Can we expose bk467p191?       Where did the money go?      

       

 

Note 7

"7. Jean M. Nader and Sheila O’Connell-Shevenell agreed that the vehicle should be disbursed [$8,000.00] to Anthony M. O’Connell in addition to his 1/3 share of the remainder of the estate." (Accounting entanglement $8,000.00 with gift - estate tax interplay)

Car

Comments

The accounting entanglement created in the estate using the car is contrary to the 1/3 each share stated in the will.

My sisters innocent Jean Nader and Sheila O'Connell sold me [Anthony O'Connell] their share of the vehicle for $1 each in May of 1992. I sent the original receipts from this sale to Edward White. The vehicle is not in the estate after it is sold. I do not understand why Edward White reported the vehicle as if it were still in the estate on October 16, 1992, and used it to create another accounting entanglement.

The accounting entanglement using the vehicle was brought into the estate and used as a wedge and a new accounting entanglement using the car was created in the estate and carried forward.

Differentiate

It is necessary to differeniate between forcing the family to sign bad documents such as the following:

"AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
DATE: _____
Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"
(Note: This creates an accounting entanglement by giving me $8,000 more in distribution than my two sisters which conflicts with the 1/3 each distribution instructions in the Will.)

and making it:

  • 1993.02.02   (Edward White to Jean Nader, in part)
    "As a matter of fact I am precluded as an attorney from dealing with an adverse party who is represented by counsel. I have no intentions of having him dictate the duties of the fiduciaries. If his counsel wishes to discuss anything, I am certainly available.

  • 1993.11.05   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, in part)
    "From inception of this estate including the time that his sisters gave him the vehicle and I merely asked for a receipt so that a proper accounting might be filed, Mr. O'Connell has tried one stunt after another to disrupt the flow of administration, notwithstanding my repeated attempts to calm him down.

 

It is impossible to stop the accountants from taking control of the family and it's assets if one member of the family trust their instructions or has been intimidated into compliance.

The accountants render the family powerless.

(1) I do not understand why the accountants did not resolve the accounting problem with the vehicle when Jean O'Connell would have asked them to resolve it; why the accounting problem was carried over to her estate. The nature of the car problem, like the bond problem in 1986, is still unknown.

1991.01.18   (Anthony O'Connell to Jean O'Connell)
"I could not resolve your title problem with Sovran Bank in a follow up phone call. I was reminded that they could not permit me access to your financial information, but they did agree to send you a complete financial history of the loan for the van. 
If it is not resolved to your satisfaction, I suggest that you call your attorney and power of attorney, Mr. Ed White.
Love, Anthony O'Connell "

(2) Why the nature of the original entanglement is still unknown. Why the accountants create new problems by not answering essential questions about the vehicle ("What is your decision as to who gets the van and how much will it costs?"), and place these new problems between family members ("I do not know what your problem is, but in the future, please address all correspondence to Mrs. Nader."), and make the family the family appear at fault? Why won't the accountants say what they plan to do? Why withold needed and asked for information? (pdf)

(4) Why the accountant's do not recognize that the three beneficiaries resolved the new problems by two of the three beneficiares selling their share of the vehicle to one beneficiary.

(insert my letter to sisters with two receipts)

  • I ask Edward White who will get the car and how much will it cost but he does not answer the questions.
  • Edward White drafts two documents for the vehicle. The first document is open ended and could be interpreted in many ways. The second document creates an accounting entanglement.
  • Edward White has innocent Jean Nader send me the first document for my signature. I question Edward White about his first document but he does not answer the questions.
  • I draft my own document for the vehicle and sign it and send it to Edward White. He does not respond.
  • I, assuming something is wrong with the document, ask another attorney how I should handle this. He advises me that each beneficiary who does not get the car sell their share of the vehicle to the beneficiary who does get the car, for one dollar. The beneficiares carry out this advice and I send the signed receipts to Edward White. He does not respond. I assume that the problem is resolved.
  • But note 7 shows that Edward White used his document that creates an accounting entanglement.

Summary

  • This accounting entanglement using a vehicle is a carryover from 1991 that Jean O'Connell wanted to resolve it but she and I did not have the power to resolve it.

  • Edward White brings up the issue of the car problem now that it is in the estate.

  • I ask Edward White who will get the car and how much will it cost but he will not say, and that my future correspondence should be to Jean Nader. An obstacle is created and planted between family members.

  • Edward White drafts a document for the vehicle that could be interpreted in several ways and instructs innocent Jean Nader to have me sign it. l question Edward White about the document but Edward White does not reply.

  • I draft my own document for the vehicle and send it to Edward White. Edward White does not reply.

  • I, assuming that there must be something wrong with document I drafted ask our previous family attorney, E. A. Prichard, how to draft a proper document. E. A. Prichard's advice is for my sisters to sell me (or whoever is going to get the vehicle) their share of the vehicle for one dollar and my sisters agree.

  • I draft a receipt for the vehicle for each sister and give each one dollar and they sign the receipts. I send the original receipts to Edward White (This was a mistake, I should have kept the originals and sent Edward White copies). Edward Whire does not reply. I assume the problem is resolved.

  • On the same day that my sisters sign my receipts and I pay them one dollar; the day that my sisters and I meet for the dedication of our mother's garden on May 5 (?), 1992) , innocent Jean Nader shows me a second document that Edward White drafted for the vehicle and asks me to sign it. I do not sign it. I don't remember what it said and I do not have a copy. I do not believe it was the same document by Edward White that creates an accounting entanglement that only my sisters signed.

    • "AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
      We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
      DATE: _____
      Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"
      (Notet: This creates an accounting entanglement by giving me $8,000 more in distribution than my two sisters whichs conflicts with the 1/3 each distribution instructions in the Will.)

  • Afterward I see Note 7 for the vehicle with the accounting entanglement and realize that the accountants did not recognize the family sale for one dollar.

  • Afterward I realize that I had fallen for the two attorney trap. Going to another attorney to resolve the problem created by the first attorney puts the family in the two attorney trap. Edward White makes it appear that our family is divided by my going to another attorney. I don't understand why the accountants makes it appear that our family is divided by my going to another attorney to resolve an obstacle created by the accountants.

    • 1993.02.02   (Edward White to Jean Nader, in part)
      "As a matter of fact I am precluded as an attorney from dealing with an adverse party who is represented by counsel. I have no intentions of having him dictate the duties of the fiduciaries. If his counsel wishes to discuss anything, I am certainly available.

    • 1993.11.05   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard, in part)
      "From inception of this estate including the time that his sisters gave him the vehicle and I merely asked for a receipt so that a proper accounting might be filed, Mr. O'Connell has tried one stunt after another to disrupt the flow of administration, notwithstanding my repeated attempts to calm him down."

  • Reminder: The end issue is where did the money go. The preceeding is cover. The preceeding creates confusion and conflict that covers the accounting trails and the document trails and makes our family appear as the source of the confusion and conflict.

"RECEIVED of the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, one 1988 Plymouth Station Wagon of a value of $8,000.00"

I asked Edward White about it but he did not respond. So I wrote my own document and signed it and sent it to him. My document read:

"April 21, 1992    Today I received from the estate of Jean O'Connell, one 1988 Plymouth Station Wagon, VIN IP4FH4037JX221930.    Anthony M. O'Connell (seal)"

Edward White did not accept my signed document or explain why. I assumed there was something wrong about it so I asked another attorney, E. A. Prichard, how to draft a proper document.*** My second document read:

"It is my decision as a beneficiary of the estate of Jean O'Connell, that Anthony O'Connell may purchase the 1988 Plymouth Van now in the estate, VIN lP4FH4037JX221930, for one dollar. 
Name   Jean Nader (seal)    Date May (5), 92"

"It is my decision as a beneficiary of the estate of Jean O'Connell, that Anthony O'Connell may purchase the 1988 Plymouth Van now in the estate, VIN lP4FH4037JX221930, for one dollar. 
Name   Sheila O'Connell (seal)   Date 5-9-92"

My sisters signed it and I gave them the one dollar and sent the original from each sister to Edward White. I never heard from him about it so I assumed that the problem was resolved. But Edward White had my sisters sign a document for the vehicle that did create an accounting entanglement. Edward White's document read:

"AGREEMENT CONFIRMING DISTRIBUTION OF VEHICLE
We, Jean M. Nader and Sheila O'Connell-Shevenell, hereby confirm that one 1988 Plymouth Van was distributed to our brother, Anthony M. O'Connell by the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell, and that we hereby confirm and agree to that distribution. We further confirm and agree that this distribution shall not be charged against Anthony M. O'Connell's share of the estate and that the remaining net proceeds of the estate after settlement of all debts and obligations shall be divided in three equal shares.
DATE: _____
Jean M. Nader (seal)        Sheila O'Connell (seal)"
(Comment: This creates an accounting entanglement by giving me $8,000 more in distribution than my two sisters whichs conflicts with the 1/3 each distribution instructions in the Will.)

I don't understand why Edward White ignored my non-accounting entanglement document and used his accounting entanglement document for the court record.

"7. Jean M. Nader and Sheila O’Connell-Shevenell agreed that the vehicle should be disbursed to Anthony M. O’Connell in addition to his 1/3 share of the remainder of the estate."

 

Notes

*I don't understand why Edward White waited until after Jean O'Connell died to work on her still unidentified car problem.

**I was not aware of the entanglement tool at this time. I assumed that some form of damage was going to be done and my best guess was that I was going to be charged $8,000 for the vehicle.

***I do not understand why Edward White later used my going to another attorney to make me appear as the adversary when it was to resolve a problem he created:

1992.03.30   (Anthony O'Connell to Edward White, copy to Jean Nader, in part)
"What is your decision as to who gets the van and how much will it costs?"

1992.04.04   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, copy to Jean Nader, in part)
"Question 2. Paid. It is not my decision as to what it will cost you, though I have been informed that you know full well. ....
I do not know what your problem is, but in the future, please address all correspondence to Mrs. Nader."

1993.02.02   (Edward White to Jean Nader)
"As a matter of fact I am precluded as an attorney from dealing with an adverse party who is represented by counsel. I have no intentions of having him dictate the duties of the fiduciaries. If his counsel wishes to discuss anything, I am certainly available.

1993.11.05   (Edward White to E. A. Prichard)
"From inception of this estate including the time that his sisters gave him the vehicle and I merely asked for a receipt so that a proper accounting might be filed, Mr. O'Connell has tried one stunt after another to disrupt the flow of administration, notwithstanding my repeated attempts to calm him down."