<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Script MT Bold";
panose-1:3 4 6 2 4 6 7 8 9 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Arial Rounded MT Bold";
panose-1:2 15 7 4 3 5 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Jared,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">While as Mark pointed out, the technical answer is no, the same facts APS found are going to help you in trying to void the gifts. Slayer statute is only one claim to pursue in this case. Sounds like you have the makings for pursuing undue
influence and lack of competence angles to void them out too. Take a look at the Dean v. Jordan and Estate of Lint cases to get you going.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As a practical matter, I suggest you immediately send a written notice/letter to whomever has the TOD account and demand that they not pay it out. This should be done yesterday
<span style="font-family:"Segoe UI Emoji",sans-serif">😊</span>. The assets in the RLT won’t be readily available to the abuser with the successor trustee in charge. If the TOD gets paid out and the ‘care giver’ gets their hands on them, they could easily disappear,
and the law of the jungle rules of actual possession can end up trumping all of your court orders.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Script MT Bold"">Jennifer L. White, Esq.</span>
<span style="font-family:"Script MT Bold""><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><img width="105" height="105" style="width:1.0958in;height:1.0958in" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.jpg@01D8A352.BBCDEBB0"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:jen@appletreelaw.com"><span style="font-family:"Arial Rounded MT Bold",sans-serif;color:#0563C1">jen@appletreelaw.com</span></a><i><span style="font-family:"Arial Rounded MT Bold",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial Rounded MT Bold",sans-serif">PO Box 11037<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial Rounded MT Bold",sans-serif">Yakima, WA 98909<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Arial Rounded MT Bold",sans-serif">509.225.9813<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jared E. Adams<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, July 29, 2022 1:10 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> wsbapt@lists.wsbarppt.com<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [WSBAPT] Financial exploitation of vulnerable adult<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi All,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is a new one for me. I am representing the successor Trustee of a living trust, which includes a substantial gift to a former caregiver of the trustor. The former caregiver is also a beneficiary on a TOD brokerage account.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The caregiver was recently investigated by APS and they have determined this is a “substantiated case” for financial exploitation of vulnerable adult. But, that is as far as APS takes the matter. The family doesn’t intend to pursue court
action because the caregiver has no resources for them to recover. Their big question is whether APS’s determination of this being a “substantiated case” is sufficient to trigger RCW 11.84.020 (Slayer or abuser not to benefit from death) and preclude the gifts
to the caregiver under the trust and TOD account.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Have any of you dealt with this before? Thank you in advance for any guidance!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jared<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jared E. Adams, JD, LL.M.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Condie & Adams, PLLC<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">611 4th Avenue, Suite A<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kirkland, WA 98033<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(voice): (425) 450-1040 <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(fax): (425) 450-1041<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(email): <a href="mailto:jared@condieadams.com">jared@condieadams.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">(web): <a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.condieadams.com&d=DwMFAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=kDcM-fraYQNOZ1rCslLoMSSRXJQXmQVvRJbE6ymQGho&m=XwsdPP4okTpEdF7xtWSJrhSmUuNdYJyzdJCaO3y449Y&s=bv7cEyOt7anAtAVfbHV_JQZ42lCNV99MHKJskQaqups&e=">www.condieadams.com</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Unless otherwise expressly indicated, any federal tax advice contained in this communication, including attachments and enclosures, is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE DISCLAIMER<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This message is from the Law Office of CONDIE & ADAMS, PLLC, and is intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this message is privileged, confidential, and protected by the attorney-client or attorney work product privileges.
Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, disclosure or use of such information is strictly prohibited. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error by return e-mail or you may
call our office at (425) 450-1040. Nothing in this message should be interpreted as a digital or electronic signature that can be used to authenticate a contract or other legal document.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>