What Happens When a Scammer Contacts a Tenacious Lawyer
The summer scam surge is on! People, like Attorney Max Elliott, are receiving calls from people impersonating IRS agents in hopes of luring unknowing targets to send them money for back taxes, when back taxes aren’t even due! The IRS has guidance, here. But this is what happens when an attorney receives these calls: Getting Acquainted with Scammer 1 Attorney: I know a little about the IRS locations because I prepare decedent tax returns. Generally, IRS locations I deal with for back taxes with decedents are in Fresno or Cincinnati. Why are you phoning me from Crows Landing, California? Scammer 1: Ma’am the IRS is located in Washington D.C. Attorney: Well, actually, you guys are everywhere. But we’ll let that go. Can you give me your agent number and name, please? Scammer 1: Ma’am? Attorney: Your agent number and name? Click. Attorney: Hello? Hello? Hellloooo… Fun with Scammer 2 Attorney: You phoned about me being sued by the IRS. Are you the IRS? Scammer 2: Yes, ma’am. [They’re very polite in the beginning.] My name is Kevin Campbell and my agent number is 21722. [Scammer 1 must have contacted Scammer 2 and put Attorney Max on the “smart target” list.] Attorney: Ok, great. Thanks Kevin. So, tell me about why you’re phoning me. Scammer 2: Well, ma’am, I need a little more information from you. Attorney: But why? You phoned me, so you have my phone number and you’re from the IRS, so presumably you have all the information on that screen in front of you. Scammer 2: But Ma’am, I need you to verify your information. Attorney: Oh. I see. What do you need? Scammer 2: Can you give me your social security number? Attorney: No. But maybe you can give it to me and I will say yes or no. Scammer 2: But Ma’am, that’s not the way it works. I need you to give it to me. Attorney: But that is the way it works with the other IRS agents I’ve worked with. Are you real? Scammer 2: Yes, Ma’am. I gave you my name and agent number; now you have to do something for me. Attorney: I know. If you’re the IRS you want me to pay you but I don’t owe you anything. It should say so in my file. Scammer 2: That’s it Ma’am. I need you to give me your information so I can verify this is the correct file. Attorney: And by the way; why did YOU phone me? Usually, the IRS doesn’t phone you, they send you notices. Scammer 2: Well, that’s just it Ma’am; we sent 2 people to your door with notices and … Attorney: You did?! That’s interesting are you sure they got the right address? What were they wearing? Scammer 2: Well, that’s what I am trying to find out. Attorney: What they were wearing? Scammer 2: No ma’am your information. Attorney 2: Oh, yeah, right. Well, my bus ride is almost over and I am about to go to the office. I told you that I was an attorney, right? Did you know that impersonating a government agent is a felony punishable by fines and imprisonment? Scammer2: Look! I don’t know who you are! Shut up! Just Shut up! Attorney: But you sent your people to my home and you phoned my private number. Are you sure you have the right person because it really is a felony, you know? Scammer 2: I said shut up! [Not so polite anymore] Attorney: Ok; I will. Click – that was by Attorney Elliott. To learn more about how to report these vultures, visit our Facebook page or phone the IRS.
Revised Uniform Fiduciaries Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA)
Illinois has passed the Revised Uniform Fiduciaries Access to Digital Assets Act (RUFADAA), which allows fiduciaries to access,and under certain circumstances, control the digital assets of persons who are incapacitated or dead. Our firm has, from its inception, provided digital asset planning and we are pleased that the law is embracing these important assets. Before passing RUFADAA, accessing a loved one\’s email or Facebook account, could be construed as criminal unless your loved one took certain steps providing the fiduciary authority to do so. Even then, if the authority conflicted with the terms of agreement, the fiduciary still was prohibited from accessing said accounts. Stay tuned for a legislative update on our blog…
Subprime service providers
Subprime service providers still targeting vulnerable homeowners but the Illinois Appellate Court and Illinois Attorney General has provided a remedy for victims of loan modification scams. Read more…
Illinois legislature is considering a new bill
Illinois legislature is considering a new bill that would allow parents to delegate certain powers and custody of children for less than a year or more for a service member. If passed, this would nullify the need for parents to go to guardianship court for designating temporary guardianship. Who would this benefit? Perhaps a single parent of a minor who has a great job opportunity in another jurisdiction. Stay tuned…
Our 2015-16 Highlights and Horizons Is OUT!
Click here to catch up last year\’s relevant news and find out about what\’s on our firm\’s horizon!
To Transfer or Not to Transfer, That Is the Question, Maybe…
As discussed in our blog, The Shark Free Zone, in September 2015 an Illinois Appellate Court ruled, in The Estate of Mendelson v. Mendelson, that real estate that is subject of a revocable living trust, under certain circumstances, does not need to be formally titled to that trust. The ruling means that a home does not have to be transferred via recording the title with the county recorder of deeds office in the relevant county before the trustmaker dies… ohboy… The more far-reaching implication is the elimination of a revenue stream for trust companies that receive an income stream from having homes retitled to trusts and then retitled to the rightful beneficiary or beneficiaries once the trustmaker dies. Read more… On June 26, 2015, in a historical moment, the United States joined several other progressive, developed countries in recognizing all citizens\’ right to marry. You can read a brief summary of SCOTUS\’s Decision on The Shark Free Zone or download the Opinion. Our firm has worked steadily with colleagues and the public in advocating on behalf of committed, loving couples who were prevented from marrying or found marriage challenging to their families because of the patchwork of laws that was created initially by the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. Accordingly, The Law Offices of Max Elliott, Ltd. joins our colleagues, communities, and families in celebrating this joyous and historic occasion, as the Supreme Court of the United States of America has made unconstitutional invidious discriminatory laws restricting the fundamental right to marry, thereby strengthening the bonds that make our country a more legally just and safe place in which to live and love.
2 Interesting Cases Before the Court Recently
You can listen to the arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges and the third party commotion here. In Tibble v. Edison, the Supreme Court of the United States, aka SCOTUS, ruled that fiduciaries of ERISA retirement funds, e.g., 401(k) plans, owe a duty to the plan participants, a fiduciary duty. What that means is in plain English is that if a financial planner, trustee, or anyone who is responsible for managing ERISA based plans does so imprudently, the investor can hold that person accountable in a court of law as long as the claim is filed in a timely manner. The Statute of Limitations is 6 years. The video features Kenji Yoshino, Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law at New York University School of Law, discussing Obergefell v. Hodges and the oral arguments heard on April 28 by the United States Supreme Court addressing the issue of same-sex marriage in that case. In addition to a few fireworks from the bench, a la notorious RBG, a person who opposed same-sex marriage created a slight stir by being obstreperous to the point of bailiffs ushering him out.
Wrigley Woes
Mr. Cub, Ernie Banks, had thousands and maybe millions of fans, so one might think he was amazingly wealthy and his estate was in order. However, that wasn\’t necessarily the case that we know of thus far. Mr. Cub\’s estate has ended up in a Cook County Court where the game is in about the fourth inning. The plays so far have been: The warm-up: October 17, 2014 Ernie created a new will, cutting his entire family out but \”not for lack of love or affection\” and leaves everything to his caregiver. January 23, 2015 Mr. Cub dies; death certificate allegedly states \”dementia\” as a leading contributor. January 31, 2015, Caregiver allegedly treats herself to champagne and a spa day. February 2015 the family, particularly the 4th wife, learns about will and contests it. Caregiver says Banks died with very little assets so Judge orders accounting. March 31, 2015 Hon. James G. Riley rules will is valid. Family lawyer says ruling is \”procedural.\” Once a will is ruled valid, it is very difficult to overturn the ruling. One way is by proving that the primary beneficiary or beneficiaries asserted \”undue influence\” over the testator. This is what the Banks\’ family is going to attempt to prove. Reports allege that Banks was suffering from dementia, which means that his soundness of mind could have been lacking on October 17 at the time he executed his will. But that\’s just it, the family must prove that he was lacking capacity to withstand the influence of the caregiver at the exact time during which he signed his will. In the interim, the Cubs are planning a tribute at the refurbished Wrigley. So…Batter-Up!
MARRIAGE EQUALITY March Heads to U.S. Supreme Court Again!
The hearing is scheduled for April 28, 2015 and this time, the justices may just determine to end the continued discrimination against same-gender couples in the 14 states that refuse to allow loving, committed couples of the same gender to marry. If you\’re familiar with our marriage equality work, you know we\’ve been watching and participating in the march from the firm\’s inception. So, we are pleased that some sources report that Chief Justice Roberts may side with the plaintiffs in this case. Why? Because of Loving v. Virginia, which we and other colleagues have long argued is the fundamental legal basis for providing national marriage equality. And Roberts may be considering his Court\’s legacy. See Mildred and Richard on the left. The Court is scheduled to hear the case in April of this year deciding in June. Read more here…
First-time home buyers celebrate and save.
On January 26, the FHA provided reduced premiums for mortgage insurance on 30-year loans. The amount of the decrease will depend on whether the down payment was more or less than 5%. Read more here.