So, you did your Power of Attorney a few years ago and you heard some laws changed. Does it matter to you and do you care? Maybe and maybe not.
The documents changed from my perspective and our 'big-girl' version appointing a first and second is a whoppping 15 pages from start to finish! What happened? Firstly, the signing requirements changed. Secondly, the powers to the attorney have changed. Thirdly, our professional obligations are more sophisticated. Our short form is still 7 or 8 pages.
In the last 3 months, many law firms have been struggling with the Land Title Office to register old and new power of attorneys. The LTO, like us, is still sorting out the new changes and what they mean to the documents. I think we mostly understand it now, but many lawyers and notaries are still having their documents rejected for registration.
My advice to the donor (the one giving the powers away) has not really changed, but my comments to the attorney have. The moment the attorney signs the document, they are bound to it and for that reason, we do not usually have the second or alternate attorney sign the document.
What has changed is that it is a more sophisticated document, requiring more skill, time and review with the clients then it did before. That means our prices are going up too.
But - there is good news on the representation agreements - that's my next blog!
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Monday, November 28, 2011
Challenging and Changing Times of Polygamy
Recently the Supreme Court of British Columbia rendered its prolific decision on the constitutionality of Section 293 of our Criminal Code. The descriptive heading of that area of the Criminal Code is "Offences Against Conjugal Rights". I find that very interesting and ironic and wonder if the powers that be might reconsider the heading.
The internet printed decision is a whopping 277 pages long (by constrast the infamous Court of Appeal Delgamuukw decision was only 253 pages long), and 36 lawyers were present along with 2 individuals appearing for 14 groups or parties over 41 days in court spanned over 6 months. The decision was rendered 1 year and 1 day after the first appearing in court and about 2 years after being first directed to do so. Law students across the country will likely be reading this judgment which, if nothing else, provides a fantastic anthropological study of polygamy in our society - the pros and cons.
What I find more interesting however, is that I have not read very much about the decision in the news, on blogs, or in social media spheres. I assume most of us legal nerds are still wading through the decision before commenting but I can't help but think that it is as if it didn't happen.
Of course, for those who haven't read it, Mr. Justice Bauman, found that Section 293 does offend our basic rights and freedoms, BUT the law remains (mostly intact) because the restriction on our rights is justifiable in our free and democratic society.
Our constitution, unlike our southern neighbours', allows for unconstitutionality to be ok. The beauty, of course, is that as our society evolves over time, what is now an acceptable restriction of freedom may one day not be.
We will know soon enough if this is the end of the question as the appeal deadline is looming in 2 weeks or so. These are interesting times, indeed!
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
The internet printed decision is a whopping 277 pages long (by constrast the infamous Court of Appeal Delgamuukw decision was only 253 pages long), and 36 lawyers were present along with 2 individuals appearing for 14 groups or parties over 41 days in court spanned over 6 months. The decision was rendered 1 year and 1 day after the first appearing in court and about 2 years after being first directed to do so. Law students across the country will likely be reading this judgment which, if nothing else, provides a fantastic anthropological study of polygamy in our society - the pros and cons.
What I find more interesting however, is that I have not read very much about the decision in the news, on blogs, or in social media spheres. I assume most of us legal nerds are still wading through the decision before commenting but I can't help but think that it is as if it didn't happen.
Of course, for those who haven't read it, Mr. Justice Bauman, found that Section 293 does offend our basic rights and freedoms, BUT the law remains (mostly intact) because the restriction on our rights is justifiable in our free and democratic society.
Our constitution, unlike our southern neighbours', allows for unconstitutionality to be ok. The beauty, of course, is that as our society evolves over time, what is now an acceptable restriction of freedom may one day not be.
We will know soon enough if this is the end of the question as the appeal deadline is looming in 2 weeks or so. These are interesting times, indeed!
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Revisiting your estate planning - why now?
It has been a long time since the Canadian landscape of laws on wills and powers of attorney have changed.
However, we recently updated our BC laws on wills, intestacy and probate. (See Bill 28 - not in force yet, for the details). We are now simply waiting for the "system" to be prepared for the changes that the laws now state. The law was passed and the court clerks are still learning what to make of it all. We don't have a date yet, but hopefully it will be soon. These changes are meaningful and will affect some of my past clients.
More recently, our provincial government quietly passed an update to the Power of Attorney laws. The changes are subtle and worth discussing with your lawyer. One reason is for your estate planning. Your attorney can now make certain changes to your beneficiaries in limited situations.
Lawyers have no obligation to contact previous wills and estate planning clients to let them know that laws have changed and their existing "planning" might not be so good anymore.
If ever there was a time to re-visit your estate and capacity planning - this is it.
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
However, we recently updated our BC laws on wills, intestacy and probate. (See Bill 28 - not in force yet, for the details). We are now simply waiting for the "system" to be prepared for the changes that the laws now state. The law was passed and the court clerks are still learning what to make of it all. We don't have a date yet, but hopefully it will be soon. These changes are meaningful and will affect some of my past clients.
More recently, our provincial government quietly passed an update to the Power of Attorney laws. The changes are subtle and worth discussing with your lawyer. One reason is for your estate planning. Your attorney can now make certain changes to your beneficiaries in limited situations.
Lawyers have no obligation to contact previous wills and estate planning clients to let them know that laws have changed and their existing "planning" might not be so good anymore.
If ever there was a time to re-visit your estate and capacity planning - this is it.
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
CMHC Mortgage Rule Changes
Typically in BC the real estate market picks up in March after a quiet grey winter. If you're one of those shopping you have very few days to get your mortgage commitment signed based on the old rules. The rules mostly apply to anyone with higher ratio mortgages.
The maximum amortization for insured mortgages will be 30 years. This is down 25% from a few years ago when it was 40 years! In addition to a decreased amortization period, is the maximum exposure which is now 90% down to 85% of the property value.
There are few other changes worth noting for brokers and realtors, and of course, lawyers:
http://www.fin.gc.ca/n11/data/11-003_1-eng.asp
The effective dates are March 18 for the changes noted above. For other changes it is April 18.
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
The maximum amortization for insured mortgages will be 30 years. This is down 25% from a few years ago when it was 40 years! In addition to a decreased amortization period, is the maximum exposure which is now 90% down to 85% of the property value.
There are few other changes worth noting for brokers and realtors, and of course, lawyers:
http://www.fin.gc.ca/n11/data/11-003_1-eng.asp
The effective dates are March 18 for the changes noted above. For other changes it is April 18.
If your lawyer is not helping you, ask yourself why not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
