California Law On Gifts to Care Custodians
Tightening the Marriage Exemption
California law presumes that gifts by an elder or dependent adult to their care custodian are the product of undue influence and void, unless the undue influence presumption is overcome by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. See Calif. Probate Code §§ 21350 et seq. The law exempted gifts to spouses resulting in some caregivers marrying their patients to claim the exemption. A 2019 change in the law eliminated the exemption under certain circumstances. That is an important new protection for seniors and dependent adults. The Alameda County and California elder abuse attorneys at Evans Law Firm, Inc. represent senior victims of financial elder abuse by their care custodians who use marriage, undue influence, fraud, or other tactics to take property and money from seniors. If you or a loved one is a California senior who has been injured by financial elder abuse, call us today at (415)441-8669.
Limiting the Marriage Exemption
Under the new law, codified at Calif. Probate Code § 21380(a)(4), gifts to care custodians who marry their dependent adult within six (6) months prior to the gift (date of transfer) or to the execution of a testamentary document (i.e., a will or trust) are presumed to be the product of undue influence. In addition, care custodians who marry their dependent adult within six months prior to the dependent adult’s own death do not qualify as an omitted spouse to receive an intestate share of the dependent adult’s estate in cases where the deceased patient’s Will does not mention them. Calif. Probate Code § 21611. Thirdly, the new law provides that at-death asset transfer between spouses, whether by will, trust, beneficiary form, is not subject to the provisions of Family Code § 721 regarding transfers between spouses. Calif. Probate Code § 21385.
What is Undue Influence?
Undue influence lies behind many acts of financial elder abuse, whether marriage is a factor or now. What exactly is “undue influence”? California law defines it as “excessive persuasion that causes another person to act or refrain from acting by overcoming that person’s free will and results in inequity.” Calif. Welf & Inst. Code § 15610.70(a). Courts consider several factors laid out by statute when determining whether a transaction was a product of undue influence:
• The senior’s vulnerability. Evidence of vulnerability includes incapacity, illness, disability, lack of education, emotional distress, cognitive impairment, isolation or dependency, and whether the influencer knew of the senior’s vulnerability. Calif. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.70(a)(1).
• The apparent authority of the influencer. Evidence of authority includes status as a fiduciary (including agent under a Power of Attorney), caregiver, healthcare professional, spiritual advisor, expert, and/or professional credentials as an insurance agent, broker, or financial advisor or other qualification. Calif. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.70(a)(2).
• The conduct of the influencer, including controlling the necessities of life, medication, and care; controlling the victim’s access to family and friends; controlling access to information and intercepting mail and phone calls; using affection, intimidation or coercion; initiating changes in financial affairs; insisting on quick decisions; suggesting purchases or financial changes at inappropriate times and place; and claiming expertise in effecting changes. Calif. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.70(a)(3)(A)-(C).
• The equity (or inequity) of the result: The Courts will consider the economic consequences to the victim, a divergence from prior intent and dispositions of property, the relationship between the value received versus the payment made by the victim, and the appropriateness of the transaction in light of the length and nature of the relationship between the victim and the influencer. Calif. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.70(a)(4). Note however that evidence of an inequitable result without more is not sufficient to prove undue influence. Calif. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.70(b).
Our litigators understand the factors consider in all undue influence cases, especially those involving care custodians, and know how to investigate these cases to gather evidence for trial. Our lawyers pursue all available remedies under California law which include getting the injured senior’s money back, undoing any gifts, transfers or other harmful transaction, voiding legal instruments or contracts procured by undue influence, and securing an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to the injured party for bringing a successful action against the wrongdoer.
If you or a loved one have been the victim of financial elder abuse in Alameda County or elsewhere in California at the hands of a care custodian or any other person contact California financial elder abuse attorney Ingrid M. Evans and the other Evans Law Firm elder abuse attorneys at (415) 441-8669, or by email at <a href=”mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org”>email@example.com</a>. Our attorneys have experience with all types of physical and financial elder abuse, investment and securities fraud and annuity fraud, and nursing home abuse. We can guide your case through a jury trial, or toward an equitable settlement. We also handle qui tam and whistleblower lawsuits, whole life insurance and universal life insurance cases, and cases involving indexed, variable, and fixed annuities.