Roselvr: If you sent an email, it did not arrive. I had the phentolamine test about a year ago. Since it has to be done in an OR setting, that may be why more drs. don't do it. This was a double-blind test. The nurse administering the drugs thru IV injection was the only one who knew what drug was given and when. I can't remember the name of the other drug they used. Since I had a remission, I did not have to go thru the nerve block procedure. As it is, there are five nerves that control the foot and they run down the spine against the vertebrae. Hitting the wrong nerve could have left me with more damage than what I had. I'm so thankful that I didn't have to go thru it. Since pain is a subjective issue and your pain level is different from another's, doctors are cautious when it comes to treating it, especially back pain. With RSDS, the brain reroutes nerves and blood supply around the injured area. That's why it is so difficult to treat. Once the brain goes into repair mode, it can rewire other simple injuries. It is a very strange situation. Upon reflection, my ankle was the second episode for me. The first was after a breast biopsy and I thought the pain I experienced for months was from scar tissue forming. Both surgeries required metal implants of some sort. The biopsy required a wire to be implanted prior to surgery to mark the abnormal tissue. With the bunion surgery, I had a steel pin projecting from the instep into the bone they severed to shorten the big toe. I had to deal with that for seven weeks. I am senstive to all metals except gold so I wonder if that triggered the rewire response. As for the situation here, the population has thinned out dramatically. The caregiver's last day was last Friday. Dad flew to Montana the next day. It is so quiet around here now. I have a ton of work to do to get the place back in shape, but I don't have to deal with "them" anymore. No more insurance or employer paperwork, no more go-fer runs to the pharmacy or dr. appts 35 miles away. I may have one casualty : my tv is on the fritz. Probably not used to being off so much! Had two appointments with different real estate agents to try to put the property on the market again. One had to turn down the opportunity. Don't know the reasons yet. The other is waiting to set an appointment with my infamous vanishing brothers. To top it off, Lil Bro almost blew himself up when a can of black powder he uses for his home-made cannons blew up in his face. I don't know the full extent of his injuries. I offered to help and he got nasty so I removed myself from the situation. I wonder if I'm living in a soap opera! H&K's to all! Carol

I don't know. I poked around the internet a little and found a couple of items that referred to bills of assurance. They sound a little POA-ish, but are not the same thing. The first thing I found was a city council meeting in which someone asked the mayor of Jacksonville what a bill of assurance was. It says, "Mayor Swaim related that a Bill of Assurance is an agreement among the individuals in a subdivision and the City does not have enforcement authority. He clarified that the enforcement belongs to the residents and is not an authority given to City government." The other record I found was from a court case in Arkansas in which an issue related to a bill of assurance was being challenged, and one of the things it noted was that "any restriction on the use of land must be clearly apparent in the language of the asserted covenant." Both in Jacksonville and in Arkansas, the issues seemed to be related more to zoning and structures being built on properties than on creating a common area thing, like a security gate. Also, neither one actually cost the property owners anything--neither issue had to do with paying assessments or dues of any kind. And I think that Christopherh is right in saying that they can't just decide to create their own little gated community on their own-- I think the city would have to give permission. So the bottom line is that I still think that your neighbors are trying to get away with something that they can't actually do. I would still do what I said originally: do nothing if they don't send you something official on paper. And if they send that, then I would get a lawyer to send them a letter saying that legally they can't do it.

murredduo Here is a thought to avoid simply walking away and having the lender foreclose. Simply give the lender the house. Have a deed prepared transferring it the lender as the new owner. Record the deed. By certified mail send the deed and the keys to the lender. Check with a real estate lawyer in RI to see if you can do that. Had it work here. The contract is if you don't pay, they can take the house --- so short-circuit it and give it to them. After you sign the deed and record it and send it, you no longer own it - the lender does and there is no one to foreclose against. (1) Thought you would qualify for the Medicare Savings Program through Medicaid - means the Medicaid program pays your Part B premium and picks up the deductibles and copays. Also your Part D (prescription plan) should have 0 premiums so long as you pick certain plans (make sure your drugs are covered by the plans) and you copays will be in the $5 or $6 range. (2) If you are getting a lump sum, paying off the credit cards and buying a small house with no mortgage is an excellent plan. (3) BUT - and here is a big 'but' - the idea of putting it solely in your wife's name (and your son ....a minor?) is not a good idea. Statistically 65-73% of people who become disabled end up divorced. The sudden poverty of disability destroys many marriages - even long term strong marriages have trouble withstanding poverty due to a spouse's disability. The better way would be to (a) Keep a life-interest in the property for you and (b) have your wife and son on the deed as the owners of the estate in the entirety interest with a reversion to you if they died before you. (That means you have the right to the property while you live and when you die, it goes to them and if you die first, it is theirs.) You really really really need to talk to an estate planning lawyer about how to title any property. If you have a life interest, no creditor will go after it -- can't sell that. If it is just tilted to you and your wife straight up and your wife is on the deed at all, they can file a lien against your interest in the new home but will have trouble foreclosing to collect on the lien because they have to give half of the money from a sale to her. If your son is on there, they only get a 3rd - not worth the trouble unless you all went to sell the house. (4) I seriously doubt that your wife can get a credit card in her name. She has not been on the mortgage and she doesn't have - and has not had - any income. She has to have a credit rating in HER name - not yours - to get a credit card. To have a credit rating that means she has had to have been on car loans or house loans to show she pays her bills. She also MUST have a source of income - your SSDI will not count for her income. About all she can get in the way of credit cards until she has an income and credit history would be 24%++ interest cards with annual fees of $75 -120 a year and credit limits of $300 -500. It will take her 4 - 5 years to even get up to a $2500 with credit limit increases. That is why not working, staying home and not having an independent financial life is a seriously bad idea for women. Something happens and they have to show a credit history or income to do something and they don't have it --- they do NOT exist in the financial world. Bottom line is she really needs to get a job -- it can be McDonalds, clerk in a gas station, retail clerk etc working part-time but work she must. If she does not work, she can not get credit for credit cards or loans. She also needs to be named on all accounts - like car payments etc (utilities aren't good enough for a credit rating). BTW having her on your accounts - 2nd card for a family member thing - does NOT get her a credit rating. The account is not in her name. Might be better to pay off the cards, keep them in your name and lock them in a drawer for emergencies. Just use them enough to keep them from getting cancelled for non-use like this month pay the electric with the card and them immediately pay off the card out of your income with the amount budgeted for electric. --- When the kids are all 18, your household size will drop to 2 people for the purposes of food stamps and a $25000 SSDI income will put you ABOVE the income limits for the Medicaid savings program and Medicaid and Food Stamps with a household of 2. (Assuming that is all straight SSDI and does not include dependent's benefits for minor kids.) Now when she is 65, imagine trying to pay for Medicare B for 2 people ($122 per person - $244 a month), Part D prescription plan ($45 a month per person -$90 per month), Medigap to cover copays but not deductibles ($135 per person -$270 per month) and the Part A and B deductibles (around $1447 per year per person - $2894 a year.) That will be $604 a month in just premiums and over $10142 for all premiums and deductibles (and not including drug copays.) That will be nearly 41% of your $25000 income leaving you only $1238 a month for food, dental & vision, clothing utilities, cars etc. Now if as I suspect that the total SSDI of $25000 includes dependents benefits for minor children - anywhere from 50% to 80% of what you are getting is for the kids - that changes when they hit 18 (or finish college at 21-22). So then when they are 18 (or until out of college at 21-22), your SSDI will probably drop to maybe $13888 -16666 a year or an average of $1272 a month. With just that income she could stay on Medicaid and you could stay in the Medicare savings program and both on Food stamps. At 62 she can draw a spousal benefit - but will take hit of around 25% less because she is not full retirement age (around 37% of what you get). At 66 she would get the full spousal benefit of 50% of what you get - and even if your SSDI drops because of the kids turning 18, her spousal benefit would send your income back up to over the limits for Medicaid, Medicare savings program and food stamps. Say she waits until age 66 to draw the spousal benefit * if the $25000 is just your SSDI and no dependents, then your combined income would be $37500 -- and you have to pay all the Medicare premiums, copays etc for both of you out of that. You are way over the income limit for Medicaid, Medicare Savings and Food Stamps of 135% of FPL for 2 people (right now $FPL is $16020 for 2 so multiple it by 1.35) * if the $25000 is, say, 65% higher than it would be because of dependents. when they are over 18 and she is 66, then your combined income would be $22727 - again above the income limits fore Medicaid, Medicare savings and food stamps --- and you have to pay all the Medicare premiums, copays etc. ($25000 divided by 1.80 = SSDI without kids + 50% of SSDI for her spousal benefit = $22727 vs Medicaid income limit of 135% FPL for 2 people of $21627) It is situations like this that cause what is called a "Medicaid divorce" so that people can keep their eligibility for Medicaid and get medical care because they can not afford the costs of other insurance. When you are planning, you have to think about how it will be in 10, 15 or 23 years. If you die before she reaches age 60 she has ZERO income. Nothing nada zip. Your SSDI will not continue except for any kid under 18 and then for the kids it would only be around 75% of what your BASE SSDI (not including extra for the kids) and are getting right now. At 60 as a widow she could get 75% of what your SSDI is (without the additional for the kids.) At 66, as a widow she would get your full base SSDI (assuming no additional for minor kids.) Right now you are at maximum income and benefits - Medicaid, food stamps, Medicare Savings Program etc --- kids leave SSDI will probably go down and she reaches the age for spousal benefits it goes up......and it can all affect whether or not you have to ante up the Medicare costs for 2 people. ANd again she needs to work if for no other reason than to stash what she makes in a retirement account for the future. If you have 2 adults and 3 minor children in the house, Medicaid cut off eligibility would be 135% of Federal Poverty Level - $28440 is FPL for 5 people. 135% = $38394. She could make $1000 -1050 a month (or $220 a weekly pay period) and not affect Medicaid & Food Stamps. That would mean $11000 or so to stick in the bank. If she does that for 22 years, you all would have saved $242,000 plus any interest. (Note her gross - not after-tax -earnings can't be anymore than that $1000-1050 in a month or Medicaid eligibility is affected for that month. If paid weekly, there will be 4 months with 5 pay periods and if paid every 2 weeks, there will be 2 months with 5 pay periods. Those are the typical pay periods for unskilled work - only kind she can get .She would just have to watch how many hours she is working a month - can't be full time) Bottom line is when you became disabled, life as you and she knew it ended -and that included the luxury of staying home with the kids and never working in a job. They can go to public school and she really needs to get a job. She is going to have to step up and get a job to help keep the family provided with electric, clothes and other basics. Living below poverty level (where you all are) is really hard. By getting a part-time job, she can ease that a lot - like increasing household net income by over 42% without effecting Medicaid and Food Stamps. Add in what would she do it if you died before she was 60 (some 16 years from now) and she only got $900 or so a month in SS benefits for the kids under 16 or got ZERO because there were no minor kids? Job - now - anything will do even stocking shelves. You are gonna need that money down the road. BTW adult kids living with you do not count in your household for figuring Federal Poverty Level.

Momcat, if you go to Google, advanced search, you would choose the search terms estate planning with your state after estate planning, like I did for estate planning NJ. It gives you a lot of information to start the search. Also on that page is a link to other states, look in the middle column under Regional Resources. What she may need is a special needs trust, so have her look into that and the different types to get familiar with them before her 1st meeting so she won't feel so lost. She should also start making lists of what she knows about each of them, any history of what each came into the marriage with is a good place to start. She will also need to find out banking information, especially if the wife had an account with her son as a joint owner or power of attorney. It's possible that she did and the son is managing it. Since she's been sick for a lot of the marriage, it's my guess the son took care of this years ago to make sure that if something happened to his mom, he would already have access to it. I just reread your 1st few lines, and wonder if what you said would be taken into consideration: My SIL father remarried after being widowed. They were both in their 70's and he wouldn't let her drop a dime of her own money after they were married. They have been married 10 years now but for the last 7 years she has been ill, so he has paid for 24 hour home nursing for his wife so they can continue to live in the new condo she just had to have. My SIL says that he has spent most of his savings on this home care and worries if there will be funds to take care of him if need be. Both were in their 70's when they married, so they both most likely had their own stuff... Did they both have a house that they sold? Does she know who contributed what to the condo when they bought it? From what was written, it sounds like the husband used his money from the sale of his house to buy the condo, and used just about all of his income & savings to care for the wife. I'm not sure if I am reading this right, but is the SIL looking to have the wife's family take over all of the wife's care and not lay claim to any money from the condo as she wants to use the funds for her father's care and not the wifes? I can see how she would be nervous about not having enough money to care for her father, but the wife would be well cared for since the father paid for everything, which could have allowed the wife to stash a lot of money. It may not be legal but I think many people remove items when cleaning out a house of a parent or relative who has moved into a nursing home. My cousin, brother and I had to clean out our aunt's home, filled with over 30 years of accumulated things, last year. She had a coin collection, lots of silver, some antique furniture plus a great deal of junk. In this case we agreed on the property division. In the OP's case it sounds like the SIL may not know exactly what was taken. After my aunt died, my cousin who was the executor had to give an accounting to the attorney. We (relatives) agreed that the things didn't have any value when in reality they must have been worth at least $10,000. We were happy with the division of property so why add more money to the estate so that the attorney could get more since he was receiving 5% of the total value. In this case, it sounds like the OP's SIL may be looking for ways to recoup some of the money that her father has spent during these years. I'm reading that she is trying to find more money for her dad and when the relatives took the stuff, things happened so fast, she never thought to not let them just take stuff. She may need to use the taken items as leverage, I don't know. Surely if they were the wifes before the marriage, if they were getting a divorce, most couples walk away with what they brought in. In this case, since both parents need care, it may be a different story and the items may have a value. If someone has a trust, only if they have inserted language entitling the trustee to be paid a fee (assuming it's an individual and not a court-appointed professional trustee), will the trustee be able to be paid a fee. Otherwise, it's merely reimbursement for expenses, the same as someone with power of attorney. This is one reason why I don't happen to believe that revocable trusts (what most know as 'living trusts') are necessarily a great idea for people, unless your attorney carefully explains the disadvantages to them, rather than just snowing people with the specific advantages they can offer. My dad had a revocable trust. I've had about 6 attorneys read it, each one said there was no need to even use this. There were other ways to protect the assets without getting so involved. I do not recommend anyone to go with the 1st attorney they interview, but to speak to a few to find out the different ways that this could be done to make sure the right way is picked. If I knew then what I know now, this is what I would have insisted my dad do, instead of going with the 1st person. What she does now will have an effect on everything until their estates are settled. If there is anything left over, you want to make sure it goes to the person the deceased wanted it to go to.