1 / 25

South Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act

South Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act. SECTION 30-2-330. Removal of social security numbers and other identifying information from official records filed by register of deeds or clerk of court or county.

paul2
Télécharger la présentation

South Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. South Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act • SECTION 30-2-330. Removal of social security numbers and other identifying information from official records filed by register of deeds or clerk of court or county. (A) A person preparing or filing a document to be recorded or filed in the official records by the register of deeds or the clerk of court of a county may not include an individual's social security, driver's license, state identification, passport, checking account, savings account, credit card, or debit card number, or personal identification (PIN) code, or passwords in that document, unless otherwise expressly required by law or court order or rule adopted by the state registrar on records of vital events. A loan closing instruction that requires the inclusion of an individual's social security number on a document to be recorded is void. A person who violates this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars for each violation.

  2. FINANCIAL IDENTITY FRAUD AND IDENTITY THEFT PROTECTION ACT Effective January 1, 2009 § 30-2-310 prohibits a public body (as defined in §30-1-10(B) and includes all state, county, and municipal courts or registers of deeds) from collecting or making available to the public an individual’s social security number containing six digits or more unless authorized by law to do so or unless the collection of the social security number is otherwise imperative for the performance of that body’s duties and responsibilities as prescribed by law. §30-2-320 of the Act lists specific exemptions to the collection and use of social security numbers and personal identifying information [1] by a public body. Several of those exemptions of significance to the Probate Court are provided below. [1] personal identifying information includes an individual’s social security, driver’s license, state identification, passport, checking account, savings account, credit card, or debit card number, or personal identification code (PIN) or passwords in that document, unless otherwise expressly required by law or court order or rule adopted by the state registrar on records of vital events.

  3. FINANCIAL IDENTITY FRAUD AND IDENTITY THEFT PROTECTION ACT Effective January 1, 2009 Exemptions : A recorded document in the official records of the County A document filed pursuant to a court Order, warrant, or subpoena A document transferred to another governmental entity for the purpose of collecting a debt, including a debt collected pursuant to the Setoff Debt Collection Act

  4. FINANCIAL IDENTITY FRAUD AND IDENTITY THEFT PROTECTION ACT Effective January 1, 2009 §30-2-330(A) of the Act specifically places the burden of compliance on the individual filing the document with the court or register and not on court officials. A person who files a document with the court or register containing personal identifying information in violation of the provisions is subject to a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not to exceed $500.00 for each violation. Therefore, the exemptions contained in 30-2-320, the hold harmless clause contained in An individual may request that a register or clerk remove a social security number or personal identifier contained in an image or copy of an official record placed on a publicly available internet website used by a register or clerk. The request must be in writing and must specifically site the location and identifier which must be removed or redacted. A clerk of court or register of deeds has no duty to inquire beyond the written request to verify the identity of an individual requesting redaction. A fee must not be charged for the redaction pursuant to the request.

  5. Administrative Order The Probate Court shall in all respects attempt to respect the privacy of all those persons and entities doing business in our office as set forth in the SC FINANCIAL IDENTITY FRAUD AND IDENTITY THEFT PROTECTION ACT (§§30-2-310 et seq.). However, in some instances, the Court will need to collect certain personal identification information (PINFO) in order to comply with its statutory duties under stateand federal law. MARRIAGE LICENSES Social security numbers or alien identification numbers are required by SC Law (§20-1-220) on marriage license applications which are kept separately from public records. For those not having social security numbers, other government issued forms of identification are collected to verify the identification and the age of applicants. ESTATES We may need to collect PINFO in order to confirm the nature and value of estate assets; however, the PINFO will be kept separately from the public file, destroyed, or returned to the Personal Representative. PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS We will collect the PINFO of protected persons, guardians, and conservators in order to secure and oversee the assets of protected persons under this court’s jurisdiction. If collected, the PINFO will be kept separate from public access. INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT PROCEEDINGS We will collect the Social Security number of any person involuntarily committed to identify the individual or to make required reports to governmental agencies. Attorneys appointed to represent patients must provide PINFO for tax purposes. All records in this division are confidential and not available for public viewing pursuant to Title 44 of the SC Code. PAYMENT OF COURT FEES/COSTS/FINES When payment is made by check or credit card, the account numbers will be processed in order to insure proper payment. No copies of transmittals will be kept in the public record. IT IS SO ORDERED! _________/S/______________ DEBORA A. FAULKNER PROBATE JUDGE January 1, 2009

  6. Growth: 60+ = 123% 75+ = 142% 85+ = 181%

  7. The population of individuals 60 and above increased from 59,857 in 2000 to 71,038 in 2006. This is a numerical change of 11,181 and a percentage change of 18.7 Greenville’s Growth POPULATION CHANGE IN GREENVILLE FOR PERSONS 65 YEARS AND OLDER 44,573 -2000 Census 48,796 -2005 Census 4,223 -Total Population Change 12,329 -Deaths 14,990 -Natural Increase 1,562 -Net Migration

  8. Projections of Alzheimer's Disease in South Carolina: 2005 – 2030

  9. MEDIATION FRIENDLY STATUTE SC Code of Laws Section 62-3-912 SC Code of Laws Section 62-3-1101

  10. SC Code of Laws, §62-3-912 Private agreements among successors to decedent binding on personal representative Subject to the rights of creditors and taxing authorities, competent successors may agree among themselves to alter the interests, shares, or amounts to which they are entitled under the will of the decedent, or under the laws of intestacy, in any way that they provide in a written contract executed by all who are affected by its provisions. The personal representative shall abide by the terms of the agreement subject to this obligation to administer the estate for the benefit of creditors, to pay all taxes and costs of administration, and to carry out the responsibilities of his office for the benefit of any successors of the decedent who are not parties. Personal representatives of decedents' estates are not required to see to the performance of trusts if the trustee thereof is another person who is willing to accept the trust. Accordingly, trustees of a testamentary trust are successors for the purposes of this section. Nothing herein relieves trustees of any duties owed to beneficiaries of trusts.

  11. SC Code of Laws, §62-3-1101 Effect of approval of agreements involving trusts, inalienable interests, or interests of third persons. A compromise of a controversy as to admission to probate of an instrument offered for formal probate as the will of a decedent, the construction, validity, or effect of a probated will, the rights or interests in the estate of the decedent, of a successor, or the administration of the estate, if approved in a formal proceeding in the court for that purpose, is binding on all the parties including those unborn, unascertained, or who could not be located. An approved compromise is binding even though it may affect a trust or an inalienable interest. A compromise does not impair the rights of creditors or of taxing authorities who are not parties to it. A compromise approved pursuant to this section is not a settlement of a claim subject to the provisions of Section 62-5-433.

  12. PROBATE MEDIATION Analysis of the data Debora A. Faulkner, Probate Judge of Greenville County

  13. Participation • 35 out of 46 counties enrolled in the program • 14 counties reported data • 21 counties have no reports • Unclear whether they conducted a mediation and mediation is not yet concluded, whether there were indeed no mediations or whether the forms were not submitted • Total cases reported - 80

  14. County Number of cases Greenville 51 Orangeburg 6 Charleston 4 Richland 4 Cherokee 2 Dorchester 2 Horry 2 Pickens 2 Spartanburg 2 Abbeville 1 Beaufort 1 Colleton 1 Jasper 1 Lexington 1

  15. The Data • Weighted responses have been taken from the Court Report and Evaluation form • Responses from participants were so small as to be statistically insignificant • Responses are weighted as follows (rounded to nearest 1/10,000) • Strongly agree: 1 • Strongly disagree: 5

  16. The Overall Data • Results • Process was helpful 2.7250 • Efficient use of Court time 2.8500 • Cost 2.8750 • Outcome 2.7825

  17. Individual County Data • Greenville

  18. Individual County Data • Orangeburg

  19. Individual County Data • Charleston

  20. Individual County Data • Richland

  21. Individual County Data • Abbeville • Colleton • Jasper

  22. Resolutions • 24 were fully resolved • 6 were partially resolved • 8 were not resolved • 37.5% resolved partially or in full; 10% not resolved

  23. Conclusions • Statistically, may not have an adequate sampling • Recorded entries may not reflect actual sentiment • Lots of straight 3’s (dead center) • Data is court sourced rather than participant sourced

  24. Conclusions • Nothing in the data is worse than a 3 • Mediation is receiving no worse than a median reception • Mediation should be a permanent tool in the Probate Court toolbox • Data does not contain anything overtly negative • To the contrary, sentiment average of all 4 questions is between 2.7 and 2.9

More Related