Spokane, Washington Elder Abuse VP Task Force ™ Article

VP Task Force ™ Public Safety Tools –  Educational Report Excerpts

7 Clusters Of Elder Exploitation

Qualitative Research Report Results for Regional Blog & Education Publication Series:

Inland North West Research Summary Articles from the NW VP Collusion Project.

Spokane, Washington & Coeur D’Alene, Kootenai County Idaho Elder Abuse VP Task Force ™ Article Public Safety Tool Report Excerpts

Qualitative Research Report Results for Regional Blog & Education Publication Series:

Inland North West Research Summary Articles

Estate Planning Attorneys (Sandpoint, Bonner County Idaho)

Empirical Qualitative Research Raw Data Content.

  • Focus AI Curating:  North Idaho – Eastern Washington Vulnerable Person Exploitation, Estate Planning, Undue Influence  & Malpractice.
  • Idaho Court Repository Research Findings  Based on Litigation History Evidence Complied From 2000 to Present.
  • Victim and victim advocate testimonial evidence.
  • Expert & layperson witness analysis and testimony,
  • Private investigative accounts,
  • Mediated and court appointed third party witness and report accounts,
  • Direct and circumstantial evidence via recording transcripts, video and estate document.

Research Project Data Source Report Risk Viarables

These 7 Clusters Of elder exploitation are certainly applicably relevant for some Coeur d’Alene and Spokane Caretakers, Estate Planning Attorneys and Guardians.

Posted on September 11, 2017September 11, 2017 by Cease Elder Abuse

Elder Exploitation Crimes in Seven Clusters:

The document separates the Financial Exploitation of Seniors into Seven Clusters. They are:

  1. Theft;
  2. Scams;
  3. Coercion;
  4. Financial Exploitation;
  5. Signs of Possible Financial Abuse;
  6. Financial Entitlement; and
  7. Money Management Difficulties.

A senior or his or her family member who suspects financial elder abuse may review the Statements associated with the Seven Clusters. The chart provided in the 2009 study is worthy of interest. While the Financial Exploitation chart is helpful, it is important to put it into context when considering Northern CA trust and estate litigation.

  1. Undue Influence Law. California’s updated definition of undue influence. See Welfare & Institutions Code Section 15610.70;
  2. Coercion is needed. Remember that unfairness is not enough. Cluster 3 below identifies some common activities that make up coercion.
  3. Burden of Proof. The burden of proof may shift to the alleged abuser requiring that abuser prove that he or she did not exercise undue influence over the senior. The three elements that the plaintiff must demonstrate to make the legal evidence shift are: a. A confidential relationship between the senior and suspected abuser; b. The abuser was an active party in forming the senior’s will or trust. c. The abuser unduly benefitted from the senior’s new estate arrangement.
  4. Susceptibility. The senior’s mental condition is a critical component when proving undue influence. The senior victim must be susceptible to manipulation by the wrongdoer – in other words, in a weakened mental state. The California Jury Instructions explaining susceptibility (vulnerability) include (but are not limited to) “incapacity/illness/disability/injury/age/education/impaired mental abilities/emotional distress/isolation/ [or] dependency.”

The Seven Clusters of elder financial exploitation is replicated below. So let us look at the first cluster:

Cluster 1: Theft

  1. Trusted other steals from senior.
  2. Trustee misuses ATM card or credit cards belonging to the senior.
  3. Trusted other takes prized belongings (jewelry) without permission.
  4. Items are substituted within the senior’s home by a trusted other (high level items with lower level items).
  5. Caregiver overcharges for their services.
  6. Trusted other agrees to do work for the senior, takes their money, but does not perform the task.
  7. Trusted other steals identity of senior or helps someone else steal the identity of the senior.
  8. Fiduciary uses money on own behalf instead of the seniors benefit.
  9. Unauthorized withdrawals from senior’s bank account.
  10. Senior’s attorney misappropriates funds.
  11. Deprivation of services to senior to use money for inappropriate purposes.
  12. Someone sells senior’s property without his or her permission.
  13. Coercion to sign contracts.
  14. Trusted other handles senior’s resources inadequately.
  15. Care of senior is not commensurate with the available resources.
  16. Senior feels cheated after someone sells something to him or her.
  17. Senior is tricked into buying something that they now regret buying.
  18. Suspicious signatures on checks or other documents

Cluster 2: Scams

  1. Institution commits fraud (overbilling and under billing) using seniors identifying information (such as social security number).
  2. Senior pays for work and is scammed or ripped off.
  3. Scams that involve giving to bogus charities.
  4. An institution affiliated with the senior misuses his or her funds.

Cluster 3: Coercion

  1. Trusted other takes advantage of cultural or family expectations to obtain seniors resources.
  2. Trusted other exploits senior’s alcoholism or drug dependency to get money.
  3. Trusted other forces senior to sign legal documents.
  4. Forcing child rearing and cost of child care on elders/grandparents raising/support grandkids.
  5. Senior is pressured to co-sign a loan for a trusted other who has no ability to repay the loan.
  6. Trusted other uses pressure, intimidation, or punishment to obtain access to resources belonging to the senior.
  7. Senior is brainwashed by trusted other and makes financial decisions they would not normally make.
  8. Senior lets trusted other spend some of their money on themselves, but the senior does not like it.
  9. Trusted other says senior should give them money because they gave money to a sibling or other relative.
  10. Trusted other promises companionship in exchange for senior’s money.
  11. Senior persuaded to give others money or personal property.
  12. Senior lets caregiver spend their money on him/herself because they are fearful of them.
  13. Senior consents to let caregiver spend some of their money on themselves, but the senior does not like it.

Cluster 4: Financial Exploitation

  1. Trusted other says they are buying something for the senior, but it is really for their own use.
  2. Trusted other tricks senior into signing legal documents.
  3. Trusted other prevents or deters senior from spending money in an effort to maximize their inheritance.
  4. Trusted other uses some of the senior’s resources for his or her own purposes with the permission of the senior.
  5. Trusted other borrows money from a senior but does not pay it back.
  6. Senior pays money so they can stay in the home but then are made to leave.
  7. Trusted other convinces senior to turn title of home over to them and then sells house and keeps money.
  8. In-home caregiver promising lifetime care for the senior, but then does not deliver care.
  9. Trusted other misuses funds primarily allocated for the seniors care.
  10. Trusted other misuses elder’s power of attorney or guardianship.
  11. Senior gives adult child money but frequently does not get back change or not all the change.
  12. Trusted other misuse of funds allocated for the seniors care.
  13. Trust other allows senior to give them large sums of cash as a gift, or buy them cars or homes.
  14. Someone takes advantage of senior’s weakness to get a hold of his or her resources such as a house, car, or money.
  15. Trusted other handles senior’s resources irresponsibly (e.g., gambling, illegal activities).
  16. Senior is tricked by trusted other into selling valuable possession.
  17. Trusted other says they are buying something for the senior, but it is really for their own use.

Cluster 5: Signs of Possible Financial Abuse

  1. Senior frequently writes out checks made out to cash.
  2. Senior has recent beneficiary changes in a will or insurance policy.
  3. Trusted other commingles his/her funds with those of the senior.
  4. Trusted other will not give accounting of how senior’s resources have been used.
  5. The senior signs over their will to a neighbor or friend.
  6. Senior makes excuses for adult child.
  7. Trusted other is financially dependent on the senior.
  8. Senior has unusual activity in his or her bank accounts.
  9. Family members frequently fight over senior’s money.
  10. Sudden changes in senior’s financial management (titles are changed, retirements or investments cashed in).
  11. Senior’s relationship of trust with someone includes an element of dependency.
  12. Senior changes long time providers (bankers, etc.).
  13. Trust other refuses to change living arrangements because finances coming from the senior contribute to the household.
  14. Senior signs documents without understanding the nature of transaction.
  15. Trusted other has senior add them to bank account as signatory.
  16. Changes occur in senior’s will or trust in favor of only 1 family member or other individual.
  17. Trusted other plans the senior’s budget without their input.
  18. Trusted other refuses to give accounting of spending to the senior.

Cluster 6: Financial Entitlement

  1. Someone lives with the senior, but refuses to pay his or her share of expenses.
  2. Trusted other feels entitled to use senior’s money for him/herself.
  3. Trusted other gives implausible explanations for spending senior’s money.
  4. Senior is talked into making investments that are not in the senior’s best interest.

Cluster 7: Money Management Difficulties

  1. Senior has trouble saving money for something expensive.
  2. Senior is unable to manage money independently.
  3. Senior has serious problems due to poor money management.
  4. Senior presents with financial problems or need.
  5. Senior has some trouble budgeting, but is able to manage money without help.

 

Northwest VP Task Force Overview

PROJECT: Inland Northwest Vulnerable Person Rural Collusion Network. Current Project:  Kootenai & Bonner County, Idaho | Stevens & Spokane County Washington. Rural Area Collusion of Vulnerable Person Exploitation Project.

Public Safety; Vulnerable Adult Crowd-sourcing Geo Project 1: Kootenai, Bonner Counties of  North Idaho, District – Region 1.  Stevens & Spokane Counties  Eastern Washington – Coeur d’Alene area, Sandpoint area, Spokane Area  Coeur d’Alene,  Vulnerable Person Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation: Idaho: IC 18-1503, IC 39-5302  and/or IC 18-7803 Violations Research & Washington:  RCW 74.34.020 Violations Research.

Kootenai, Bonner, Spokane and Stevens County evidence indicates that several legal professionals acting in concert with their side guardianship services, conservator companies and informally affiliated colleagues in vulnerable adult service and legal professionals (estate planning, guardianship and conservator-ship law)  have a repeated 10 + year history of exploiting elders and vulnerable persons with physical and mental infirmities, these general incident details are outlined in Table 1.0.

 PUBLIC DATA SUMMARY RESEARCH SOURCES

Collusion Network Repeating Patterns.

Current investigation subject area:  North Idaho – Eastern Washington.

  1. For confirmation of findings with actual fact based evidence reference alleged perpetrators named in news articles, media announcement organizational chart,  Reference 3 core related estate cases with 6 additions supporting related cases, charts and perpetrator map legend content below.

Common patterns and primary connection in all  3 – 9 estates are:

  1. Vulnerable Persons have assets worth several million dollars,
  2. most VP’s are elderly women with either physical/cognitive impairments usually both,
  3. each has age or medical circumstance related to cognitive decline or combination of both as they undertook estate planning and was intentionally restricted access or isolated from trusted family members or friends,
  4. Undue influence factors intentionally placed upon victim by financially driven family member-primary caretaker
  5. each included in concert and/or collusion with white collar professional legal/medical and in some cases established felon criminals,
  6. Attorney, LSW and geriatric care physician and neurocognitive clinician malpractice.

Additional repeating variables and repeating patterns include: Dependence, intentional, isolation/restriction on private access with trusted family member(so or friends by primary caretaker and permitted by attorney, new financial planning advisers and/or estate planning attorney, guardianship/consulting attorneys brought in prior to G/C petitions when VP first began suffering physical and cognitive diagnosis, new primary care or, geriatric care physicians, one or series of cognitive evaluation completed by  neurocognitive clinician completed without medical or  (against best practices) use of licensed social workers in collusion networks group for court visitor evaluations braising reports in doctors and clinics concealed and/biased cognitive evaluations and additions the LSW do not in driver court mate rails in family contentions or suspect financial matters and are repeating legal clients of attorneys operating in concert with suspect family member or caretaker, LSW or other individual in group also working in Dual role capacity as owners of geriatric service company while simultaneous employment  at health facility or hospital which allows them personal contact or knowledge of wealthy vulnerable person.   Estate planning attorney or financial, planning adviser also owning additional companies that they refer services of their vulnerable clients to their own or affiliated companies whom are also repeating clients of attorney as is the case of LSW an other geriatric evaluaters; PCP physician & clinical Psychologist each whom were intentionally (concealment)  not disclosed prior physical and mental health diagnosis for their evaluative reports or court appointed declarations. In the medical profession these business practices could be considered violations of the Stark Act.

Affiliated Rural Area Network of Geriatric Legal and Health Service Providers to Vulnerable Persons (Elder or Senior Citizens).

Bonner County Estate Planning Attorneys, Guardians, Conservators, Kootenai Health Patient Advocate Guardianship Services Court Visitor Companies, Estate Planning Attorney Owned Fiduciary Services. Clinical Neurocognitive psychiatric evaluaters, Kootenai Health Affiliated Geriatric Primary Physicians acting In Concert with Non-Licensed Family Caretakers for purpose of vulnerable person exploitation, negligence, abuse (isolation). Malpractice State Bar, State Medical, CMS, Federal Act SSA Regulations relate to IC 18-1505 statutes in Idaho.

ONE NOTEWORTHY EXAMPLE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED: Deceptive plan by tax strategist-estate planning Attorney recommending a TEDRA agreement to be signed by all Trustee-beneficiaries except the benefactor (physical and cognitively impaired 82 year old woman) to lock in previous illicitly gained Trust asset disposition shifts to the majority-ruling Trustee-beneficiaries. Tax strategist – estate planning attorney states not to have the benefactor (Trust Grantor/owner of the assets) not  sign the agreement so not to arouse scrutiny of the IRS. One reason would be because Trust in its formation and due to circumstances was in violation of numerous Federal Acts, State Laws. IRS Circular 230. ABA Model Rules.  Uniform Trust & Probate Codes.

 

VP TASK FORCE Public Safety Tools

Profile and Track Public Safety & Vulnerable Person Abuse, Exploitation, Negligence and Malpractice.

 GEO API RISK Multiple Layered Map Overlays

Tactical Alert Warning Systems & Tertiary Profiling of Public Safety Threats Tracking Individual and White Collar Crime Collusion.

SHERLOCK AI Artificial Intelligence

Researchers & Researcher Trained Machine Detectives Curating Data For Repeating Criminal Patterns.