Audit Report on Estate Asset Identification and Management Practices of the Bronx County Public Administrator’s Office
Audit Impact
Summary of Findings
The audit found that BCPA generally conducted research to appropriately identify decedents’ assets. BCPA also created a procedure manual that sets out its own office procedures as required by Article 11 of the New York State Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act.
However, the auditors found multiple instances where BCPA did not properly oversee the administration of the estates and act in the best interest of decedents’ estates, and because of this, assets were put at risk.
Intended Benefits
The audit identified the need for BCPA to improve its processes for identifying and safeguarding decedent’s assets and maintaining accurate estate records.
Introduction
Background
New York City has one Public Administrator (PA) in each county who is appointed by the judge or judges of the Surrogate’s Court of their respective counties. The PAs are responsible for administering the estates of individuals who die intestate (without a will) or with no heirs willing or able to administer the estate. BCPA administers such estates in Bronx County.
BCPA is managed by a PA and a Deputy PA, and the PA is also authorized to appoint other employees to work at BCPA.[1] The official duties of the PA are governed principally by Article 11 of the New York State Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act (Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act or SCPA), Guidelines for the Operations of the Offices of the Public Administrators of New York State (NYS PA Guidelines), and reporting requirements established by New York City Comptroller’s Directives. In addition, BCPA has its own Procedures Manual.
As the estate administrator, BCPA has a fiduciary duty to the estate that requires conducting thorough investigations to discover and account for all assets and safeguard them; paying decedents’ debts and taxes; accounting for and maintaining documentation to support estate activities and transactions; and distributing estate proceeds to decedents’ heirs.
BCPA’s operations are funded by the City of New York and by estate commissions. The City mainly funds the office’s salaries and other than personal services (e.g., supplies, some contracts, utilities). The amount of estate commission is fixed by statute (SCPA Sections 1106 and 2307). These commissions are calculated on a sliding scale based on the assets of the estate, starting at 5% of the first $100,000 and going down to 2% of any assets over $5 million. These commissions are supposed to be distributed to the City’s general fund (Department of Finance). The BCPA also receives an additional 1% of the gross asset of the estate, which is supposed to be maintained in a suspense account (separate bank account) to be used for necessary expenses of the office that are not covered by City funds. The suspense account can also be used to loan money to the estates for various expenses (e.g., filing fees, death certificates, funeral) to be reimbursed when the estate assets are collected.
One critical component of BCPA’s responsibility is to identify, collect, inventory, and manage or oversee the sale of real and personal property that belongs to the decedents’ estates it administers. BCPA initiates a property search upon notification by hospitals, nursing homes, or medical examiner’s offices regarding a decedent with no known family or beneficiaries. The property search at the decedent’s residence should be conducted by a minimum of two BCPA employees, with subsequent searches performed if necessary.
During the initial search, BCPA officials document the condition of the residence and the decedent’s belongings with photographs, which are to be maintained at the BCPA office, along with an Investigation Report. The Investigation Report, which must be signed by the two BCPA officials or one BCPA official and a witness who conducted the search, includes the decedent’s personal information as well as the initial search information—the date of entry, signature of persons entering the residence, the premise’s address, and the contents collected.
BCPA maintains two safes in its office―one for storing smaller tangible items of the estates’ personal property pending liquidation through sale at auction or private sale, and the other for storing cash/checks prior to deposit in the bank. BCPA retains large items, such as furniture, pictures, and electrical appliances, at the decedent’s residence prior to private sales.
BCPA conducts additional research by sending letters to financial institutions (e.g., banks, pension systems, insurance companies) and searching the New York State Unclaimed Funds database and LexisNexis research engine to identify additional assets that may not be included during the property searches.
BCPA uses CompuTrust, a trust accounting and case management software system, to process and maintain an accounting record of each estate’s financial transactions and assets and to support and manage other aspects of estate administration. However, BCPA also separately maintains hard copy files for all active estate cases and keeps closed estate case files at the office for 10 years before archiving them.
As of June 30, 2023, BCPA maintained a caseload of 2,529 open estates according to its records. Among these, 267 were large estates valued at $50,000 or more; the remaining 2,262 cases were classified as guardianship, nursing home, citation, and small estate cases. According to June 2023 bank account statements, BCPA was managing $93,370,237 in cash balance for the estates. BCPA employs nine full-time staff, including the Public Administrator and Deputy Public Administrator.
Objectives
The objectives of the audit were to determine whether BCPA (1) conducted proper research to identify decedents’ assets, and (2) accurately accounted for and properly safeguarded estate assets.
Discussion of Audit Results with BCPA
The matters covered in this report were discussed with BCPA officials during and at the conclusion of this audit. An Exit Conference Summary was sent to BCPA and discussed with BCPA officials at an exit conference held on July 19, 2024. On August 23, 2024, we submitted a Draft Report to BCPA with a request for written comments. We received a written response from BCPA on September 9, 2024. In its response, BCPA agreed with all recommendations, and provided implementation plans for three (# 3, 5, and 7) of the seven recommendations.
BCPA stated that it “acknowledge[s] and accept[s] the recommendations proposed by the Comptrollers [sic] Auditors; and BCPA intends to aggressively pursue all the necessary steps to implement the same. However, BCPA’s success will partially hinge on its ability to overcome its lack of adequate funding and staffing.”
BCPA’s written response has been fully considered and, where relevant, changes and comments have been added to the report.
The full text of BCPA’s response is included as an addendum to this report.
Detailed Findings
The audit found that BCPA generally conducted research to appropriately identify decedents’ assets. BCPA also created a procedure manual that sets out its own office procedures as required by Article 11 of the New York State Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act.
However, the auditors found multiple instances where BCPA did not properly oversee the administration of the estates and act in the best interest of decedents’ estates. BCPA failed to safeguard decedents’ personal properties by:
- Not properly maintaining inventory records of decedents’ personal property.
- Not following procedures when searching decedents’ residences.
- Not ensuring segregation of duties when collecting and storing estate assets.
The audit found that BCPA put assets at risk of loss, depreciation, and theft. Issues found included missing assets and delays reconciling decedents’ bank accounts. These issues occurred primarily because BCPA staff did not follow the NYS PA Guidelines or the Comptroller’s Directives, and they failed to ensure that existing procedures were enforced.
In one extreme case widely reported in the press, a BCPA investigator was found to have entered a decedent’s apartment alone, without gaining legal access. The investigator did not record his search and did not voucher items properly, and there were subsequent allegations that he stole numerous items, including cash and jewelry. The investigator resigned only after the decedent’s relative saw security footage of the investigator in the apartment and reported the impropriety to BCPA. Auditors found at least one other instance in which the same investigator performed another search of a residence without a second witness present.
These and other issues are discussed in more detail below.
BCPA Does Not Adequately Protect Decedents’ Property
Inadequate Inventory Practices Resulted in Missing Estate Assets
According to Comptroller’s Directive 1, Principles of Internal Control, §5.5, physical controls such as periodic inventory counts and accurate inventory lists must be established “to secure and safeguard vulnerable assets.” Further, “periodic counting and comparison to control records for such assets is an important element of control of these assets.”
However, BCPA did not conduct periodic physical inventory counts of the personal property kept in its safes or maintain a comprehensive and accurate inventory list of decedents’ personal properties. As a result, estate assets have gone missing, and BCPA is unable to ensure that its inventory records accurately reflect all personal property held by its office.
On January 31, 2024, the auditors conducted a physical inventory count of decedents’ personal property and found that items appraised for $17,500 belonging to an estate listed on BCPA’s inventory list could not be located. The items included a pair of diamond earrings, one gold clutch bag, one small gold powder case, one diamond necklace, and one platinum pendant with chain necklace. The PA and Deputy PA stated that they were familiar with the missing items and had searched the office to see if the bag containing the jewelry had been misplaced; however, they could not find it. To date, the items have not been located, and the BCPA staff does not know when the items disappeared.
BCPA also did not maintain a comprehensive and accurate inventory list of all personal property held in its office safe. Auditors found items in the safe belonging to 14 estates that were not included in the inventory list. These items included 11 U.S. Treasury checks with total value of $8,180, five keys to safe deposit boxes, and four money orders with a total value of $137.
The auditors’ review of sampled estate case files showed other examples of BCPA not accounting for all estate property. In one case, a BCPA investigator found two Rolex watches and other jewelry items appraised for $1,737 during an initial search. However, these items were not included on BCPA’s inventory list, nor were they found in the safe, nor were they recorded in CompuTrust as having been sold at auction.
Concerns regarding BCPA’s inventory maintenance increased when the auditors reviewed estate sale documentation and found that items sold at auction had not been recorded in CompuTrust. As stated in BCPA’s Procedures Manual, “The property manager is to maintain a complete list in CUT (CompuTrust) of all estates where the PA is securing jewelry in the office safe. Once jewelry is sold at auction or returned to the family, this list is to reflect the transaction by including name of purchaser and date of purchase or return. […] All estate activity shall be recorded promptly in the case management system [which] shall provide […] an individual inventory of each item of real and personal property of saleable value relation to each estate and location of such assets.”
However, auditors reviewed a sample of 33 estate files whose items were sold at auction and found that the corresponding CompuTrust entries were incomplete for seven of them. Although the proceeds of sales were properly credited to the estate accounts, the items collected from seven of the estates were never entered into CompuTrust.[2] All personal properties belonging to the decedent should be listed in the estates’ CompuTrust account before being sold at auction.
BCPA has a fiduciary responsibility to properly maintain a comprehensive and accurate inventory list of items. Based on these findings, the auditors believe that BCPA is not properly maintaining the decedents’ personal property and that there is a high risk that other estates’ properties may be missing or go missing without BCPA’s knowledge.
On May 17, 2024, BCPA provided auditors an updated inventory list; however, based on the findings, auditors cannot be sure this is a complete and accurate list without conducting another inventory count. Given the evidence that BCPA does not always properly document or maintain all items collected during searches, there are valid concerns that the most recent inventory list is also inaccurate.
Allegation of Stolen Estate Assets
The NYS PA Guidelines requires at least two PA employees to be present during the initial search of a decedent’s residence. Employees must also prepare a detailed report during or immediately after the search. This report must be signed by the employees as well as any other witnesses.
Based on information provided by the PA, and an article published in the New York Post on February 10, 2024, the auditors determined that on December 15, 2023, a BCPA investigator conducted an unauthorized search of a decedent’s residence without another BCPA employee or witness present. During this search, the investigator failed to follow several NYS PA Guidelines and BCPA Procedures.[3]
Specifically, the investigator:
- Entered the premises without obtaining a letter of authority (also known as a “Pink Letter”) to gain legal access;[4]
- Did not voucher the items collected promptly or properly;
- Waited weeks to bring the money and items to the office and did not place cash and items in clear bags provided by the PA’s office, as required; and
- Did not photograph any of the items during the initial search.
Unbeknownst to the investigator, there were active cameras inside the decedent’s apartment that recorded the investigator putting cash and other items in his pockets. Someone close to the decedent complained to BCPA alleging that the investigator had stolen from the decedent.[5]
After learning of this incident, the auditors randomly selected an additional 12 estate cases from the inventory list of personal and real properties to further determine whether BCPA properly conducts investigations. It appears that the same BCPA investigator conducted a search of another residence on April 12, 2023, again without a second BCPA investigator or witness present, as required. (The Investigation Report had only one signature instead of required two signatures.) Thus, in at least two cases, the same investigator conducted searches without witnesses present and without taking any photos or videos documenting the conditions and contents of these residences.
BCPA failed to enforce procedures that are in place to mitigate risk of improper search and/or theft, which is precisely what happened in these two instances. With the retirement of the Public Administrator in April 2024 and the resignation of the investigator, the office may be short-staffed and may not be able to ensure that the policy is followed. It is of the utmost importance that BCPA fill any vacancies to ensure that all decedent residence searches are conducted by two employees. In the interim, BCPA should ensure that an independent witness is present during all searches and that there is video or photographic evidence documenting these searches.
Initial Searches Not Photographed or Recorded
The NYS PA Guidelines requires PA investigators to record searches of decedents’ residences by photograph or video recording. The office uses photography instead of video recordings during searches. However, auditors found that no pictures were taken by BCPA investigators during the initial searches of 12 of 52 estates.[6]
In most cases, the PA investigators conducting initial searches are the first people responsible for preparing an inventory of the contents. In this situation they have access to valuable items before any other record exists, making proper documentation of initial searches a vital internal control measure. In addition, transparency is essential for maintaining public trust, and taking photographs and/or recording video as part of the initial search of a decedent’s residence documents the condition and contents as they are found and mitigates risks of possible theft and misconduct.
No Segregation of Duties for Collection and Custody of Estate Assets
In the above case, the auditors also found that there was a lack of segregation of duties in the number of tasks handled by the investigator. During a walkthrough meeting, the investigator explained to the auditors that he was involved in the search of decedents’ residences, collection of personal property, maintaining the inventory list of items collected, and the sales of large items found in the decedents’ homes.
According to Comptroller’s Directive 1, no one individual should control all aspects of a transaction or event, and key duties and responsibilities must be divided between different staff members. Segregation of duties is a crucial internal control that helps prevent errors and fraud by ensuring that different individuals are responsible for distinct parts of a task. The same person handling inventory collection and preparing inventory records increases the risk of errors and intentional manipulation of data. BCPA’s investigator was involved in both collecting personal property and preparing inventory records, and he was also involved in the sale of large items.
At the exit conference held on July 19, 2024, BCPA officials stated that staff shortages and lack of funding hindered their ability to comply with guidelines and established procedures. The Acting Commissioner stated that they are currently in communication with the NYC Office of Management and Budget regarding the need for additional staff and other resources.
Second Attempts to Access Residences Not Always Timely
According to NYS PA Guidelines, “The search of a decedent’s residence, if feasible, shall be conducted as soon as possible after notice of the decedent’s death is received.” The auditors found that for one estate case, after an unsuccessful first attempt to enter the residence, BCPA did not attempt another entry until almost a year later, after auditors inquired about the status of the case. The estate case was opened for administration on May 22, 2023, and according to file notes, the investigators went to the decedent’s residence on May 26, 2023, but were unable to enter. The investigators failed to follow up until almost a year later, on March 6, 2024.
In response to the auditors’ inquiry into the status of the case, the PA responded that “an attempt at re-no access [sic] to apartment is scheduled to take place in the next month or so.” By not revisiting the decedent’s residence as soon as possible, BCPA did not comply with NYS PA Guidelines and put the estate’s property at risk of loss or theft.
Adjustments to Monthly Bank Reconciliations of Estate Accounts Delayed
According to NYS PA Guidelines, among its banking options, the PA can maintain a “pooled” account at a financial institution and record separate sub account ledgers for each estate. They must employ a system of checks and balances to ensure that funds are properly reconciled, and that interest is posted to each account or sub account on a monthly basis.
The auditors found that BCPA did not make adjustments to estate accounts in a timely manner when deposits were returned by the bank. Auditors reviewed December 2022 and June 2023 bank reconciliation reports and found that seven returned deposits appeared on reconciliation reports from December 2022 to June 2023, but none of these resulted in adjustments to the estates’ sub accounts made by BCPA. For these seven returned deposits, BCPA had reported the checks as revenue on the estates’ accounts; however, when the checks bounced, BCPA did not subtract the amounts.
When auditors asked BCPA why returned checks were not properly adjusted on the estate accounts in a timely manner, BCPA explained that the current staff responsible for preparing bank reconciliation reports lacks the knowledge to make appropriate adjustments. The previous bookkeeper left the office in 2022 and had not properly trained the staff. BCPA contracts a CPA firm responsible for preparing estates’ tax returns and, according to the firm, they have volunteered to train the staff. However, issues persist because of the staff’s lack of accounting knowledge. When BCPA fails to appropriately credit or debit the estate accounts for six months, it increases the risk that interest will be miscalculated and incorrectly posted to the estate accounts.
Recommendations
To address the abovementioned findings, the auditors propose that BCPA should:
- Periodically update the inventory record to maintain a comprehensive and accurate inventory list reflecting the entire population of personal property being held in its possession.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation. - Designate employees who are independent of the inventory process to conduct periodic physical inventory counts of the personal property maintained in the safe.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation. - Segregate duties so that staff involved in the search and collection of personal property are not involved in maintaining the inventory list of such items.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation. - Always document searches through photographs and video footage taken during inspections at decedents’ residences, to ensure that conditions and contents and all personal property are clearly identified with physical evidence.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation. - Ensure compliance with NYS PA Guidelines and BCPA Procedures when administering the estate cases by:
- Searching a decedent’s residence as soon as possible after notice of the decedent’s death is received.
- Ensuring that at least two persons (preferably employed by BCPA) are present with an authorization letter during the initial search. If only one BCPA employee is available, an independent witness should also be present.
- Voucher the items collected immediately.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation.
- Promptly and properly cash checks and credit estate accounts.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation. - Fill all vacancies, including hiring an in-house accountant, and properly train the employee who currently prepares the bank reconciliation to ensure that appropriate adjustments to estates’ accounts are completed if checks bounce.
BCPA Response: BCPA agreed with the recommendation.
Recommendations Follow-up
Follow-up will be conducted periodically to determine the implementation status of each recommendation contained in this report. Agency reported status updates are included in the Audit Recommendations Tracker available here: https://comptroller.nyc.gov/services/for-the-public/audit/audit-recommendations-tracker/
Scope and Methodology
We conducted this performance audit in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). GAGAS requires that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions within the context of our audit objective(s). This audit was conducted in accordance with the audit responsibilities of the City Comptroller as set forth in Chapter 5, §93, of the New York City Charter.
The scope of this audit was January 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023.
To gain an understanding of the policies, rules, and regulations applicable to BCPA’s daily operations, the auditors reviewed the documents that detail the office’s general responsibilities and powers. These included the Guidelines for the Operations of the Offices of the Public Administrators of New York State, the New York State Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act, and Comptroller’s Directive 1, Principles of Internal Control. Auditors also obtained any available policies and procedures from the BCPA office to gain a general understanding of the overall functions of BCPA.
Auditors also reviewed a previous BCPA audit entitled Audit Report on the Bronx County Public Administrator’s Compliance with Financial Reporting Requirements, issued December 28, 2021, to determine whether there were any recurring issues.
To gain an understanding of BCPA’s administration processes, and the roles and responsibilities of BCPA’s staff related to the processing of decedents’ estates and safeguarding of estates’ assets, the auditors obtained BCPA’s organization chart and reviewed its written internal policies and procedures in its Public Administrator Bronx County Procedures Manual. Additionally, the auditors conducted a general walkthrough of the administrative and management process with the Public Administrator (PA) and separate virtual meetings with its staffs, including the office manager, an office assistant, an investigator, an intake case manager, and three other case managers concerning their daily duties and responsibilities in managing estates.
To learn about the computerized data management system called CompuTrust, which is used by BCPA for estate accounting and case management, the auditors obtained the user manual and authorization for accessing data from the system. In addition, to obtain a better understanding of its operating practices and case management process, auditors observed BCPA’s staff entering and obtaining detailed information of the estate cases to and from CompuTrust.
To determine the number (total population) of estate cases that were closed during 2022, and remained active as of December 31, 2022, auditors obtained a report titled Estates Opened_ Closed 2022. A decision was made to extend the scope period to June 30, 2023, and auditors obtained an additional report titled Estates Opened Closed to include additional estate cases started from January 1, 2023 to June 30, 2023. To accomplish the audit objectives, the auditors randomly selected 25 cases from the population of 2,306 active cases and a separate sample of 25 cases from population of 451 closed cases as our initial testing. A random number of active cases was created by an EXCEL formula for each sample date between the period of January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2022, and a random number of closed cases from the list of Estates closed during 2022 for the preliminary review.[7]
To assess the accuracy and validity of computer processed data (Estates Opened _Closed report 2022) generated from BCPA’s CompuTrust system, auditors used above randomly selected samples for the preliminary reviews. Auditors compared decedent’s information, such as the decedent’s name, PA number, and case started date included in the report to its hard copies kept in the estate files, and further compared other important information entered in CompuTrust to the hard copies to ensure that the decedent’s information was accurately entered and any differences were immaterial and made by human errors.
To test the completeness of the data, the auditors randomly picked 50 estate files (hard copies) maintained in BCPA’s file cabinets and storage room, then traced them back to the Estate Opened _ Closed 2022 report to determine whether the computer-generated report was completed and that there were no omissions or over reported cases, and further tested the accuracy of the data from CompuTrust to validate the data.
To determine whether BCPA promptly conducted research to identify the decedents’ assets, auditors used a random sample of large estates and other estates to select an additional 25 active cases from the population of 2,529 to include additional estate cases started from January 1, 2023 to June 30, 2023, and 25 cases from the population of 451 closed during 2022 based on the preliminary result of initial reviews. Auditors examined the documentation in the case files for evidence of works done, including but not limited to, letters from the PA office to banks inquiring about a bank account in the decedent’s name, investigation memos, pictures and debrief reports from the investigators, reports from the LexisNexis Accurint System, and notes from the case managers. Additionally, the auditors independently conducted online searches on the NYS Comptroller’s Office website for any pending unclaimed funds under the decedents’ names and used CLEAR for additional searches to find any other real properties owned by decedents.
To determine whether BCPA properly accounted for and safeguarded decedents’ personal assets, auditors obtained a list of collected personal properties that were kept in BCPA’s safe and the latest report of auction consignment. Then, auditors conducted a physical inventory count and traced the items kept in the safe back to the list of collected personal properties and further reconciled them to the auction consignment report to determine whether the decedent’s personal properties not yet auctioned were in BCPA’s possession. For the items sold on auction, auditors further reviewed the trial balance reports to ensure that the selling proceeds were credited to their estate accounts.
To determine whether BCPA properly managed and safeguarded decedents’ real properties, auditors obtained the lists of real properties owned by decedents, then interviewed with the PA to obtain a general understanding of the process of selling and managing descendants’ real properties. In addition, the auditors reviewed the status of the properties and separated properties into sold and unsold categories. For sold properties, auditors conducted online searches on the City’s Automated City Register Information System (ACRIS) and other real estate websites to obtain the property ownership information and transfer data to determine whether the properties were sold for fair market value and the selling proceeds were properly credited to their estate accounts. For unsold properties, the auditors reviewed whether Letters of Administration were properly applied, and whether BCPA maintained decedents’ properties in a safe condition.
In addition, auditors randomly selected 10 sold estate property cases from BCPA’s House Roster and further reviewed the trial balance reports and real estate closing statements to ensure that the expenses related to maintaining and selling these real properties were reasonable and that proceeds resulting from the sale of properties were appropriately credited.
To determine whether BCPA redeemed decedents’ stocks in a timely manner, auditors conducted a physical inventory count and reviewed the stock certificates stored in BCPA’s safe. Then, auditors investigated CompuTrust to find out whether the estate cases related to these stocks were active, and also looked up the value of the stocks being held.
To assess whether BCPA properly administered its Chase bank account where it maintains the estates’ funds, auditors judgmentally selected two months December 2022 and June 2023 bank reconciliations (the last month of CY 2022 and the most current month of the audit’s scope period), and its trial balance reports to determine whether BCPA reconciled CompuTrust trail balances and bank balances and promptly deposited the estates’ receipts. Auditors also checked whether the bank reconciliations were signed by a preparer and independently reviewed.
In addition, to ensure that BCPA properly secured estate funds in an FDIC-insured bank account and that it has a collateralization agreement approved by government securities as required by the NYS PA Guidelines, auditors reviewed BCPA estate account bank statements to determine whether the balance exceeded FDIC insurance coverage limits. JP Morgan Chase Bank is a City of New York designated bank.
To determine whether the investigators properly conducted the investigation at the decedents’ residences as per the PA’s Procedures manual, the auditors randomly selected 12 of the estate accounts from the personal and real properties inventory lists to examine documentation such as a letter of authority (Pink Letters) from the case managers and signed by PA or Deputy PA for the search, an investigation memo, an investigation report/Debrief Report, any pictures taken by the investigators and whether each time investigator visits is recorded on the log (Run Sheets). In addition, the auditors traced all personal properties identified by the investigator to CompuTrust to ensure the items or proceeds from the sales were properly recorded.
The results of the above tests, while not projectable to their respective populations, provided a reasonable basis for the auditors to evaluate and support their findings and conclusions regarding BCPA’s estate assets identification and management practices.
Addendum
Endnotes
[1] As of April 1, 2024, the Bronx PA retired, and the Deputy PA is currently the acting PA.
[2] The items were on the list of auctioned items and on the investigation reports.
[3] Linge, Mary Kay, Georgia Worrell, and Susan Edelman. 2024. Review of NYC Investigator Caught on Damning Video Rifling through Dead Man’s Items, Allegedly Pocketing Nearly $500 — before Promptly Resigning: “Disgraceful.” New York Post, February 10, 2024. https://nypost.com/2024/02/10/metro/nyc-investigator-resigns-after-hes-seen-on-video-sifting-through-dead-mans-items/.
[4] When investigators conduct an investigation of a decedent’s residence, the case manager is to provide Letters of Authority (Pink Letters) which are used by the investigators to obtain legal access to the premises.
[5] As a result of this impropriety, the PA reprimanded the investigator, who promptly resigned.
[6] The auditors selected a sample of 112 estates cases to review; however, only 52 required that BCPA investigators conduct initial searches of decedents’ residences. The remaining cases were either nursing home cases, guardianship cases, or citation cases that did not require searches.
[7] According to BCPA, prior to 2013 many estate cases might have been closed, but were indicated as active in CompuTrust; therefore, auditors only included the active estate cases from 2013 through June 30, 2023, as total population.