Will This Elected Official Once Again Kill This Great Bill?
We start today with a story about how one publicly-elected official, NCC Register Of Wills Ciro Poppiti, has led a years-long effort to quash what I think is a great bill. The bill in question is HS1/HB 147 (Harris).
Here’s an excerpt from an AARP Op-Ed as to what the bill would do:
AARP Delaware supports House Bill 147, which would create a transfer-on-death deed for our state. The document allows a homeowner to transfer his/her home to a loved one when he/she dies simply by naming a beneficiary (just like we currently do with cars, pension proceeds and retirement accounts). These deeds have a track record of working well in other states. They have been used in the U.S. for more than 35 years, and 30 states currently allow them.
By completing a TOD deed and filing it with the recorder of deeds, a homeowner can ensure that his/her home goes directly to a person he/she chooses, avoiding the complexity of probate or the expense of a trust. Such a deed can also help prevent fraud because it requires notarization and must be publicly recorded before a property owner’s death, added safeguards not present with a will.
Delaware’s Registers of Wills in all three counties who, let’s face it, stand to lose business were the bill to pass, have joined Ciro in opposing the bill. This from DJ Cox, Kent County Register Of Wills:
I have opposed this bill from the beginning—both in principle and in practice—due to its vague and troubling language.
This bill will do harm to the weakest among us. It disproportionately affects people without means, stripping them of protections they cannot afford to replace. Even more concerning is that the bill appears to override the clear intent of legally established wills and trusts, undermining personal autonomy and the right to decide what happens to one’s estate. This bill is a gateway to fraud and abuse. That is something that can never be overlooked and it clearly is being overlooked here.
Rather than promoting justice or clarity, HB 147 introduces confusion, threatens vulnerable individuals, and undermines long-standing legal protections. I urge you to stand against it and prevent the harm it will cause.
Um, that appears to be, what’s that word, untrue. From a Delaware AARP advocate:
The truth is the exact opposite. TODDs are a tool to increase autonomy, prevent fraud, and ensure property passes down with a clear title. TODDs were created as a way for people of modest means to have a simple, affordable way to make sure their home transfers to the beneficiary they choose, without the delays and expense of paying a lawyer or going through a long, costly probate process.
Cox says the language is “vague and troubling”, but that’s not true. HB 147 is based on a model bill written by the Uniform Law Commission.
Harming people without means? TODDs have a proven track record going back 35+ years and they are currently used in 32+ States (see attached). Cox and Poppiti say it undermines autonomy, but in reality, it gives people more control–an easy way to retain control of their property until they die and then pass it on to the person they choose without the necessity of paying an attorney or going through the delay and expense of probate.
Now, you may ask me, why am I so worked up about this? Glad you asked. The answer is because I have now experienced Ciro in action. I first referenced his involvement with this bill a couple of weeks ago, but made a point of not mentioning his name or his office. Within a day, I got the first of several e-mails from him, saying, and I’m paraphrasing, ‘Hi, Steve, just got back from deployment and I have the funniest story to tell you where your name came up. Give me a call’. Now, I may not be the smartest overpriced pencil in the drawer, but I just couldn’t help but wonder about the sheer coincidence of this e-mail, especially when I can’t recall the last time I’d ever spoken to him. Twenty years, perhaps? So, I didn’t respond.
Last week, I get a, wait for it, registered letter from him. Some excerpts:
Hope all is well, friend.
I have tried calling and texting you to tell you a funny story involving you when I was deployed recently to the Middle East with the US Army.
Also, it has come to my attention that there are (yet again!) baseless, ugly rumors being spread about me, namely:
1, That I am vehemently opposed to HB 147, Transfer Of Death Deed.
2. That the reason I am opposed is that this bill will affect me financially.
The idea that I would ever allow money to influence how I engage in public policy is disgusting and repugnant to me.
Fair enough. He claims that the bill has technical defects and that:
I have met with the main sponsor of the bill, Majority Leader Harris. The meeting was very positive. Based on that meeting, I was asked to draft changes which could address my concerns. I have done so–and circulated it to the Bar to solicit feedback.
OK. I will ignore the fact that Poppiti has crusaded against this bill (and its predecessors) for years. I will ignore the fact that the Uniform Law Commission has successfully drafted model statutes that have been adopted in about 30 states, and that Delaware’s Uniform Law Commissioner has drafted this bill.
Ciro has now drafted proposed changes to the bill. Perhaps they’ve been incorporated into the substitute bill, perhaps not. What we will learn today during the House Administration Committee hearing, scheduled for 3 pm, is whether Ciro has been truly sincere in his concerns about the bill, or whether his opposition is rooted in other motives.
I invite Mr. Poppiti to respond here. He can take all the time (and words) he likes. After all, I’d just love to hear that funny story he wanted to share with me.
Im surprised this bill isnt getting heavy push back from the lawyer community also as this would limit their trust work.
The TODD was developed to assist people who are of modest means but own property. According to a 2024 AARP Study, and a study in Cook County, IL (Chicago) 2023, about half of all seniors and 70% of seniors who make $30K a year, OR are Black, OR are Hispanic do not have valid Wills. When that happens, their property is passed along “by Law,” and this means you can end up with 16 or more owners of a piece of property, all of whom have to agree what to do with it, all of whom must have good credit if they are to get a loan to fix up the place to sell it, none of whom have outstanding debts that might put liens on the property, etc. These are the properties you see boarded up in Urban areas and elsewhere, degrading the entire neighborhood. In the Cook County study, it was determined that the Transfer on Death Deed was the solution to tangled titles, because it costs less than $100, vs. hundreds for a deed or thousands for a trust. So, while you are correct some estate attorneys don’t like it (the subject of this thread), the fact is those attorneys are not serving these clients now. In places where TODD has been enacted, people who use attorneys continue to do so, but now some who can’t afford an attorney now have the option of leaving their property as they see fit. An estate attorney with a mind for business can capitalize on this new client base, offer to do TODDs very cheaply, and then upsell the client to other things like Powers of Attorney, Medical powers of attorney, etc. The TODD can be done with or without an attorney. Email me at eugenia.thornton@kentcountyde.gov if you want to review the studies I mention. Also, I can send you a very recent news article describing how a crooked notary in Philly “stole” 21 of these homes, pretending to be the deceased, selling the properties and she got away with it for a long time because the actual owners do not live in the homes, and can’t afford to fix them up or don’t have the agreement of everyone on the deed to sell the property. (PA wants to use Probate, they do not have a TODD. In Cook County where they have recorded more than 30,000 TODDs, they find the neighborhoods improving and generational wealth being created. That study concluded that MORE TODDs need to be recorded. The TODD will be very good for Delaware, just as it has been well received in more than 30 other places. It needs to pass this year, its been held up for two legislative cycles (four years) already.
Thank you! I loved your presentation before the committee.
Let’s hope that the Speaker deigns to put it on an Agenda soon…
You are very welcome. I’ve spoken with a dozen recorders, fraud department attorneys, owners of title companies, TODD needs to pass but disinformation has been spread about it which legislators believe. The thing is, it’s a deed, not a Will. It does not even go on Register of Wills inventory list. Their role is limited to accepting the death certificate, reviewing the affidavit, and informing the tax collector where to send the prooerty tax bill. Just like when one spouse dies, leaving the property they jointly own to the surviving spouse.
Also, while Ciro submitted some ideas, they were not adopted in the bill (at least so far). He wanted to change it so a lawyer would have to be involved in drafting it (and isn’t being Estate Attorneys his family business when he is not deployed???? hmmmmm). That change would defeat the purpose of the bill since it is for people who are not using attorneys now. His second amendment was to have the property not be allowed to transfer for 8 months. Again, this is essentially probate. It prevents heirs from selling the property right away and creating generational wealth. Plus, two states tried it that way, and both of them rewrote the law to take that provision out. The only change to the law that was adopted–and I don’t believe the idea came from Ciro–was to have two witnesses, and these witnesses would be notarized. This was because there were some concerns expressed that someone in a nursing home may be persuaded against their will. But, again, someone in a nursing home who is under the influence of a person trying to scam them, will be able to make a new will (which requires two witnesses but not a notary) or to sign the property over via a Quit Claim Deed (which requires a notary, but not witnesses). Scammers would prefer the Will, since it is not public until executed, by then, the elderly person is dead and it is hared to establish the truth. (per the ABA up to 3% of Wills are contested, compared to infinitesimal number of Deeds that are hacked.) There are some states that have the witnesses, so I did not object to it, but I do not feel it makes the TODD any more “safe,” because a scammer will sign as one of the witnesses and his friend will be the other witness, or they will just make up names and sign and there is no way for me to tell when I record. I would be accepting the Notarial Certification prima facie, as I will do without the witnesses. My research says TODDs are not vehicles for fraud; Quit Claim Deeds and homemade wills are. TODDs actually prevent fraud by moving the property quickly into new hands, letting someone live in it, etc. vs. it sitting vacant while “by law” heirs (tangled titles) prevent anyone from doing anything with the property. As I said earlier, one notary in Philly was recently changed with forging signatures of 21 properties owned on paper by deceased people in “tangled title” situations. Cook County does not see fraud as a characteristic of TODDS and they have done more than 30,000 of them in the last decade. Cook County sees TODDs as the solution, not the problem.
It increasingly looks like Ciro’s proposals would only benefit–people like Ciro.
Time to put this bill on an agenda.
Ciro’s “concerns” have been reviewed by the AARP attorney on two occasions and by the Uniform Law Commission attorneys. He has been told why these concerns are not a reason to hold up the bill. My personal research does not support holding up the bill. The Cook County Study does not support holding up the bill. Discussions with owners of Title Companies in Cook County do not support holding up the bill. Hon. DJ Cox’s concerns about “what if one person inherits the house but not what is inside the house” are not a reason to hold up the bill since that situation can (and does) already happen with by law or with a will, too. One wonders why these concerns continue to be expressed to legislators as if they are new, when the answers have been provided repeatedly to the Registers of Wills. HB 147 is supported by Camp Rehoboth, several Hispanic organizations, several Black organizations, and organizations supporting urban housing. It is opposed by those who make money off of probate.
More importantly, why do we still elect Row Offices in general???
We got rid of a couple of them. Prothonotary and, uh, one other I can’t recall. Clerk In Chancery?
It’s a good question.
While Poppiti didn’t show, he sent his deputy to say that they still have concerns, but, of course, would still like to work with the committee. You know, take yet more time to ‘get it right’.
Guess who the communications director for the Register of Wills is–why it’s that Italo Carreri-Russo guy. Jee-zus, guess running the restaurant isn’t enough for this guy. He showed up, gave a one-sentence speech echoing Ciro’s deputy’s remarks, and, uh, that was it. The Register Of Wills Office needs a communications director? Not to mention, THIS guy?
It sounds like nothing more than delaying tactics by Ciro’s Cadre. I hope the committee doesn’t buy them.
They released the bill from committee, so that’s progress.
I really liked the comments of this Eugenia Thornton, who is Recorder of Deeds for Kent County. They were pretty much a mic drop on Ciro’s Cadre.