The State of Massachusetts has recently extended an application for its full adoption of the Uniform Probate Code to January 2012. This is because of budget limitations. In the main, this is a delay due to the costs assessed the courts and public by reason of forms and probate action standardizations etc.
However, the opportunity for a law restatement and reform is no t lost. perhaps when again calendaring and reviewing the compliance date and another? budget extension, the law can be better served.
A few unchanged standards of Probate Law regarding dead persons and their property should be re-affirmed and follow:
Probate Estate Administration requires a visit to the Courthouse by you or your lawyer to legally manage the estate when you have a will or no estate planning and property in the dead person’s name (intestacy). That managing authority will depend on whether there is a will or not; and the size of the property involved (the estate).
If the Estate is small, the actions you will perform will be a Voluntary administration; if large, greater than a minimum size, the actions of Estate Management will be Involuntary. In the latter case, you must seek and acquire more Court permission for specific actions –such as the sale of property.
Probate Real Estate - In Massachusetts – more notice of an Estate real estate asset bound in Estate Administration is given to and for out of county property, than to real estate in the county of the dead person’s residence. The State should correct this by requiring a specific estate Administration pending notice to be recorded in the Land Record office of the decedent’s resident county as well as any county where the real estate involved is located.
In Massachusetts, a Personal Representative casually can collect liquid assets from bank accounts before Estate Administration when they are of a lesser amount (?$10,000?). This is supposed to save time and money – but the assets are to be collected and distributed for the Estate and its Administration, or after legally counting the monies for the estate. They do not become the property of a personal representative for consumption. Thye arise as an embezzlement and theft and fraud issue if they are not counted for the estate or mis-represented as joint property. The State should re-affirm and correct this; and sustain cross-reporting to the IRS and the State Department of Revenue; and or permit the practice by funds transfer only to an escrow account pending Estate Administration. That saves costs and prevents fraud.
When lay people are paying so much for legal representation and estate planning, the extra cost of Probate court and laws when not enforced or used is ridiculous. If Court time is expensive and not available by reason of Domestic & Family Court demands in same Court, then replace decedent estate and trust and conservatorship with another Court or replace it with a special reporting agency for administration.
The Uniform Probate Code is a good reform –but lets use the opportunity for better law enforcement and sane cost-saving administrative reform as well.
