|
Please give it out for content, it would go
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:00 |
|
|
TVsVeryOwn posted:
Perfect
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Out of only a slight amount of self interest I would put forward, "Having the phrase that eventually became a thread title."
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
I need this deep inside me, Mr Hands style. Fuzzy Mammal posted:Out of only a slight amount of self interest I would put forward, "Having the phrase that eventually became a thread title." A good metric.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:03
|
|
|
Guest2553 posted:
Agreed On an equal parts-BWM/BWL/GWM/GWL topic, this Bogleheads thread on "How Much Money Are You Leaving Your Kids After You Die" has some interesting posts. https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=263257 Some people really feel like controlling their kids from beyond the grave. quote:What my perfect situation is to set up some charity to give away money each year and they can have a set salary to administer that charity. That way they make some extra money by WORKING and hopefully lets them see the benefits of helping those less fortunate. Somebody said it sounded a bit controlling, and they responded quote:Absolutely. That is how it is meant. My wife and I made the money so why shouldn't we decide how it is spent? The whole "control from the grave" is a very Western concept. If I give MY money that I earned from MY hard work then I get to choose what I do with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
I mean, that seems fair. Offering the kids a job with the charitable trust, or the ability to let someone else manage it if they're not interested seems fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
It's both fair (it's their money, it would be fair for them to burn it if they wanted!) and reasonable (charitable giving is good). It just strikes me as weird when parents are concerned that their kids will receive too much money or spend it wrong. Obvious exception for kids with substance abuse/addiction issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:21
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Some people really feel like controlling their kids from beyond the grave. quote:What my perfect situation is to set up some charity to give away money each year and they can have a set salary to administer that charity. That way they make some extra money by WORKING and hopefully lets them see the benefits of helping those less fortunate. I've done audits for a few charities and this comment was designed to aggravate me. Wildly underestimating the amount of money needed to endow a self-sustaining charity or trust? Check. Setting up a charity as a nepotistic vanity project with the prime mission of subsidizing your lazy offspring's lifestyle under the guise of character-building work? Check. Complete ignorance of federal tax rules over charities that make such dumbass schemes legally questionable? Check.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:It just strikes me as weird when parents are concerned that their kids will receive too much money or spend it wrong. Obvious exception for kids with substance abuse/addiction issues. I don't think it's weird. This thread is full of stories of people who get windfalls then blow the entire amount and more immediately, getting into a worse place than they were before the money. Edit: and heaven forbid you have multiple beneficiaries or people who don't get anything, at which point everything will be spent in the legal battles Dr. Eldarion fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Nov 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:40
|
|
|
The secret is to not die until your children have mortgages. That way you know how most of the money is (hopefully) going to be spent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:43
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:It just strikes me as weird when parents are concerned that their kids will receive too much money or spend it wrong. It's been widely written about that a lot of family wealth is squandered by the 3rd generation. First gen makes it somehow, their kids lived through the hard times and learned the work ethic and were evntually left in a privileged position, their kids grew up wanting for nothing, get inheritance and basically set it on fire because they don't understand that money can run out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
Motronic posted:It's been widely written about that a lot of family wealth is squandered by the 3rd generation. First gen makes it somehow, their kids lived through the hard times and learned the work ethic and were evntually left in a privileged position, their kids grew up wanting for nothing, get inheritance and basically set it on fire because they don't understand that money can run out. It's also been written that US citizens have an extremely high likelihood of being in the same socioeconomic ladder rung as their parents. Does the 3 generation rule say that fantastically wealthy families are brought back to earth by the 3rd generation? Or that across any socioeconomic status, every 3rd generation is more poor than the two before it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:52
|
|
|
Motronic posted:It's been widely written about that a lot of family wealth is squandered by the 3rd generation. First gen makes it somehow, their kids lived through the hard times and learned the work ethic and were evntually left in a privileged position, their kids grew up wanting for nothing, get inheritance and basically set it on fire because they don't understand that money can run out. So will the Trump grandchildren die penniless and drug addicted or do I have to wait for the great-grandkids?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
howdoesishotweb posted:So will the Trump grandchildren die penniless and drug addicted or do I have to wait for the great-grandkids? you're watching the squandering. fred christ trump made the fortune
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:It's also been written that US citizens have an extremely high likelihood of being in the same socioeconomic ladder rung as their parents. Which is hardly mutually exclusive with what I said. You have an extremely high UNlikelihood of breaking that socioeconomic class, but when it happens........ GoGoGadgetChris posted:Does the 3 generation rule say that fantastically wealthy families are brought back to earth by the 3rd generation? Or that across any socioeconomic status, every 3rd generation is more poor than the two before it? What's gotten you so upset about what I said that you've now decided to try to put words in my mouth like "rule"? bob dobbs is dead posted:you're watching the squandering. fred christ trump made the fortune lol, probably this. But I'm not really so sure this apply to FANTASTIC wealth. What I recall reading about most was like, poor-ish to lower middle families that end up in a position to live solidly upper middle class lives while saving for retirement, kids end up with school paid for along the way, help with purchasing their first homes, benefiting from the connections of their parents, etc and then left with a few million of leftover retirement when their parents kick it. (parents being the typical case studies in "The Millionaire Next Door", and some of what I'vm remembering may have even been from exactly there) Motronic fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Nov 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 01:34
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Which is hardly mutually exclusive with what I said. You have an extremely high UNlikelihood of breaking that socioeconomic class, but when it happens........ What part of my post seemed upset? I thought we were having a normal conversation. If anything I wrote came across as scrappy, it was not intentional.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:What part of my post seemed upset? I thought we were having a normal conversation. If anything I wrote came across as scrappy, it was not intentional. Immediately misrepresenting some vague recollection I posted about as a "rule" + your general posting persona leads to a reaction like this. I'm going to treat this as innocent, and not a complete backing down once you were called on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
Motronic posted:I'm going to treat this as innocent, and not a complete backing down once you were called on it. What would happen if you treated it as something other than innocent, out of curiosity?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:10
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Immediately misrepresenting some vague recollection I posted about as a "rule" + your general posting persona leads to a reaction like this. Snort an entire Xanax immediately dude, lol. "3 Generation Rule" is word-for-word a thing from the link I posted, which is the topic at hand. This was not an attack on your anecdote and I don't know what you are "calling me" on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:10
|
|
|
This one is good. Possible BWM: Having your brother commit identity fraud Possible GWM: Having your brother spot you a house by committing identify fraud (WA) Brother used my identity to buy a house. Do I own the house? https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/9v5z89/wa_brother_used_my_identity_to_buy_a_house_do_i/?st=JO8D2A4L&sh=75383a92 quote:Long story short, I recently discovered that my brother used my SSN and identity to buy a house and get a mortgage for $250,000 in 2017. I know I should’ve checked my credit report more often but here I am. He managed to do so by going through the papers my parents had in their home. My parents keep meticulous records in their safe, which include copies of our passports, SS cards, birth certificates, etc. from since we were kids. My brother got access to it and this is how he stole my identity. The reason why I discovered the issue was because I wanted to buy a house myself and my mortgage broker said I can only get a $270,000 loan. This was puzzling because my income is $178k and I have no debt. When he dug deeper, he saw that I have another mortgage taken out in 2017. After a week of digging, trips to the county clerk, and courthouse, I have hard proof of my brother’s scam. I have not confronted him yet. quote:Oooh... this is very interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:30
|
|
|
Yikes. Good reminder to finally get my SSN and birth certificate out of my parents' house.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
Lockback posted:This one is good. How feasible is this to pull off? A mortgage isn't like a credit card you need witnesses, notaries, etc all involved...
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:42
|
|
|
Lockback posted:This one is good. This one is very good. Could the title insurance company be left holding the bag here, having to sue the probably in-jail fraud committing judgement proof brother?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
Motronic posted:This one is very good. Could the title insurance company be left holding the bag here, having to sue the probably in-jail fraud committing judgement proof brother? Fun little sub detail is that the brother would have had to have gotten a fake ID and posed as the victim in person at least once. That Notary is in a heap of trouble.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 02:59
|
|
|
GoGoGadgetChris posted:Fun little sub detail is that the brother would have had to have gotten a fake ID and posed as the victim in person at least once. That Notary is in a heap of trouble. That might go back to the (soon to be former) notary's E&O insurance being a bag holder. This is gonna be a complete cluster of subrogation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:07
|
|
|
Notarious Fake ID.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
I saw a document notarized in Louisiana, apparently notary commissions for lawyers don’t expire until death. “My commission expires: ___upon death___” is interesting to read!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
If he managed to hey access to enough documents, ther brother could have gotten a state issued ID. In that case I would doubt the notary would suggest consequences.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:16
|
|
|
Motronic posted:This one is very good. Could the title insurance company be left holding the bag here, having to sue the probably in-jail fraud committing judgement proof brother? GoGoGadgetChris posted:Fun little sub detail is that the brother would have had to have gotten a fake ID and posed as the victim in person at least once. That Notary is in a heap of trouble. Notary will only be 1 party, and they likely will be fairly limited on how liable. Title insurer would be one, and then there will be a giant clusterfuck of a battle between the bank and OP. I would bet the bank will try to settle something between OP and itself because who the gently caress knows what will happen if this goes to court. I liked the start of this comment: quote:Congrats on living out a law school exam question :/
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:17
|
|
|
Torrens makes it interesting! I hope there are updates!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:19
|
|
|
With brothers, it's possible that he was just able to use his actual documents (if he had access to them) without having to get forgeries. There are many brothers who look enough alike that no one is going to blink when comparing one to a 3-4 year old ID picture of the other. His brother could have presented an ID that looked just like him and with all the other information people wouldn't have had cause to doubt it too much. Regarding leaving things to your kids, the main problem is that waiting until you die to try and impress financial skills onto your adult children through some elaborate will conditions isn't going to work, because they'll probably have good or bad finance skills pretty well ingrained at that point. You want to be working on that when they are children and developing their skills as they grow up, so that by the time you die they're already not idiots and managing their money and adding more doesn't break them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
Maybe some US lawyer can chime in here, but he wouldn't get to "keep" the house, right? His recourse is to get the house off his name and get reimbursed for whatever damages he's suffered (attorney fees, maybe having to pay extra for his real mortgage). He can of course file criminal charges if he wants, but that's a separate issue from the civil case. I would imagine that the house will end up being auctioned off by the state as it starts getting convictions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
Ur Getting Fatter posted:Maybe some US lawyer can chime in here, but he wouldn't get to "keep" the house, right? Perhaps he could kick his brother out, take over the mortgage, and sell it to cash out the equity?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
Well it’s torrens instead of abstract, so the state says A owns that piece of property, instead of abstract where A acqruired it from B acquired it from C who acquired it from the state. Brother Z should have had “A” sell the property to him after he acquired it the first time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:29
|
|
|
Ur Getting Fatter posted:Maybe some US lawyer can chime in here, but he wouldn't get to "keep" the house, right? NAL, but married to one. Torrens basically means the state doesn't care how a name gets on a title, whomever is on there owns it (that's simplified, but the gist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title The Bank will probably offer to just foreclose, not report it on his credit, and pay him his legal fees with a bump for himself but who knows. If it goes to court it will probably be a giant clusterfuck. He could make an argument (I don't know if it would stick) that he owns the house and his brother is liable for the mortgage. The bank wouldn't have recourse to foreclose because they never had an agreement with the title holder. crazypeltast52 posted:Well it’s torrens instead of abstract, so the state says A owns that piece of property, instead of abstract where A acqruired it from B acquired it from C who acquired it from the state. His brother has no money and no way to get a mortgage, which is why he needed to pretend to be someone else in the first place. Lockback fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Nov 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 03:56
|
|
|
crazypeltast52 posted:Well it’s torrens instead of abstract, so the state says A owns that piece of property, instead of abstract where A acqruired it from B acquired it from C who acquired it from the state. Zaurg's been ordained?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
Motronic posted:It's been widely written about that a lot of family wealth is squandered by the 3rd generation. First gen makes it somehow, their kids lived through the hard times and learned the work ethic and were evntually left in a privileged position, their kids grew up wanting for nothing, get inheritance and basically set it on fire because they don't understand that money can run out. The way I learned it, the third generation destroys the family business. The first generation builds the business, the second generation runs the business, the third generation destroys it. By the third generation, they are too used to the wealth, and unlikely to have the grit and interest in running the business. They are more likely to dissolve it, sell it, or run it into the ground. Wealth, on the other hand, can continue for many more generations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
therobit posted:If he managed to hey access to enough documents, ther brother could have gotten a state issued ID. In that case I would doubt the notary would suggest consequences. I am inclined to think this too. I am a notary so I reviewed the information on the secretary of states website and the requirement is quote:(2) A notarial officer has satisfactory evidence of the identity of an individual appearing before the officer if the officer can identify the individual: And it goes on to list some documents including government issued ID. I’m not allowed to notarize a few items and they are mostly things that would help prove your identity. I notarize about a half dozen items annually and only for people I know or at work so I never have considered insurance, but I doubt much insurance is going to pay out of you either willfully notarize if you know the identity is wrong or if you stamped based on legitimate identification since there’s no liability. If you get access to all of somebodies original documents I have no doubt you could eventually present every form of common government ID, provided there’s no fingerprinting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 05:36
|
|
|
That horse daddy gif made me spit water. Holy gently caress. Glad it wasn’t on my laptop or the thread would have been BWM for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 08:00 |
|
|
Lockback posted:He could make an argument (I don't know if it would stick) that he owns the house and his brother is liable for the mortgage. The bank wouldn't have recourse to foreclose because they never had an agreement with the title holder. Equity should allow a court to go "k, defrauded brother doesn't' get a house but he gets his credit scrubbed, bank gets the house, fraudster bro goes to jail." The presence of clear fraud I believe makes this one easier than it appears at first blush, since the fraud was present from the start and taints the entire transaction. The way it reads, Torrens registration isn't a license to commit fraud.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2018 06:27
|
|
