No Release; No Distribution

[scottkins]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Trustee has paid himself trustee fees against the terms of the trust; was found out, claims he "put the money back" and now is requiring release of liability from benefiicary otherwise there will no further distribution. Trustee has threatened beneficiary if they don't sign off release of liability, trustee will not make dstribution. Instead of making the distribution, trustee is with-holding the money in the trust to pay his attorneys fees to file a petition. For what? Beneficary does not request a bona fide accounting. Just proof the money was put back and then distribute the trust. No fighting. Simple.

Meanwhile, same Trustee has not complied with a court order regarding another trust (same benefiicaries) to reimburse medical receipts to beneficiary.No money for medical, no more distributions. What to do? Does any of this sound like grounds for a Motion for Contept of Court for failing to obey a court order? Or, an Ex Parte filing for a hearing to somehow make the trustee pay? Which is better? What other remedies are there? Or a Motion for Distribution? Trustee has been fighting with everyone with attorneys. Beneficiary is poor and In Pro Per.

 

[scottkins]

Trustee in Contempt

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

Trustee has paid himself trustee fees against the terms of the trust; was found out, claims he "put the money back" and now is requiring release of liability from benefiicary otherwise there will no further distribution. Trustee has threatened beneficiary if they don't sign off release of liability, trustee will not make dstribution. Instead of making the distribution, trustee is with-holding the money in the trust to pay his attorneys fees to file a petition. For what? Beneficary does not request a bona fide accounting. Just proof the money was put back and then distribute the trust. No fighting. Simple.

Meanwhile, same Trustee has not complied with a court order regarding another trust (same benefiicaries) to reimburse medical receipts to beneficiary.No money for medical, no more distributions. What to do? Does any of this sound like grounds for a Motion for Contept of Court for failing to obey a court order? Or, an Ex Parte filing for a hearing to somehow make the trustee pay? Which is better? What other remedies are there? Or a Motion for Distribution? Trustee has been fighting with everyone with attorneys. Beneficiary is poor and In Pro Per.

Does anybody have any knowledge along these lines? The economy is so bad the average person cannot afford attorney and the courts are flooded with Pro Pers.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

The logical thing to do IMO, is research filing in court to have the trustee removed and a successor trustee appointed.

 

[tranquility]

The logical thing to do IMO, is research filing in court to have the trustee removed and a successor trustee appointed.

That is certainly what the OP wants, do you have any support or reason to do that?

The problem here are facts. What is going on?

 

[scottkins]

Please pardon my ignorance. What is IMO?

We filed a Petition to Remove Trustee but the court denied it without predjudice and told us we can bring it again. At the same time, at same hearing, the court just simply asked the trustee to resign. It makes no sense. The reason the court gave for not removing them was the court said it would cost money to get a new trustee which does not make sense either because trustee is using our trust to pay his attorney to defend himself. Trustee is hostile stonewalling. Judge at court called trustee "passive agressive" but then did not grant petition to remove. What is going on here is the trustee has worked to walk off with everything, when challenged, used the trust to fight off beneficiaries. Now it is surcharge time. We are trying to put together a surcharge petition hoping the judge is going to be fair. Can a beneficiary obtain surcharges if the trustee was not removed? Thank you for helping.

 

[tranquility]

Please pardon my ignorance. What is IMO?

We filed a Petition to Remove Trustee but the court denied it without predjudice and told us we can bring it again. At the same time, at same hearing, the court just simply asked the trustee to resign. It makes no sense. The reason the court gave for not removing them was the court said it would cost money to get a new trustee which does not make sense either because trustee is using our trust to pay his attorney to defend himself. Trustee is hostile stonewalling. Judge at court called trustee "passive agressive" but then did not grant petition to remove. What is going on here is the trustee has worked to walk off with everything, when challenged, used the trust to fight off beneficiaries. Now it is surcharge time. We are trying to put together a surcharge petition hoping the judge is going to be fair. Can a beneficiary obtain surcharges if the trustee was not removed? Thank you for helping.

It seems the judge felt the trustee did not breach his fiduciary duties (Or, you did not prove a breach.) at that time, but he saw at least one beneficiary is very unhappy with him. Rather than have future court time being spent, he hoped the trustee would resign. A judge cannot remove a person just because he thinks it is a good idea, there must be a breach. If the trustee was not removed or a breach proven, I see no way the beneficiary can get a surcharge. You lost. You just didn't lose forever.