Standard Legal does not offer a “successor Attorney-in-Fact” in its Power of Attorney legal documents because experience has shown that such a structure can often create confusion or lead to delays at an inopportune time.
For example: suppose the maker of the POA named John Smith as Attorney-in-Fact, with Mary Jones named as a successor Attorney-in-Fact only to act if John Smith can no longer fulfill his duties.
In that case, a party receiving the Power of Attorney document (a bank, for example) from Mary Jones may need to inquire about John Smith’s availability or ability to act as Attorney-in-Fact before proceeding.
Absent proof that John Smith is unavailable or able to act, the bank may not allow Mary Jones to act on behalf of the Principal who created the Power of Attorney document.
Or, if John Smith has died, Mary Jones may need to present John Smith’s death certificate to the third party as proof that she now possesses the authority to act on behalf of the Principal — a document that Mary Jones may not possess.
Standard Legal believes a better method is executing a Power of Attorney with two individuals named Attorney-in-Fact, requiring no additional proof of authority for either to act.
Another option would be to execute two different Power of Attorney documents with no successors or co-attorneys, with one document immediately provided to the “primary” Attorney-in-Fact, and the other held by the Principal or some other trusted person to be delivered to the “secondary” Attorney-in-Fact only when the primary Attorney-in-Fact is unable or unavailable to act on behalf of the Principal.
Under either option above, confusion is removed and the receiving party of the POA document will be able to execute the requested function without concern.