By THOM SENZEE Contributing Reporter Changes in the rules that regulate conservatorships for incapacitated individuals have some San Fernando Valley attorneys facing new pressure on their practices and feeling uncertain about the future of elder law, estate planning and certain types of probate cases in California. Designed to reduce opportunities for fraud among those appointed to be the guardians of society’s most vulnerable, the changes have been taking effect incrementally since shortly after November 2005. That was when the Los Angeles Times published an investigative report about problems with some conservators. The Times found that some so-called private professional fiduciaries (PPFs) had so taken advantage of their positions as to leave their wards “neglected or isolated.” In fact, after The Times report, a Riverside professional conservator, or PPF, was convicted of outright stealing from her clients’ estates and is still serving time behind bars. However, some attorneys are worried that now people who really need the help of a court-appointed conservator may not get it under the new rules. “This is a very important issue that has slid under the radar,” said Alice Salvo, principal attorney at the Law Offices of Alice A. Salvo in Woodland Hills. “As a result [of the new, more stringent rules], the filings of conservatorships is way down.” However, the fact that fewer people are requesting court appointments as guardians does not necessarily mean fewer are doing the job, according to another local attorney who specializes in elder law. From David Coleman’s perspective, the new laws will create more ad hoc guardianships, those operating completely without oversight. “They’ve really gone out of their way to make things difficult,” Coleman said. “People will try to run an incapacitated person’s life without a court’s supervision as a result.” The number of new conservator petitions has dropped from as many as dozens per week to fewer than a dozen in L.A. County since July 1. The drop is attributed to a newly implemented licensing process, greatly increased reporting and accounting requirements, mandatory classes for existing conservators and a fresh emphasis on investigations. Most conservators are not professionals. Rather, they are relatives watching over the assets and well-being of family members who are often elderly parents or grandparents. Salvo believes the new rules are onerous to familial guardians, a belief she thinks will give rise to an increase in the professional-guardian industry the very one targeted by the Los Angeles Times in its investigation. For now, however petitions from PPFs are down. “Ultimately, you will see more professionals, because there’s so much more record keeping and more reporting to be done,” Salvo said. “A lot of lay people are not capable of being conservators now.” Coleman, a partner at the Encino law firm of Oldman, Cooley, Sallus, Gold, Birnberg & Coleman believes the confluence of a bad economy and what he sees as poorly-conceived changes in the law will have just the opposite effect. In fact, he believes his business will suffer as a result of the new rules. “Anytime you add complexity, it becomes more cumbersome to clients,” he said. “That added complexity also has added layers of new expenses, which of course are likely to raise the issue for many people of affordability.” Coleman proposed several hypothetical scenarios to demonstrate what he sees as major shortcomings in the new laws. He wonders how a conservator would go about submitting a warranty claim on a new plasma-screen television for her ward if the store or manufacturer asks to see the original sales slip, because now the court must keep original receipts in its custody. “Now we have to give original receipts and bank statements for every year, and the court must keep them in storage,” he said. “Obviously, the idea is to prevent receipts and bank statements from being doctored. But most people get their bank statements online now. What about Photoshop? How are they going to tell? And how much is all of this new storage space going to cost?” Indeed, cost is the pink elephant in the room. As with many legislative mandates nowadays, the so-called Jones Bill (actually a set of four separate bills), which revamped conservator laws from top to bottom, did not allocate any money to help courts enact its provisions when it passed. Yet, Los Angeles Superior court Officials are undaunted. “We’re trying to prepare our people to do a good job,” said Los Angeles Superior Court supervising probate attorney, Sandy Riley. Riley believes there will be challenges implementing the new codes, but feels certain the task will be manageable. She is confident that, in the end, the charges who rely on conservators will be better protected thanks to the new laws. “There’s another component to this,” Riley said. “The Court Investigators Office now goes to a facility or a home to see that care is adequate. There is now a set of eyes that looks at people, and we have a fairly aggressive office of court appointees counsel, which is just another check and balance to make sure conservatees’ interests are being served.” Riley noted that relatives are not required to become licensed fiduciaries in order to act as guardians of family members’ estates. “A family member is not required to be licensed,” she said. “But there is substantially more reporting and accounting, as well as education even for relatives.” Riley’s office offers classes to conservator appointees at the court’s downtown location. “Since we’ve added additional requirements for conservatorships under the probate code, even for family members, we now offer two free trainings once a month,” she said. “One is a broad overview offered 1 to 4 p.m. the first Monday of each month. You can just show up.” The training clinics are designed to help conservators prepare for the new rules,especially those relating to accounting, which require a full reporting to the court of expenditures, disbursements, investments, etc. at the end of the first year after a conservator is appointed. After that, reports must be submitted to the court no less than once every two years. Those and other new requirements are sure to hurt business says David Coleman “I think the legislature acted rationally, just not correctly,” he said. “Unless you know for a fact that these changes are going to work, it may be for naught.” He says only family members who may also be CPAs will find the job doable.