Given that I do a pretty good bit of estate planning and elder law in my real job, I read with great interest this article from today’s New York Times.  It concerns lawsuits being filed by people who lost a great deal of money who claim that they should not be responsible for their actions because they are old. Not because they were mentally incapacitated, not because they were the victims of fraud, not because they were intimidated, not because they were forced to do so, not because they were taken advantage of by charlatans - but simply because they were old.

The subject of the article is 81-year old Joseph Pyle:

    Eight years ago, when Robert J. Pyle was 73 years old, he had about $500,000 in the bank and owned a house in Northern California worth about $650,000. He was looking forward to a comfortable retirement.

    Today, at 81, he has lost everything. Mr. Pyle, a retired aerospace engineer, now lives in his stepdaughter’s tiny, mountainside home in a room not much larger than his bed.

    By his own admission, Mr. Pyle willingly made every decision that led to his financial problems. He gave away large sums to people he thought were friends, and then, in need of money, sold his house at a deep discount to the first person who offered to buy it.

    Even so, he claims in a lawsuit that he should be compensated for some of his losses for a simple reason: he is old, and should not bear the full responsibility for his choices.

    “I still make pretty good decisions about most things,” said Mr. Pyle, who shows no signs of dementia. “But for others, I guess I’m not as sharp as I was before, and people take advantage of that.”

    For his part, Mr. Pyle wants to have it both ways — protection when he makes mistakes, and the right to make all his own decisions.

    “It would be complete overkill to take away my independence,” Mr. Pyle said. “So I made a few mistakes. Twenty-five-year-olds make mistakes all the time, but they don’t lose their right to make decisions. I helped build this country. I deserve more dignity that that.”

When you read the whole story, which is fascinating for me, both on a personal and professional level.

On the human side, it’s hard not to feel sorry for Mr. Pyle.  After his wife died he met a 40-something single mother who talked to him (she says there was a romantic relationship, he denies it) and made him feel good again, and seemingly took awful advantage of him.  He started giving her loans because she was struggling. He also bailed out her and her boyfriend when they got in criminal trouble and also co-signed loans for her and ended up paying creditors a few hundred thousand dollars on her behalf.

Then with his resources running dry and much of his savings used he refinanced his home to pay off his debts, but soon found he could not afford the new mortgage.

Finally, forced to sell his house, Mr. Pyle accepted the first offer he got (from an 18 year old mortgage broker) that he knew was about $110k less than value.

Unfortunately, Mr. Pyle’s story is more common than you might realize. I’ve often seen people his age, especially widowers who just lost their wives of many years, suddenly start spending money on the first person they meet after their spouse dies. Sadly for Mr. Pyle, the person he met only seemed to be interested in his money.

Many people Mr. Pyle’s age also will not share their financial situation with their children, either out of stubbornness or embarrassment, even though the children have their best interests at heart. And in many cases they may be totally adrift because the deceased spouse took care of all the bills. I’ve had clients in their 80’s who never wrote a check or paid a bill in their lives, and barely know where they have bank accounts.  Almost nothing breaks your heart as much as seeing just how sad and really lost these people are.

However, I don’t think that Mr. Pyle’s claims in his lawsuit should be given any merit whatsoever. By his own admission he knew exactly what he was doing every step of the way, and because of that he should bear the consequences of his decisions, no matter how heartbreaking.

If such a claim were allowed to succeed, it would create a slippery slope, and allow simply being over a certain age, to be a defense to poor decision making.  It also would diminish and take focus away from dealing with the real problem - people who purposely and criminally take advantage of the elderly.

Just a note of free advice - if you have an elderly parent or a relative that you are concerned about being taken advantage of, try talking to them about the subject and getting them to an elder law attorney or a reputable financial advisor. However, if they are stubborn or refuse to go and are competent to make their own decisions, there’s really nothing you can do.