By Anton L. (Tony) Janik, Sr.
Registered Investment Advisor
Certified Fiduciary License #20283
2. Is the Advisor’s Approach Objective?
Your advisor should avoid all conflicts of interest and work only in your best interest at all times. Does the advisor have referral fee arrangements with anyone?
The surest way to avoid a conflict of interest is to work only with an independent advisor who is compensated on the basis of a professional fee rather than a commission for the purchase or sale of stocks, bonds, insurance or annuity products that would be used to implement the investment strategy for your ward’s portfolio.
The advisor’s fees may be charged on an hourly basis or as an annual percentage of the assets he manages for you. It’s ok to ask about how the advisor is compensated!
3. Did the Advisor Ask About Your Ward’s Investment Needs, Objectives and Risk Tolerance?
A good advisor will ask you personal questions about the needs and circumstances of the ward. Your answers to these questions will enable the advisor to design an Investment Plan that will meet your ward’s needs for asset protection and income production. The advisor will also be able to design the Plan to meet your wards tolerance for investment risk and investment time horizon.
These are some of the Questions the Advisor Should Ask You on Behalf of the Ward
• Can you provide me with a statement showing the ward’s current investments?
• May I see a copy of the latest income tax return?
• Does the ward have any extraordinary medical expenses?
• Is there a capital loss carry forward?
• What is the ward’s current income and net worth?
• How much income will you need from these investments?
• What are the investment goals?
• How long do you plan to keep these funds invested for the ward?
• Do you have any unusual investment requirements?
• What is the annual rate of return that you expect from the ward’s portfolio?
• How much of a decline in the value of the ward’s portfolio can you tolerate during a 12-month period?
• Are the ward’s assets held as separate or community property?
• Does the ward have an up-to-date estate plan?
• Are the ward’s assets held in trust?
• Has the title been changed to the name of the ward’s trust for all assets that should be administered under the terms of the trust?
Welcome!
Thank you for visiting our official BLOG for the Arizona Fiduciaries Association. We look forward to your participation and feedback.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Congratulations to Heather Winters-Bull
The AFA wishes to congratulate board member Heather Winters-Bull. She has recently been appointed to the Estate Administrator position with the Sun Valley Group.
You may contact her at:
Heather Winters-Bull
Estate Administrator
The Sun Valley Group, Inc.
480-726-9581
http://www.sunvalleygroup.com/
Arizona Care Management
480-633-1831
http://www.azcaremgt.com/
2050 South Cottonwood Drive
Tempe, AZ 85282
Fax 480-726-9582
You may contact her at:
Heather Winters-Bull
Estate Administrator
The Sun Valley Group, Inc.
480-726-9581
http://www.sunvalleygroup.com/
Arizona Care Management
480-633-1831
http://www.azcaremgt.com/
2050 South Cottonwood Drive
Tempe, AZ 85282
Fax 480-726-9582
Friday, January 15, 2010
Former AFA President, Roger Coventry, Joins Childers & Berg LLC
Childers & Berg is excited to announce that Roger Coventry joined their management team as the Director of Estate Services on December 1, 2009. As past President of the AFA, Roger has many friends and acquaintances within the fiduciary industry and the AFA, please feel free to contact Roger at Childers & Berg.
Childers & Berg, LLC
11134 W. Wisconsin Ave
Youngtown, AZ 85363
(623) 972-3819
(623) 977-0352 Fax
RCoventry@childersandberg.com
Childers & Berg, LLC
11134 W. Wisconsin Ave
Youngtown, AZ 85363
(623) 972-3819
(623) 977-0352 Fax
RCoventry@childersandberg.com
Case Law Update: Conservatorship
Division Two of the Arizona Court of Appeals held surety bond could be held liable for illegal acts of conservator prior to issuance of bond holding that guardians and conservators are responsible for pursuing assets wrongfully taken from protected person even if it means suing themselves for misappropriated assets. The Court awarded prejudgment interest against the surety but declined to award attorney’s fees to estate of protected person stating the surety had not taken an unreasonable position, the surety made good legal arguments and the law was unsettled in Arizona. Pacheco vs Hartford, 2 CA-CV 2007-0135, issued September 22, 2008.
Find this case and others Here
Find this case and others Here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)