quote:

Originally posted by tsmccull:
legitimate recipients.

Pretty loose there with your language, chief.

When my Dad passed away in 2016, the funeral home volunteered to notify SSA & state teacher retirement system, I contacted the VA about an insurance policy, and possibly about his VA disability ( my memory fails, if it was me or the funeral home ). But who ever did the contact, it was confirmed with each entity whether the latest payment was going to be pulled back, everything was direct deposit.

Also at the time we found out that, contrary to what our Dad had assured us, we were only had signature authority to his checking account, not assigned ownership, which authority ended at his death, as did our POA’s. We were able to work it out with the bank, to continue to pay his estate bills, until we could get through probate. Being a longtime bank customers in a small town made this possible, also made getting through probate expeditiously. We obviously didn’t go in and loot the accounts or otherwise engage in any dubious transactions.

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:

quote:

Originally posted by selogic:
I don't understand why SS would take the payment back for the month that you died but it seems to be common practice . In my case , I became eligible in February but did not receive my first payment till mid April .

-------------------------------------------

quote:

NO it's NOT prorated, and in the case of direct-deposit SS benefits, YES they do take back the last payment....The SSA process here makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever, but that's what they do.

__________________________________

quote:

It's not a "common practice." It's the law. It's been that way since 1937. And forgive the repetition, but it's also not an "SSA process," it's the law. As far as making sense, since when is it a requirement that the law make sense? Save any anger for those that wrote the law.

Sooo, you're saying the 'the Law' states that benefits that a Decedent is entitled to, and that could not possibly have been received unless they were entitled to them (paid in arrears, such that they are received the following month), must be clawed back (even though the decedent is entitled to them), and distributed to the next of kin....But ONLY if the Survivors 'apply' for them. Do you realize how FUCKED UP that is?

In my case, the funds were NEEDED to help pay my Father's debts/bills. These were funds that he was entitled to, and guess what, the Estate NEVER received the funds!

Well, at least I'm comforted that 'It's the Law'....

quote:

Originally posted by rburg:

quote:

Originally posted by tsmccull:
legitimate recipients.

Pretty loose there with your language, chief.

Not at all. You sign up for SS when you’re eligible and your payments reflect a combination of your age and historical income. That’s legit. What’s not is someone who cashed checks that were erroneously paid to a dead person. I’d call the latter an illegitimate recipient.

[/QUOTE]
Sooo, you're saying the 'the Law' states that benefits that a Decedent is entitled to, and that could not possibly have been received unless they were entitled to them (paid in arrears, such that they are received the following month), must be clawed back (even though the decedent is entitled to them), and distributed to the next of kin....But ONLY if the Survivors 'apply' for them. Do you realize how FUCKED UP that is?

In my case, the funds were NEEDED to help pay my Father's debts/bills. These were funds that he was entitled to, and guess what, the Estate NEVER received the funds!

Well, at least I'm comforted that 'It's the Law'.... [/QUOTE]

There are two issues raised in the last several posts in this thread. The first is the question of eligibility for benefits in the event of death. Eligibility exists for the beneficiary or survivors only if the beneficiary is alive the entire calendar month. Been that way since 1937. If I understand you correctly, that's not the issue you are raising. The second issue, your issue, seems to be what happens when a beneficiary dies and the survivors are eligible for the benefit. Upon notification of death, the Treasury Department will reclaim the benefit for redistribution to eligible survivors. Decedents are ineligible for benefits. Only their survivors are entitled. Treasury reclaims the benefit in conformance with their legal obligation to collect benefits which are not payable (in this case to the deceased.) Doesn't mean the recovered benefits can't be paid out. If your suggesting why not just leave the money in the account, lots of people have joint accounts with people who are not eligible survivors. What happens when eligible survivors come looking for their money, but it's gone because Treasury never reclaimed the money and other non-eligible people cleaned out the account? So yes, Treasury is complying with the law when the money is reclaimed.

Your post seems to suggest the survivors or the estate never received the underpayment that is due. I can only assume nobody applied for it. Not sure when the death occurred, but it may not be too late to file. Not sure what purpose the punctuation marks around 'the Law' were in your post, but it does appear that everything that was done was in conformance with the law. My very best to you. If there is an underpayment due, hope you are able to receive it.

quote:

Originally posted by 229DAK:
Edmond - it will be interesting to hear the outcome of the meeting.

MIL went to the meeting with her sister.

The branch manager and a regional manager were there. Regional told them about what's been going on, that money was being deposited into granny's account and money taken out and deposited into the aunt's account. Regional asked aunt if she had given any money to MIL and she proudly exclaimed "no!" Account was a joint account that MIL had with granny but MIL never used it as she has her own account at the same bank.

Come to find out the aunt never told the bank or social security that granny had died. She swears that she got a letter from SS saying she was entitled to that money. Also found out that her father, granny's husband who died around 2007, had some sort of pension around $800/month being deposited each month which the aunt also withdrew and spent. Now I don't know much about pensions being paid out but I could see the pension being paid to a surviving spouse but to adult children? Was very adamant that she was the rightful heir to grandfathers pension.

Supposedly when granny died in late 2015, the sisters suspected that granny had left money for them in a safe deposit box. The aunt said there was a note there but no money. The note was addressed to MIL saying here is "some money" for you to use as you please.

Here's something even more fucked up: granny had a burial insurance policy and also a small policy for the grandkids, the benefits to the grandkids (my wife and her sister) wasn't very much, maybe $3,000-4,000 for each of them. When granny died, the aunt asked if my wife and her sister would give up the money from that policy to pay for the funeral and burial knowing that granny had a policy.

Granny had a car but couldn't drive anymore so it was left at my MIL's house, she couldn't drive either due to eyesight so the car was just parked there. Aunt was living in Utah at the time but moved back to the Chicago area. Lived in an apartment (cheap one at that) and didn't have a car so MIL says take granny's car because neither of them could drive it. Proceeds to talk shit saying MIL messed granny's car up. Granny dies and aunt all of a sudden got an Audi (or a Lexus, I don't remember exactly) and buys a home which I'm sure was over $230k. Employment situation didn't change, maybe a modest promotion and raise but I'm sure the lady doesn't make much.

Aunt got defiant and boldly told my MIL at the bank that she has about $55,000 in a 401k and they "better not touch that money!"

There's another meeting with someone from social security on Monday at the bank. I sure as hell hope they escort her away in cuffs. Account has been frozen.

MIL is hurt, called her sister in CA crying, trying to understand why their sister would steal from their mother as she was dying and afterwards.

I've heard it said that you never know the character of a person until you share an estate with them. Or probably divorce them.

quote:

Originally posted by tsmccull:
Not at all. You sign up for SS when you’re eligible and your payments reflect a combination of your age and historical income. That’s legit. What’s not is someone who cashed checks that were erroneously paid to a dead person. I’d call the latter an illegitimate recipient.

I'm sorry if anyone took offense. It was me being bad and making a political statement in a clearly non-political thread.

For a historical background, SS has been used for decades to buy votes from those who barely worked. The crooked vote buyers have gone to no end to convince the low income worker that they were entitled to the funds. Often as much as those who sweated blood for their "contribution". Its not like it was voluntary. Most of us worked from our late teens into our 70s and beyond, still paying.

Worse, many of us paid both halves or twice as much as others.

I have no comment about the situation the OP finds himself in. Well, except he should have his wife accompanied with counsel at the next meeting. If competent, both wife and counsel should remain as silent as possible. I would doubt that the bank or SS will be very forthcoming with what the inevitable audit will reveal. Banks keep records. Every penny withdrawn or even deposited in the evil sisters account will be right there in black and white.

I would assume a Federal Prosecutor will be present to listen in. Something I was taught long ago was to speak as little as possible, but get the name and employer of each attendee. Not to comment on their reply, if they answer, but just for fun and games. Because if the situation is as the OP has stated, we're dealing with criminal fraud. It means the bank has skin in the game here. All deposits and withdrawls from the date of the POA will be revealed. Any deposits into the evil sisters accounts will be revealed eventually. Including cash withdrawls. Then all the gory details of the home purchase.

Any auditor worth his salt will want that matched up with any cash deposits. The banks problem will be with accepting cash in large amounts. With any luck, a good picture of how much cash was in the box.

As for hold a bank box with nothing in it, a possible reason is that the owner or co-owner of a box can't take someone's name off it. The way that's done is to buy another box and empty the contents into it. Leaving the now empty box will tell them if the person they want off it does access it.

quote:

Regional asked aunt if she had given any money to MIL and she proudly exclaimed "no!"
She swears that she got a letter from SS saying she was entitled to that money.
Was very adamant that she was the rightful heir to grandfathers pension.
The aunt said there was a note there but no money.
Proceeds to talk shit saying MIL messed granny's car up.
Aunt got defiant and boldly told my MIL at the bank that she has about $55,000 in a 401k and they "better not touch that money!"

It will be interesting to see if the aunt displays this attitude towards the social security representative. I hope she does.

What was the reaction from the bank representatives?

Not my business and no need to answer if you don't want to, but did your granny have a will and did it go thru probate?

And maybe someone could remind the aunt to bring that letter she got from the SS office to the meeting.

quote:

Originally posted by 229DAK:
It will be interesting to see if the aunt displays this attitude towards the social security representative. I hope she does.

What was the reaction from the bank representatives?

Not my business and no need to answer if you don't want to, but did your granny have a will and did it go thru probate?

And maybe someone could remind the aunt to bring that letter she got from the SS office to the meeting.

Granny had nothing written down except for a vague note saying “here’s some money” for my MIL. The reason why she left money to my MIL is because she and her daughters (my wife and her sister) were the ones who stayed local while everyone else moved out west.

Bank representatives reaction was “oh okay.” I suspect they will probably be interviewed by social security. She kept calling herself the beneficiary and they told her to stop because she’s not a beneficiary.

This is even more fucked up: granny’s credit cards were kept open and the aunt has been using them. That’s how she was financing upgrades in her home. And was also writing checks with granny’s checking account and signed her name to pay the monthly due.

They did not go to meeting on Monday. Aunt claims she had a lawyer and lawyer told her she doesn’t have to go. Probably bullshit on her part. I hope they issue a warrant and drag her ass out of work in cuffs.

All the sisters know and hindsight is 20/20. Now they don’t wonder how she managed to buy a home and upgrade it so quickly: hardwood flooring, new furniture, big screen, patio, etc. Being patient liaison care supervisor at a hospital probably wasn’t paying that much.

The aunt fails to understand one of the basics of being a competent thief.
When you invest stolen funds in something, make sure it’s on wheels so you can hide it.
A house is easy to seize and locate.

I'm glad I am not in the aunts shoes. She is probably shitting bricks.

When my dad died two years ago, his social security payment was deposited about a week afterward. The next month, it was reversed and sent back to SSA.

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:

quote:

Originally posted by 229DAK:
It will be interesting to see if the aunt displays this attitude towards the social security representative. I hope she does.

What was the reaction from the bank representatives?

Not my business and no need to answer if you don't want to, but did your granny have a will and did it go thru probate?

And maybe someone could remind the aunt to bring that letter she got from the SS office to the meeting.

Granny had nothing written down except for a vague note saying “here’s some money” for my MIL. The reason why she left money to my MIL is because she and her daughters (my wife and her sister) were the ones who stayed local while everyone else moved out west.

Bank representatives reaction was “oh okay.” I suspect they will probably be interviewed by social security. She kept calling herself the beneficiary and they told her to stop because she’s not a beneficiary.

This is even more fucked up: granny’s credit cards were kept open and the aunt has been using them. That’s how she was financing upgrades in her home. And was also writing checks with granny’s checking account and signed her name to pay the monthly due.

They did not go to meeting on Monday. Aunt claims she had a lawyer and lawyer told her she doesn’t have to go. Probably bullshit on her part. I hope they issue a warrant and drag her ass out of work in cuffs.

All the sisters know and hindsight is 20/20. Now they don’t wonder how she managed to buy a home and upgrade it so quickly: hardwood flooring, new furniture, big screen, patio, etc. Being patient liaison care supervisor at a hospital probably wasn’t paying that much.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

Always interesting to see how a thief can rationalize their entitlement. Will be interesting to hear the details as this progresses. Going to be asset seizures, restitutions and probably some jail time, I suspect.

quote:

Originally posted by Suppressed:
I'm glad I am not in the aunts shoes. She is probably shitting bricks.

She’s actually not. Either she’s really delusional in believing it’s her entitlement or she’s so fucking dumb she doesn’t realize what the penalty is for stealing social security from a dead person is.

She’s been super defiant through all of this.

Oh man! I've been following this, & it looks like it's about to hit the fan...

Staying tuned for updates.

Edmond

I hope your MIL's Sister is made to reckon for her dishonesty! Nothing worse than a thief!

Reading this thread I realize at this point who in her orbit hasn't she stolen from?

To use the term above, I hope yall go scorched earth on her and remove from her what can be removed, house, 401K, auction off household goods, car, etc.

F that entitled witch.

HK Ag

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:

quote:

Originally posted by Suppressed:
I'm glad I am not in the aunts shoes. She is probably shitting bricks.

She’s actually not. Either she’s really delusional in believing it’s her entitlement or she’s so fucking dumb she doesn’t realize what the penalty is for stealing social security from a dead person is.

She’s been super defiant through all of this.

I kinda wondered about that. It is possible that she is horribly evil and has been deliberately stealing from her own flesh and blood as well as the US government. However it is also possibly that Hanson’s razor is appropriate here, “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” She could actually be that much of a deluded fool.

Edmond, curious if there’s any new update as to your thieving aunt’s status.

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:

quote:

Originally posted by Suppressed:
I'm glad I am not in the aunts shoes. She is probably shitting bricks.

She’s actually not. Either she’s really delusional in believing it’s her entitlement or she’s so fucking dumb she doesn’t realize what the penalty is for stealing social security from a dead person is.

She’s been super defiant through all of this.

She didn't steal Social Security from a dead person, she stole it from the Federal Government.

I'm really sorry your mom has to go through this from her own sister. It's disgusting what some people will do when it comes to money.