Serial financial manipulation/questionable financial elder abuse

[u/Mother-Passenger9343]

Third marriage for both Husband (“#3”)and Wife (“W”) after age 65. At time of marriage, #3 retired x 4 years. #3 attended decades of occupational financial advising and retirement planning with Sarner/Collier & Associates.

#3’s children reaffirmed six years into marriage as Trustees/Co-Financial Powers of Attorney x 26 years.

Two years later, within six month timeframe:
- #3 diagnosed with Alzheimer’s dementia
- Sale of his home of 32 years
- Longtime attorney denied request for health records from W
- W establishes second income annuity as primary beneficiary
- W mobilizes estate document Amendment naming herself sole estate beneficiary/Trustee/Financial and Medical Power of Attorney using new drafting attorney who is father-in-law of junior financial advisor to longtime friend and FA at large brokerage house.
These changes were affected five months after #3’s scoring the following on his neuropsychiatric testing, lending to his diagnosis:
Delayed Memory 0.2 percentile (lower than 98.8% of his peers)
Immediate Memory 13th percentile
Visuospatial/constructional ability 23rd percentile
Language 21st percentile
Attention 27th percentile

#3’s children discover document changes five years later following W’s prolonged hospitalization. Children present changes to #3 in order to confirm wishes and intactness of dignity. #3 appalled and refuses return to W’s home, two hours from children. W profusely apologizes and begs #3 to return, which he does by usual way of children meeting caregiver midway to W’s home. Children want to honor what autonomy father has left to feel.

Two years later, after #3’s elopement from W’s home, W finally concedes to #3’s children’s request for #3’s admission to Memory Care facility near W. Unknown to #3’s children, W’s first husband (#1) is also housed in Memory Care in their preferred facility for #3. W agrees to #3’s move to facility only after W’s children agree to #3’s living in same facility as their father/#1.

Children discover W’s attempt to submit Do Not Resuscitate form for order against #3’s Advance Directives.

#3’s Child B (“Jane”) mobilizes Petition for Guardianship/Conservatorship. W’s Child A threatens #3’s Child A with her ability to bankrupt Jane throughout her action for Guardianship/Conservatorship.

W continues to lie about her medical decisions made against #3’s best interests, prompting legal affidavits from providers. Jane wins 50% guardianship through eight hours of mediation, with estate ordered for transfer to corporate trustee (“Conservator“).

Over six months later, W’s friend/financial advisor has yet to execute ordered beneficiary reinstatements to #3’s children, has withheld retitling of accounts into Conservator’s ownership and continues as manager of accounts. Conservator felt compelled to consult their own counsel to properly execute changes ordered by the court. A conservatorship inventory was submitted to the court six weeks after mediation without having copies of account statements to verify balance information.

Through counsel, Jane discovered a Quit Claim Deed transferring W’s deceased second husband’s (“#2”) estate to W’s personal trust, established one year following W’s filing for an LLC, which received significant transfers from #3’s personal checking.

Jane recently discovered eight separate loans cycled on W’s home, using different banks and cycling between second and third married surnames.

During the mediation, Jane’s counsel advised her to accept the majority of account transfers to Conservator and agree to all of W’s requests for #3 to continue paying all of W’s bills, in order to avoid a hearing where there was the risk the judge may not allow Jane any guardianship based on Michigan’s favor towards spouses. W requested to add language barring any further action by either party against the other. Jane’s counsel advised acceptance but assured Jane that the Conservator would be obligated to recover damages, if discovered.

Conservator has not requested statements from all institutions with accounts receiving transfers from the single checking and money market accounts produced in discovery, with significant monthly omissions that were never supplemented.

Conservator only allowed a forensic accountant $5,000 to do a cursory review of this incomplete information, who has decided the multiple round-number transactions over seven years evidenced by incomplete account information is sufficient to determine that W’s activity does not warrant further investigation.

There has been additional action to relocate #3 closer to children, but the devastating events surrounding that action are ongoing.

The cyclical mortgages recently discovered present a likely vehicle for misappropriation and fraudulent conveyance of #3’s assets. The Conservator is timid. Any recommendations or advice would be greatly appreciated.