Family members assete seized because husband was a beneficiary....

[ErikaA11]

I guess my question is legally how were the courts even able to freeze my in-laws account(s) when my husband was only listed as a beneficiary on those accounts. He was not a co-owner. The bank wants to know how the courts even found out he was a beneficiary. My in-laws are still living, so it is not a question of probate or wills. It is scary to think that the courts can do this. They have since removed my husband as a beneficiary do to fear of this happening again.

 

[justalayman]

If he was not listed as an owner, why did the bank freeze the account?

You see, something isn't making sense. If he was not listed as an owner, how they found the account is a mystery. If he was not listed as an owner, how could a court freeze the account. If he was not listed as an owner, why would the bank acknowledge the court order to freeze the account.

As you should see; unless he was somehow listed as an owner, none of that should have happened yet it did. The bank should be able to explain why they froze the account. If they can't, they shouldn't have frozen the account.

So, now that he has been disassociated from the account, if he was an owner, the creditor could still likely be able to seize the account so this may not be over.

Your in-laws should speak with their banker and ask them why they froze the account if your husband was not a co-owner.

 

[LdiJ]

I guess my question is legally how were the courts even able to freeze my in-laws account(s) when my husband was only listed as a beneficiary on those accounts. He was not a co-owner. The bank wants to know how the courts even found out he was a beneficiary. My in-laws are still living, so it is not a question of probate or wills. It is scary to think that the courts can do this. They have since removed my husband as a beneficiary do to fear of this happening again.

So its resolved? They have access to their money again? If so, I would recommend that they consider moving it to another bank or at least a new account at their current bank.

This honestly should not have happened if he was truly only a beneficiary.

 

[aldaron]

Me thinks the son is hiding assets in that account with the parents blessings.

 

[LdiJ]

Me thinks the son is hiding assets in that account with the parents blessings.

While that's certainly possible, I still don't see how the child support agency could connect him with the accounts. The OP and her husband don't have and bank accounts so there wouldn't have been a transfer identified from a bank account or anything like that.

I would really like to know the answer myself simply because I find this disturbing and just a little too "big brotherish".

 

[mistoffolees]

While that's certainly possible, I still don't see how the child support agency could connect him with the accounts. The OP and her husband don't have and bank accounts so there wouldn't have been a transfer identified from a bank account or anything like that.

I would really like to know the answer myself simply because I find this disturbing and just a little too "big brotherish".

It looks to me like OP isn't being clear and I would appreciate a clarification.

My reading of all the contradictory statements is that the account is currently set up with the parents as owners and with the kids as beneficiaries - in the event of the parent's death.

OP is concerned about what could happen IF the parents die. In that case, the account could be seized since one of the beneficiaries owes money for CS. Removing his name as a beneficiary is one solution, but I would suggest that a trust and/or appropriate treatment in a will would be a better way to handle it. The person who owes CS would still lose his portion, but the rest of the kids would get theirs.

 

[LdiJ]

It looks to me like OP isn't being clear and I would appreciate a clarification.

My reading of all the contradictory statements is that the account is currently set up with the parents as owners and with the kids as beneficiaries - in the event of the parent's death.

OP is concerned about what could happen IF the parents die. In that case, the account could be seized since one of the beneficiaries owes money for CS. Removing his name as a beneficiary is one solution, but I would suggest that a trust and/or appropriate treatment in a will would be a better way to handle it. The person who owes CS would still lose his portion, but the rest of the kids would get theirs.

She said this:

I guess my question is legally how were the courts even able to freeze my in-laws account(s) when my husband was only listed as a beneficiary on those accounts. He was not a co-owner. The bank wants to know how the courts even found out he was a beneficiary. My in-laws are still living, so it is not a question of probate or wills. It is scary to think that the courts can do this. They have since removed my husband as a beneficiary do to fear of this happening again.

Isn't this clear that the account were frozen?

 

[majomom1]

She said this:



Isn't this clear that the account were frozen?

That is how I am reading it. It looks to me like the husband was a co-owner.

And, if the account was frozen, wouldn't that stop the account holder from making any change to the account?

 

[ErikaA11]

As I stated before...NO, he is not a co-owner. He was listed as a beneficiary ONLY in the event of his parents death. His parents are both still alive and well. He (my husband)has no other accounts and never has.

 

[stealth2]

As I stated before...NO, he is not a co-owner. He was listed as a beneficiary ONLY in the event of his parents death. His parents are both still alive and well. He (my husband)has no other accounts and never has.

Thing is, that is one of the more likely reasons why this action was taken. It may not have been the intent of his parents - it may have been a clerical mistake. THEY need to speak with their banker and find out the exact details.

Your husband has NEVER had any sort of bank account?

 

[justalayman]

While that's certainly possible, I still don't see how the child support agency could connect him with the accounts. The OP and her husband don't have and bank accounts so there wouldn't have been a transfer identified from a bank account or anything like that.
.

Ah, I have it. Forensic accounting. If the guy was depositing money the CS agency legally had a right to seize, a forensic accountant would have discovered that and viola`, account seized.

I suspect there is a lot of behind the scenes activity by the CS agency to have discovered this but if he did deposit money into the account, that removed mom and dad's claim it was their money alone.

 

[ErikaA11]

But he did not deposit money, withdrawl money, or for that matter even know that this account(s) of his parents even existed. They are livid, they feel like their privacy has been breached. As I said before, he was only listed as a beneficiary upon their death, they are still alive and well.

 

[stealth2]

But he did not deposit money, withdrawl money, or for that matter even know that this account(s) of his parents even existed. They are livid, they feel like their privacy has been breached. As I said before, he was only listed as a beneficiary upon their death, they are still alive and well.

Then, finally, maybe THEY need to get their butts in gear and find out what happened.

 

[justalayman]

Even after death, there is still a PROBATE period if we are talking about Probate, Trust, Wills & Estates.
.

No, if the account is TOD/POD, probate, wills and estates, and anything else concerning the decedents affairs do not affect the situation. The account is transferred to the bene at the moment of death.

 

[LdiJ]

Ah, I have it. Forensic accounting. If the guy was depositing money the CS agency legally had a right to seize, a forensic accountant would have discovered that and viola`, account seized.

I suspect there is a lot of behind the scenes activity by the CS agency to have discovered this but if he did deposit money into the account, that removed mom and dad's claim it was their money alone.

I know what forensic accounting is and I cannot see a child support agency having the expertise or manpower to do the kind of forensic accounting it would take to locate an account that someone was the beneficiary of, even if that person happened to deposit some money into it.

Even with that however, OP has been insistent that he is only listed as the beneficiary, therefore the CS agency, even if they suspected that he had deposited money into the account, had absolutely no right to freeze it...and the bank had no right to allow the freeze either.