A client from Brooklyn called me last month in a state of quiet panic. Her husband had just passed, and their bank had frozen their joint savings account—the one they’d used for thirty years to pay the mortgage and build a life. She was understandably distraught and confused. “It’s my money, too,” she said. “Why can’t I access it?”
Her question is one we hear often. People use joint bank accounts to manage shared finances, assuming the process is seamless when one partner dies. Often, it is. But that assumption can mask significant legal tripwires, especially when other family members are involved or intentions are not clearly documented.
A joint account is a tool, but it is not a substitute for an intentional estate plan. Understanding how New York law treats these accounts is the first step toward using them prudently.
The “Right of Survivorship” Presumption in New York
The answer to my client’s question lies in a legal concept: the “right of survivorship.” New York law presumes that when two or more people open a bank account together, they intend for the funds to automatically pass to the survivor(s) upon the death of one owner.
This presumption is codified in New York Banking Law § 675. This statute establishes that by titling an account as “joint tenants with right of survivorship,” the owners are presumed to intend for the survivor to inherit the entire balance. The funds pass directly to the surviving owner outside the probate process. The money is not controlled by the decedent’s will and is not subject to the delays and expenses of Surrogate’s Court.
For many married couples, this is exactly the intended outcome. It provides immediate liquidity to the surviving spouse, allowing them to pay for funeral expenses, household bills, and other needs without waiting for an estate to be settled. It is a mechanism for continuity during a difficult time.
When the Presumption Can Be Challenged
The right of survivorship is a presumption, not an unbreakable rule. This is where families can find themselves in costly and painful disputes. The burden of proof is on the person challenging the survivor’s claim, but it can be done. I’ve seen these challenges arise in two primary scenarios.
1. The “Convenience Only” Account
The most common challenge involves an aging parent who adds an adult child to their bank account. The parent’s intent might be purely practical—they need help paying bills or managing deposits. They are not necessarily intending for that one child to inherit the entire account balance at the expense of their other children.
After the parent dies, the other siblings might argue the account was for “convenience only.” To succeed in Surrogate’s Court, they must present clear and convincing evidence that the deceased parent did not intend to create a right of survivorship. This could include testimony, letters, or other documents showing the account was merely a tool for managing daily finances. These cases are difficult and turn on the specific facts and credibility of the parties involved.
2. Fraud, Undue Influence, or Incapacity
A more serious challenge arises from allegations of wrongdoing. If it can be proven that the surviving joint owner was added to the account through fraud or by exerting undue influence over a vulnerable or incapacitated individual, a court can set aside the transfer.
For example, if a home health aide pressures an elderly client in Manhattan to add them to a brokerage account, the decedent’s family could bring a proceeding to recover those funds for the estate. Proving undue influence requires showing that the decedent’s free will was overcome—a high legal bar that demands substantial evidence.
A Tool, Not a Strategy
A joint account bypasses probate, but it is not an escape from estate administration entirely. Even if you inherit funds seamlessly through right of survivorship, those assets are still generally considered part of the decedent’s taxable estate for calculating state or federal estate taxes, should the estate be large enough to be subject to them.
Relying on joint accounts as a primary method of transferring wealth is poor stewardship. It lacks the nuance and control of a properly drafted will or trust. You cannot name a contingent beneficiary on a bank account. You cannot place conditions on the inheritance or protect it from the survivor’s creditors. It is an all-or-nothing transfer.
Stewardship. That’s the core of our work. It’s about creating a deliberate, intentional plan that honors your relationships and protects your family’s future. Joint accounts can be part of that plan, but they should never be the entire plan.
Relying on joint accounts to transfer significant assets leaves your legacy to chance and the interpretation of a court. A far better approach is to clarify your intentions in legally binding documents. If you are unsure whether your current asset titling aligns with your estate planning goals, the most prudent next step is a detailed review with your legal counsel.
