SUBJ: Warning: Transfer-on-Death (TOD) Deeds and Insurance Gaps
 
As you may recall, a TOD deed is helpful as an estate planning tool because it is a revocable deed that you record before your death that only takes effect at your death, and it passes the property to the persons you named as grantees on the deed. For many people, a house is the only asset that would require a probate, as all their financial assets are in accounts that have beneficiary assignments. A TOD deed is much like a beneficiary assignment for a financial account.
 
Recently, I have learned about a case that now makes me very reluctant to use a TOD deed, and I am writing to make you aware of the issue. Although the case occurred outside Oregon, I believe the results would be the same here.

In that recent case, an uncle used a TOD deed to leave his house to his niece. When the uncle died, his niece was unaware of the need to get the house insured in her name immediately. And, as luck would have it, the house burned down a few days later.
 
The uncle’s insurance company got out of paying for loss of the house because their policy ended the minute title to the house transferred from the uncle to the niece – which is to say, the minute the uncle died.
 
Thus, the uncle’s insurance policy lapsed as soon as the TOD deed took effect, and the house was instantly uninsured. The niece didn’t know to get insurance in effect immediately and so when the house burned down, the niece got ashes instead of a nice check from the insurance company that was collecting premiums until the uncle’s death.
 
[The actual case opinion from Minnesota is below if you care to read it.]

Although this was in the Midwest, I have done a little reading, and I now think all insurance companies would act the same way everywhere. Thus, when you die with a TOD deed recorded, your homeowner’s policy on that house will lapse.

In short, I understand it, if you use a TOD deed, you are at risk for this loss of insurance coverage if the person who gets your property under the TOD deed doesn’t immediately (a) know of your death, and (b) get a new policy in place.
 
Now, in most cases, the people you leave your house to probably will know when you’ve passed on – but it’s not a sure thing, for many possible reasons. None of us know when we will die, or where our grantees will be, or how long it will be from the time of our death until word spreads. The people we left our property to might die before us, or at the same time or be overseas or otherwise out of touch for a long time. We can’t foresee all the ways that this insurance gap could arise, especially with people living longer and longer, sometimes with failing memories.
 
Regardless of the many ways this gap in insurance could occur, it is a big risk. So I have decided to avoid writing new TOD deeds for clients until I find some way to protect against this risk. Although I really liked the simplicity and low cost of TOD deeds, I don’t like them enough to keep using them until we find a way around this problem.
 
If you too are concerned about this (as I think you should be), you should revisit your estate planning and reconsider the decision to use a TOD deed as part of your estate planning. You should consider whether the ease of the TOD deed is worth the risk that a gap in insurance coverage would occur at your death, leaving you uninsured against what can be a catastrophic loss.
 
Remember that probate is nothing to fear, especially if you have used beneficiary assignments for your other assets. A one-asset probate for a house or land is usually not too complex or too costly.

For some people, revising their will and revoking the TOD deed might be appropriate. For others, putting the real property into a trust might be appropriate. (Or selling the property and banking the money.) There are many options.

The important thing is that you take some action to ensure that your property doesn’t fall into this coverage gap. Unoccupied houses have a greater risk of loss than occupied houses, so the risk of a coverage loss with a TOD deed increases just when you need the coverage the most.
 
If you want to discuss this issue with me further, please contact my office to arrange a phone appointment.                                      
                                                                                 s/ John Gear

The author of this piece says "almost never" -- I will go further and say that should be "never" for consumers.

That is, unless you are a professional auto rebuilder, stay far away from salvage title/rebuilt title cars and trucks, period. 

They will be nothing but grief for you.

Why You Should Almost Never Buy a Salvage or Rebuilt Title Car
While a salvage or rebuilt title doesn’t necessarily mean the car is a death trap, the bad usually outweighs the good.

It may be tempting to buy a car with a rebuilt title because of its low price point, but what’s tricky is you don’t always know the extent of the damage that gave it a salvage title to begin with. 


“It’s very hard to determine if a car is back to pre-accident condition,” says Jack Gillis, executive director of the Consumer Federation of America. “I recommend just staying away from those types of vehicles.” 

Sometimes a rebuilt car can look shiny and new on the outside, but still have some serious internal problems. Flood damage is a prime example of this. Cars that have been damaged in a flood are especially dangerous to drive because it can take months or even years before the water corrodes the electric and mechanical systems. You should always ask an experienced mechanic to inspect a rebuilt car before deciding to make the purchase, but even then, it’s a risky move. 

“If a vehicle was in a flood, you can’t fix it. It’s not rebuildable. If it was wrecked so badly that it was salvaged, chances are the frame or unit body was compromised,” says Shahan. “So if you’re in a subsequent collision, it’s not going to give you anywhere near the same protection that you would’ve gotten if it was an undamaged car.” . . .

Much more at link here.

Please Help Consumers Like You --
Check Your Credit Report for Errors and Let Consumer Reports Know What You Find

Dear friends and allies,

The National Consumer Law Center is partnering with Consumer Reports to finally hold powerful credit reporting agencies accountable for errors, and we need your help.


At least one in four of us probably has an error in our credit report. And the COVID-19 financial crisis has made that bad situation even worse. So what’s the big deal about a little mistake on your credit report? It can cost you serious money. Getting a credit card, renting or buying a home — even landing a new job — can all hinge on the accuracy of your credit report.


Can you check your credit report for errors, and let Consumer Reports know what you find? 

You’ll be a key part of a groundbreaking Consumer Reports’ people-powered research project, where thousands of consumers like you use their credit report to finally hold these powerful credit agencies accountable!

CLICK HERE TO GO TO Check Your Credit Report


 We’ve made it super easy for you to do. Click the link and you’ll be taken to a page where we show you how to check your credit report for FREE. When you do, be on the lookout for basic mistakes such as a name misspelling or wrong address, to bigger mistakes like late payments that weren’t late, or even someone else’s debt on your account.
Checking your credit report is critical for your financial future. In one case, a couple almost lost out on a home mortgage because the husband’s birth date was off by one digit. Another consumer told us a ticket he got while driving a rental car was sent to the wrong address, causing it to go into collections and knocking 80 points off his excellent credit score.


Checking your report also will help us reform how the major credit reporting companies — Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion — do business. Already we know that people with monthly student loans postponed under the COVID-relief package are seeing missed payments on their credit reports, a clear violation of the law. Yet it’s almost impossible for them to get those damaging delinquent payments removed.


Check your credit report for FREE here. It will help you, and help us, make sure no one’s finances are wrecked by the credit agencies mistakes!


The more people who tell us what problems they find, the better armed we are to take on the credit bureaus. Please share this with friends and family so they get the reminder to check their credit reports, too!

Chi Chi Wu
Staff Attorney
National Consumer Law Center

Lack of True Penalties Exacerbates Wage Theft in Oregon
January 20, 2021
By Janet Bauer Oregon employers face almost no downside to stealing the wages of workers, given that the boss rarely pays a penalty when caught. Although the state may compel employers to pay the wages owed, in only 1 percent of wage claims found to be valid by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) do employers wind up paying a penalty for their wrongdoing.[1] The fact that employers risk little when they violate labor law exacerbates the problem of wage theft in Oregon.

BOLI rarely penalizes employers for wage violations; employers rarely payWage theft is a persistent and widespread problem.[2] Wage theft is a catchall term for the many ways employers fail to pay workers the wages they have earned, such as failing to pay overtime, requiring people to work off the clock, and stealing tips. By one estimate, it costs low-paid workers nationwide over $50 billion annually.[3] In Oregon since 2006, workers have submitted claims for unpaid wages worth more than $50 million.[4]

Despite the pervasive problem that is wage theft, BOLI rarely imposes penalties on employers as a way to deter misconduct. When a worker suffers a wage violation, they may file a claim with BOLI. Of the wage claims filed over the period 2013-19, the Bureau found most of them — 3,703 in total — to be valid. Even though the agency has the authority to impose penalties in addition to requiring payment of wages, it does so rarely. BOLI levied penalties on just 16 percent of valid claims over the six-year period.

(Read the rest at link: https://www.ocpp.org/2021/01/20/lack-true-penalties-exacerbates-wage-theft-oregon/?blm_aid=28620)

Download PDF

The Center for Justice & Democracy at New York Law School (CJ&D) released today Lifesavers 2021: CJ&D’s Guide to Lawsuits that Protect Us All. The study describes over 125 lawsuits that have led to major safety improvements benefiting large numbers of people, spanning well over 50 years. According to co-author Emily Gottlieb, CJ&D’s Deputy Director for Law & Policy:

“Lifesavers shows how lawsuits serve an invaluable purpose by causing manufacturers, employers, polluters, hospitals, law enforcement and other entities to stop their dangerous or negligent behavior, and gives them the proper economic incentive to become more safe and responsible. These cases protect us all, whether or not we ever go to court.” 


Said co-author Joanne Doroshow, CJ&D Executive Director, “The report’s release coincides with several national crises: the COVID-19 pandemic, the rise of violent hate groups and the use of excessive force by some law enforcement. It shows how civil lawsuits have helped mitigate each one of these crises by holding wrongdoers legally and financially accountable. Its release also comes as a time when special interest lobbyists are pushing for legal immunity laws in states around the country. Lifesavers stands as irrefutable evidence that immunity laws are dangerous. Lawsuits save lives, and we as a society would suffer tremendously if our civil justice system were weakened in any significant respect.”


According to the report, “The study includes some cases recently brought against COVID-19 super-spreader establishments,” which led to safer workplaces. Other cases have resulted in “the redesign or recall of a product, a changed hospital procedure, safer law enforcement, a more secure public area, the bankruptcy of a hate group, the protection of sexually-abused children or a cleaner environment.” 


The study explains that when it comes to the recent rise of violent hate groups, “it is everyone’s hope that the criminal justice system will function properly to hold accountable those responsible for current violence and insurrection. However, it should be noted that in the past, more was needed than criminal prosecutions to weaken hate groups. Particularly in the 1980s and 1990s, civil lawsuits by hate crime victims were used effectively to bankrupt several white supremacists and Nazi organizations, while also directly responding to the financial needs of victims. These cases demonstrate that civil lawsuits can sometimes provide the only effective means to put dangerous hate groups out of business.”


Said Doroshow, “The civil justice system is one of the great achievements of American democracy and an important safeguard of freedom. Unlike other, weaker democracies which have abolished the civil jury, our system, thus far, has largely withstood the assaults. The jury’s roots are deeper here. The American colonists fought the Revolutionary War in significant part over England’s repeated attempts to restrict jury trials. Over the last 40 years, the civil justice system has been battered. But as Lifesavers shows, after 245 years and just as the nation’s founders had hoped, the system still works.”


A copy of the study can be found here: http://centerjd.org/content/lifesavers-2021

lifesavers2021f2.pdf
File Size:	1934 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

---

thehill.com/opinion/finance/529675-after-5-decades-of-private-credit-reporting-its-time-for-a-change?rnd=1607626407

After 5 decades of private credit reporting, it's time for a change | The Hill
Amy Traub and Chi Chi Wu, Opinion Contributors

* * *

Credit reports contain far too many errors for something so vital to our economic well-being, with one in five consumers having an error, and one in 20 having a serious error that would affect their ability to obtain credit or its pricing. Consumers are frustrated by the Kafka-esque system devised by the credit bureaus to process disputes, which often blocks them from getting relief. Credit reports and scores are used for inappropriate purposes, such as employment, insurance, and even immigration (their use is required as part of the Public Charge Rule.) Most critically, credit scores reflect and perpetuate thorny racial disparities, playing a role in financially entrenching America’s original sin.
* * * 
Many of the problems with credit reporting stem from its very nature. An oligopoly of three private companies governs our financial reputations, trading in and profiting from our data. We are captives because we cannot opt out of the system. Instead, creditors and other companies are the credit bureaus’ customers and constituency. There’s not much incentive for credit bureaus to create a system that works better for consumers, including disadvantaged communities. We can see the upshot of this dysfunction where credit reporting issues are often the number one source of complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, including during this pandemic.

But there is a way forward. Among President-elect Biden’s economic proposals is an innovative plan to establish a public credit reporting agency, based on policy developed by Demos. This solution recognizes that access to consumer credit is a public good and would promote that public good by establishing a public institution to replace the private companies that now control credit reporting. A public credit reporting agency or registry would also be an effective way to build economic power for Black and Brown households by putting equity at the center of its decisionmaking and enabling them to exercise greater control over their economic lives. . . .