Dissolving a Trust

[Zigner]

it was kiawah and myself (not you), who suggested that she get a copy of the trust document, so she could see what it actually stated.

when she followed our advice, because we understood the ramifications of trust law, is when the new information came into play.

you, like a typical lawyer, just told her to see an attorney.

OUR ADVICE at least got her started in the right direction.

so next time, try to follow the ramifications of trust law, and tell someone to read the trust document, because that is the bible for their trust.

you wanna put some more boxing gloves on ? come on at me. i will hit back twice as hard, and twice as often.

you have met your match and more.

Oh BROTHER!

 

[tranquility]

it was kiawah and myself (not you), who suggested that she get a copy of the trust document, so she could see what it actually stated.

It is always better to get more facts. That's why no one can give true advice here. Yet, when you see a situation time and time again, you can sometimes figure out what the general reality is without it being spelled out. Sorry you couldn't.

(Please don't put yourself in with kiawah. He is far more circumspect and correct in his responses. If I differ with him, I will think a second time before posting.)

when she followed our advice, because we understood the ramifications of trust law, is when the new information came into play.

you, like a typical lawyer, just told her to see an attorney.

With this purported "new" information, what is your advice now? Also, did you stand by your previous statements after hearing this "new" information?

so next time, try to follow the ramifications of trust law, and tell someone to read the trust document, because that is the bible for their trust.

Yes and no. I know that is your opinion, and it is a part of your error. But, how clauses and the language is interpreted by the courts tends to have competent crafters use standard language. Can you tell me precisely what each of the clauses the OP posted mean and why they were included? I couldn't, with precision, without some research. However, because trusts tend to have certain purposes, I can give a general idea of the reason for each. And, if the facts led me there, I'd do that research. The trust is important, it is not the Bible. I've seen clauses struck out before. Which part of the Bible should be struck out? Which part of the Bible do you need to review statutes and case law to understand?

you have met your match and more.

Only if you're the referee.

you dont intimidate me in even the slightest of inklings.

My intention is not to intimidate, but to provide accurate guidance to those who post. It's clear that when your errors are pointed out, you argue different matters, change your position and say it was the same all the time or call it a tie. My goal when addressing your advice is nothing more than the free market of ideas. The OPs and other members who read them may pay heed to whichever they find most useful.

 

[JM1863]

HAHAHAHA. I love that y'all are fighting just like some of the fights I see on other forums. At least it's more common than I thought.

Ok, back on topic. Yes, it's a institution. A bank in fact. Our officer was recently assigned to the trust because the old one will retire in a few years. We never received any notification of this. We have not received monthly statements like we should be. We practically have to beg to be kept in the loop concerning the trust and have to beg to get money out of it.

The OP is not going to pry out the trust from the institution's fee-soaked portfolio unless they can prove to a court that the trust should be fully distributed or that the trustee has breached her fiduciary duties
And, since the trustee has every incentive to keep their nifty fees and can use trust funds for defense to the action, the OP and his family really need an attorney.
But, then, I already said that.

What would constitute a breach of duties? I'm not sure she's done anything that is against the law. It's just that now there has been so much bad blood pass between us that I don't feel like I can have a professional relationship with this woman without getting pissed off. I don't feel like I can trust her. I wish that were reason enough.

Also, I am not trying to have it dissolved anymore. We've decided that it would be ok if we got it moved to Texas. I think we're going to go with Fidelity since my mom has had good results with her retirement fund with them.

To whomever it was that asked: The trust initially was worth almost $500,000. In three years however the net portfolio change has been a negative $82,000. About $34,000 of that was distributions to us. The other $48,000 loss was due to market drops and account fees. I would think that if they were investing properly, they would at least make enough money to cover their fees. (At least my mother's retirement fund did...)

I just want the trust here in Texas where we live. So if we have questions we can go see someone. Not have conversations on the phone or get emails with unclear emotional undertones.

 

[JM1863]

Also...I never really considered this, but do you think if I simply asked the woman to resign as trustee that she/the bank would so we could move it here? Boy, wouldn't that make this so much easier?

 

[tranquility]

Odds are the woman was not the "trustee" the institution was. (Sometimes there is a legal fiction where a person is named, but the institution is the trustee.) The woman was only representing the bank and acting in the name of the bank. The bank is still the trustee, it's just you have another person who is representing the bank. There has not been a change of trustee.

Fiduciary duties are many, subtle and complex. Look up on Google:

"fiduciary duties" trustee

and get a ton of information. I'd put in the name of your state as well, even though the information won't change that much. Bad blood is not a breach. The loss on the investment, on its own, is not a breach. It could suggest a breach, but with an institutional trustee, it is unlikely.

Not paying for your educational supplies if the trust requires that, could be a breach. Again, because it is an institution and the representative does this all the time it is unlikely. Failure to properly account for the trust to the beneficiaries could be too. I doubt there is a monthly requirement though. However, those places are where reading the trust really does matter. But, you'll need an experienced eye. If you don't want to see an attorney, you might talk to the representative's boss and explain why you don't trust them any longer and ask if they can appoint another person to be your conduit.

 

[TrustUser]

my previous statements were given at a certain time of reference. and of course i stand by them.

it was that statement that got her to read the trust document, and report back to us.

which she did.

once it needs to go back to court, i dont put my nose in it. that is not my expertise, and i dont pretend that it is.

my expertise is creating trust documents that dont need to go to court. and as an acting trustee for several trusts, the actual management of them.

i have funded most every type of asset, so i know what that is about. i knew that 1041s and k1s were filed at the end of the year, because i am involved in that.

i am here to give advice to others in the very small area in which i am competent.

always go to your trust document first. it is ALWAYS one's starting point.

i was hoping for her sake that the trust gave power to the beneficiaries to decide on trusteeship. that would have made it easiest on her. so i wanted her to specifically look for that.

there is no being nice to you. it pains you to have a non-lawyer who is competent at what he is doing. many estate lawyers know only the very basics about trusts. i do not consider them to be "knowledgeable".

people think that those lawyers are real knowledgeable. they arent. if i wanted advice on what i am doing, i would seek out a trustee management company, not an attorney. for example, farmers and merchants has a huge separate trust department. so they are very up to date on trust management issues.

we will never get along. i know this. i have been acquainted with many lawyers, and they are all pretty much made from the same cloth. you fit the stereotype so well, that if i was to make a sarcastic movie regarding lawyers, i would cast you as my starring character.

 

[TrustUser]

to the op - you are probably already aware, but if you can, i think it would be best for you 3 to take over trusteeship, and to transact business locally.

since it appears as though it needs to go back to court, it cant hurt to ask for trusteeship.

no one has more desire to keep your money safe than you do.

 

[TrustUser]

and of course, by all means, it cant hurt to ask your current trustee if you 3 (any combination) can be appointed trusteeship.

the most important quality for a trustee is HONESTY. you can always pay accountants, etc. for advice. but there usually comes great peace of mind when you have the final say-so.

if all you want to do is invest in cds and t-bills, you certainly dont need the expertise of any investment firm.

investment firms, for the most part, know how to make commissions.

 

[tranquility]

TrustUser embarrasses himself yet again. He does not relate to the legalities of the situation and, without complete and unchanging agreement among the beneficiaries that they will never sue, would be a breach of fiduciary duties.

I am astonished he would state such things and, while it is not my nature to "tell" on people, suspect he is veering towards being banned.

 

[TrustUser]

tranquility does it again - a stereotype lawyer.

give me a break - i suggested that the beneficiaries ASK about being appointed their own trustee.

 

[TrustUser]

but unlike you, i am never surprised by your lawyerese actions.

 

[TrustUser]

irrevocable trusts file 1041s and k1s to beneficiaries. i was right, you were wrong.

when having trouble with the trustee, the first thing a beneficiary should do is get a copy of the trust so said beneficiary can see what the document states. i was right, you were wrong.

 

[TrustUser]

while it is not my nature to "tell" on people, i suspect that tranquility is working with other lawyers on this site to have me removed, because they dont like a non-lawyer who actually knows what he is doing.

while they could at any time remove me, they want it to appear as if there was a valid reason to do so.

in either case, i will manage to live on.

 

[anteater]

To whomever it was that asked: The trust initially was worth almost $500,000. In three years however the net portfolio change has been a negative $82,000. About $34,000 of that was distributions to us. The other $48,000 loss was due to market drops and account fees. I would think that if they were investing properly, they would at least make enough money to cover their fees. (At least my mother's retirement fund did...)

While I second Tranquility's rant about bank trustees, it really is not fair to compare one portfolio to another without taking into account all sorts of other factors. And such a comparison, by itself, does not make a case for violation of fiduciary duties.

 

[tranquility]

irrevocable trusts file 1041s and k1s to beneficiaries. i was right, you were wrong.

That's the second time you've brought that up. Since I am able to buy food for my kitty, in part, based on that fact, please provide some context? I did a search for my name and 1041 and only came up with this thread.

Perhaps you can provide a quote from me or the thread you're talking about so I can understand what you're babbling about.

(By the way, do you know what happens to a trust when the trustees and beneficiaries are the same? If the beneficiaries want the trustee to invest in CDs and T-bills, and he does so, could he be in breach of his fiduciary duties? If the beneficiaries have the right to select the trustee, do you know how the trust is legally different?)

I'm sorry you don't find me knowledgeable. Your lack of understanding of anything beyond casual trusts is obvious. Your insistence you are correct even when your errors are pointed out is comical. But, as to who I am:

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED ON THIS PAGE WERE NOT REVIEWED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OR ATTORNEYS AT FREEADVICE.COM. Thousands of professionally prepared and reviewed questions and answers in 130 legal categories are to be found at the Question and Answer pages at FreeAdvice.com.
FreeAdvice Forums are intended to enable consumers to benefit from the experience of other consumers who have faced similar legal issues. FreeAdvice does NOT vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any posting or the qualifications of any person responding. Use of the Forums is subject to our Terms and Conditions which prohibit advertisements, solicitations or other commercial messages, or false, defamatory, abusive, vulgar, or harassing messages, and subject violators to a fee for each improper posting. All postings reflect the views of the author but become the property of FreeAdvice. Information on FreeAdvice or a Forum should not be relied upon and is not a substitute for advice from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction who you have retained to represent you. To locate an attorney visit AttorneyPages.com. Copyright since 1995 by Advice Company. All Rights Reserved.