Co-Trustee Issues

[Fedupwithfamily]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Illinois
My question has to do with two people being co trustees. What do you do if your co trustee doesn't want you to put any of your belongings in a property that is part of the trust, even if their belongings are already in there? Shouldn't co trustees both be able to share the property 50/50? There are other issues too, but I thought I would start with this one. I was told by my lawyer that I had every right to use 50% of the property, but now my co trustee is saying we have to be in agreement on usage (like what I can put in there) For example: I want to put in my mother's old vanity, because it will be where I will place my toiletries when I am there. I don't feel this is something I should have to ask to do, seeing that my co trustee has decided (before I was co trustee) to furnish the whole entire house with their own belongings. They are now telling me, I can't do the same because I don't have agreement from this said person. They said they had agreement from the previous co trustee, so it is ok to keep all that stuff in the house, but I am not allowed to make any changes, because they (co trustee) don't agree. Is this true? My feelings are that this person has had their chance to furnish, and now I should get the same chance.

 

[tranquility]

It would depend on the trust documents. The default is any trustee has full power. But, it is common for the wording of the trust to require agreement between all trustees.

What is more interesting to me is how the trustees seem to be personally benefiting from the trust. Are there any other beneficiaries?

 

[curb1]

Is the trustor still alive? What is to be done with the assets in the trust? Are you a beneficiary? Is the other co-trustee a beneficiary?

 

[Fedupwithfamily]

Yes, I am a beneficiary. It is not written in the trust at all that we have to be in agreement on everything. It is VERY vague and just states that it is for the enjoyment and use of all the descendents. The person who wrote the trust is now dead, and they put my parent and their sibling as co trustees, but it is actually left to the descendents. Then my parent passed their trusteeship to me, so now I am co trustee with my parent's sibling. They are now telling me that Illinois Trust Law states we must be in total agreement on everything, or nothing can be done. I understand that for legal matters, but if I want to add a piece of furniture to an existing home on the trust that they have already fully furnished with their own stuff? Really? It doesn't seem fair or legal. Shouldn't I have 50% usage of the homes storage and be able to add some storage if all the storage is already taken up by them? They are not offering to take out any of their stuff, because they state that all their stuff was ok'd by my parent to be in the home, and since I just became co trustee, I am not able to change anything that was done by either one of them before I was trustee, but I feel that law could easily be interpreted different ways. I thought that was more meant to protect me from being held liable for something they foolishly did before I became trustee. So I wouldn't be held liable. Right? It's frustrating, because this person was given too much power in the past several years, due to the fact my parent really didn't have much to do with the properties. So now, it's like my co trustee feels they are higher than me, ad because they have had more use of the home and done more with it, they deserve more say in it. When in actuality, since they had more usage, they really should now start giving other descendents usage, ad sacrifice theirs for while to make things even.
The co trustee behaves as if they are the main beneficiary, and I do not get anything until they die, but that isn't how the trust document is written at all. It doesn't state any order. When the original person died, it went straight to 'The Descendents." All the assets are for maintaining the properties and for the use of the descendents.

 

[curb1]

Do you have a copy of the trust? You are not being unreasonable in your stance. Are they willing to buy out your part of this property? That might be one solution. Is this a vacation property? How much do you use it?

An alternative would be to just go along with them on this point rather than pushing this point to a destruction of the relationship. Is there more to this problem than the storage? I can understand the resentment to their power play. This is not unusual when shares pass down through generations.

 

[tranquility]

Do you have a copy of the trust? You are not being unreasonable in your stance. Are they willing to buy out your part of this property? That might be one solution. Is this a vacation property? How much do you use it?

An alternative would be to just go along with them on this point rather than pushing this point to a destruction of the relationship. Is there more to this problem than the storage? I can understand the resentment to their power play. This is not unusual when shares pass down through generations.

The problem is, the OP is as responsible as the other trustee for any actions taken.

There is clearly some self-dealing here. I think the OP should see an attorney for many reasons. Not only to protect himself, but also to clarify his powers under the trust.

As to the prior acts of the trustee:

(760 ILCS 5/14) (from Ch. 17, par. 1684)
Sec. 14. Powers and Duties of Successor - Liability for Acts of Predecessor - Approval of Accounts. (1) A successor trustee shall have all the rights, powers and duties, which are granted to or imposed on the predecessor. (2) A successor trustee shall be under no duty to inquire into the acts or doings of a predecessor trustee, and is not liable for any act or failure to act of a predecessor trustee. (3) With the approval of a majority in interest of the beneficiaries then entitled to receive or eligible to have the benefit of the income from the trust, a successor trustee may accept the account rendered and the property received as a full and complete discharge to the predecessor trustee without incurring any liability for so doing.
(Source: P.A. 78-625.)

 

[Fedupwithfamily]

The problem is, the OP is as responsible as the other trustee for any actions taken.

There is clearly some self-dealing here. I think the OP should see an attorney for many reasons. Not only to protect himself, but also to clarify his powers under the trust.

As to the prior acts of the trustee:

Are you saying that I have no right to say anything about what furnishings the other co trustee put in before I became co trustee with this person? Because that is the way my fellow co trustee is interpreting this Illinois Law you posted. I interpret this law to say I don't have to agree to the "furniture agreement," the other two had. I feel this law id there to protect me from having to deal with something bad a prior trustee did. Right? As it sits right now, my co trustee has the whole entire house furnished with their belongings. There is no room for any of my stuff, and they are saying they need to approve anything I want to add as furniture to the house. I feel this is not ok. It doesn't say anywhere in the will that I must agree. Only Illinois law says we must agree, but I feel this is a little "ticky" to ask me to have agreement on something this small. Plus, they have already set the precedence of putting in their own personal belongings. Right? Why shouldn't I be able to do the same?

I know it doesn't seem like much, but this person has a bevy of other things they do not agree on, and if I start giving on on this stuff, it can start a precedence. This person is also telling me I can not store things in the home like a toothbrush! Although, they have done all that already. It literally looks like they live there full time. They have been very lucky, because until now, no one else needed the home. Now the family is bigger though, so they do. They had several years of the home all to their selves, now they have to share. I can see how that would be hard to swallow, but it's the reality. They have fought it tooth and nail, and I feel that is a breech of the trust. It specifically says it is for ALL the descendents to use and enjoy. Not just the oldest one.

The home is a vacation home, but it does not say anywhere that it has to be only used for that. Like I said before, it just says it is to be used by all the descendents.

 

[Fedupwithfamily]

Also, does self dealing apply if it isn't about taxes or making money off the trust? Can it apply to this person just enjoying the home for them selves and not wanting to share equally?

 

[tranquility]

The powers of a cotrustee are unclear in the code without knowledge of the underlying facts. The self-dealing has to do with any trustee who benefits himself over another beneficiary. One problem is your main complaint about furniture storage is an example of self-dealing as well.

You need an attorney because everyone seems to be taking the fiduciary duties too casually.