Skip to main content.

Fraud Alert: Scam Text Messages Claiming DMV Penalties -

We have been made aware of fraudulent text messages being sent to individuals claiming to be from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) or the court system. These messages often state that the recipient owes penalties or fees related to traffic violations or DMV infractions and may include a link or phone number to resolve the matter. 

Take these steps to reduce the chances of falling victim to a text message scam:

  • Never respond to unsolicited or suspicious texts — If you receive a message asking for personal or financial information, do not reply.
  • Verify the source — If you are unsure, always contact the DMV through official channels.
  • Call the DMV if you have concerns — The DMV customer service team is available to help you at 800-777-0133.

Please see DMV warning about fraudulent texts: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/news-and-media/dmv-warns-of-fraudulent-te…

Jury Scam alert -

The Santa Barbara Superior Court has received complaints about individuals trying to scam members of the public by pretending to be court officers or officials. The Jury Services office of the Santa Barbara Superior Court does not call citizens to request payments for failing to appear for jury duty. California law does not permit citizens to pay a fine in lieu of jury duty. If you receive such a call simply hang up and, if the scammer persists, call your local law enforcement agency. Learn more about the recent scam warning.

Notice to Jurors:

Prospective jurors summoned for jury service can expect to receive their jury summons in postcard form. Please check your mail for a postcard with important instructions to fulfil your jury service. Visit the Jury Services page for more information.

Estate of Margaret S Bevan

Case Number

SM111459

Case Type

Conservatorship

Hearing Date / Time

Wed, 10/23/2024 - 08:30

Nature of Proceedings

Annual Accounting and Report

Tentative Ruling

Probate Notes:

Appearances required.

After review of all documents filed with the court, and review of the transcript of the hearing on September 18, 2024, the following is provided for the Court at the hearing:

                                             

Formatting/code compliance.  Despite the explanations provided by counsel for the trustees, the accounting is not presented in compliance with Probate Code sections 1060 et seq., because the Code does not allow the format presented to the court in this accounting.  The schedules supporting the receipts and disbursements listed in the Summary of Account are improperly separated into multiple schedules for each category, instead of being presented in a single schedule for each category.  The schedules also reflect co-mingling of events that should be in separate schedules. 

The primary example of this is how the Receipts category was presented in this accounting. Instead of including a simple list of “Receipts” in Schedule A, the accounting contains 3 schedules labeled A-A, A-1, and A-2, of which A-1 and A-2 co-mingle gains on sale of securities (which should have been listed in, and labeled as Schedule B) with all the dividends paid to the trust that should have been in Schedule A alone.

The same issue is present in the Submitted Schedule B, which co-mingles losses on sales and disbursements, and includes reinvestments of dividends in the same schedule.  Reinvestments of dividends should be listed as changes in the form of assets, not as disbursements. (Fiduciary Accounting Handbook (CEB 2024) §7.38.)  Counsel’s description at the hearing does not resolve these issues.

According to section 1061(a) of the Probate Code, the schedules attached to the summary of account should be the following:

(1) The property on hand at the beginning of the period covered by the account, which shall be the value of the property initially received by the fiduciary if this is the first account, and shall be the property on hand at the end of the prior account if this is a subsequent account.

(2) The value of any assets received during the period of the accounting which are not assets on hand as of the commencement of the administration of an estate.

(3) The amount of any receipts of income or principal, excluding items listed under paragraphs (1) and (2) or receipts from a trade or business.

(4) Net income from a trade or business.

(5) Gains on sales.

(6) The amount of disbursements, excluding disbursements for a trade or business or distributions.

(7) Loss on sales.

(8) Net loss from trade or business.

(9) Distributions to beneficiaries, the ward or conservatee.

(10) Property on hand at the end of the accounting period, stated at its carry value.

Unreasonable Trustees and Attorney’s Fees.  Counsel for the trustees offered clarification at the September 18th hearing that the paralegal working for counsel does not perform the bookkeeping functions of the trustees, but instead provides similar bookkeeping functions for counsel in preparation of the accounting to present to the court.  Although this is somewhat duplicative work, the beneficiaries of the trust could object to such expenses and have not. Therefore, the Court should approve the trustee fees, as presented, unless an objection is lodged by the beneficiaries of the trust.

As for attorney’s fees, Petitioner requests $7,725 in attorney’s fees, for 26.5 hours of attorney work an astounding rate of $625 per hour, and 31.1 hours of paralegal work at equally astounding rate of $300 per hour. It is noteworthy that many of the entries appear to be time spent correcting the flaws in the last accounting that caused multiple hearings…time that should not be compensated.  Further, many of the entries were one-word descriptions such as “bookkeeping.”  Not only did those descriptions cause the confusion discussed above, but those descriptions are insufficient to provide detail for the Court to determine the reasonableness, necessity, or benefit to the trust that these entries entail.  This is not an area the Court should rely upon the beneficiaries to object to before taking action.  Therefore, a reduction of attorney’s fees in the amount $2,347 should be ordered.

Appearances:

The court is open to the public for court business. The court is also conducting hearings via Zoom videoconference.

Meeting ID: 161 956 1423

Passcode: 137305

Was this helpful?

Yes No
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Was this helpful?