to her but it was constant) THEN in February 2009, she looked me dead in the eye and told me that she doesn't know what's going on. She only knows what Sally Griffin and Josh Mitzen tell her (and basically tells me that she does as she's told). But this is not true because I told her myself (I can prove it). Does she have a poor memory or is she also self-serving? My conclusion? Does it make a difference? Just ask yourself if you want her to set up your future and have her looking after you. THAT is what you should concern yourself with in regard to hiring this attorney, not whether or not she's going to introduce Josh Mitzen. (This is what I thought several months ago when I wrote it. Janna DOES invite Josh into the lives of her clients when she knows it's a conflict of interests because he makes her money. She can churn the bill because he causes chaos and animosity among family members and everyone else. So, if you hire this law firm, put several zeroes behind the amount she quotes you.)
Make sure that NO ATTORNEY sets you up with a living (or predatory) trust. That’s Rick Block’s dream come true and I’m sure he’s not the only trustee that gets off on one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)