Legal workarounds for testamentary trust perceived as unfair The Next CEO of Stack OverflowCan a California living trust give the trustee authority to distribute assets to beneficiaries on an as-needed basis?Family trust but probate (informal or formal?) neededEstate Trust and Obligations to Inform BeneficiariesPlain English Meaning Of Trust Language1000-year trust? (fictional)How do I protect my child's assets against medical expenses incurred by their potential guardian?Meaning of Trust LanguageDeath Tax For TrustUltra vires and termination of a court's general equitable power to supervise an estate?trustee deed or warranty deed for revocable trust transfer of real property to 3rd party?
Is there a way to save my career from absolute disaster?
Where do students learn to solve polynomial equations these days?
Why isn't the Mueller report being released completely and unredacted?
Grabbing quick drinks
Find non-case sensitive string in a mixed list of elements?
Is wanting to ask what to write an indication that you need to change your story?
What connection does MS Office have to Netscape Navigator?
Why do remote US companies require working in the US?
Can we say or write : "No, it'sn't"?
How to edit “Name” property in GCI output?
Is it ever safe to open a suspicious HTML file (e.g. email attachment)?
What does "Its cash flow is deeply negative" mean?
Easy to read palindrome checker
How to avoid supervisors with prejudiced views?
Would this house-rule that treats advantage as a +1 to the roll instead (and disadvantage as -1) and allows them to stack be balanced?
How to invert MapIndexed on a ragged structure? How to construct a tree from rules?
What flight has the highest ratio of time difference to flight time?
Is it okay to majorly distort historical facts while writing a fiction story?
Method for adding error messages to a dictionary given a key
What steps are necessary to read a Modern SSD in Medieval Europe?
The past simple of "gaslight" – "gaslighted" or "gaslit"?
A small doubt about the dominated convergence theorem
TikZ: How to reverse arrow direction without switching start/end point?
Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?
Legal workarounds for testamentary trust perceived as unfair
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowCan a California living trust give the trustee authority to distribute assets to beneficiaries on an as-needed basis?Family trust but probate (informal or formal?) neededEstate Trust and Obligations to Inform BeneficiariesPlain English Meaning Of Trust Language1000-year trust? (fictional)How do I protect my child's assets against medical expenses incurred by their potential guardian?Meaning of Trust LanguageDeath Tax For TrustUltra vires and termination of a court's general equitable power to supervise an estate?trustee deed or warranty deed for revocable trust transfer of real property to 3rd party?
My mother recently passed away and her will includes a testamentary trust for a portion of the estate designated for her grandchildren. Unfortunately, the terms of this trust seem to unfairly benefit my children vs. my brother's, which is creating family drama -- so much so that extended family (cousins) designated as trustees want to refuse to get involved. My brother and I are aligned on a more equitable arrangement (with which the trustees concur) but my initial research indicates that testamentary trusts must be followed exactly.
The trust is for the benefit of five grandchildren: Two from my brother, presently age 27 and 22, and my three children, ages 17, 13, and 11. However, rather than equal distribution, the trust specifies the following (excerpting some of the exact legal language):
- for the benefit of any one or more of the living benficiaries
- for their health, and education (including room and board)
- without the necessity of equalization among them at any time
Education is more fully defined in another paragraph and largely applies to tuition, room, board, books, etc. at an accredited college, university, or trade school. The trustee has "absolute discretion" but is advised to "consider all funds or resources available to a beneficiary".
When the youngest beneficiary is 21, the trust is to be divided into two trusts (no specific split percentage is mentioned) based on children of myself and my brother, from which income is paid at the trustee's discretion to the children until the youngest of each of these two trusts reaches age 25, at which point the trust(s) terminate with equal division.
As written, the trust would seem to possibly unfairly benefit me/my children:
- My brother's children have both graduated college, and do not plan to pursue postgraduate education
- His two children's college was funded primarily through Pell Grants; they do not have student loans
- My three children do have college coming up (the first next year!) and my income precludes any significant financial assistance, but is not enough to avoid taking out loans
Obviously there's no clear cut "need" and the "absolute discretion" allows the trustee to make that judgment (which our relatives don't want to have to make.)
Everyone (my brother, myself, trustees) would love to just equally split the benefits to all five grandchildren; however, there does not seem to be a way to do that within the constraints established. Even if we "designated" 60% to be disbursed to my children and supported their college, we would have to wait 10 years until my youngest child reaches age 21 before we could "divide" the trust (100% to my brother's children, 0% to mine) to pay out to the other beneficiaries.
One thought I've had to reduce family drama is to request the trustees disburse all the funds for my own children's education and simply gift my brother's children their "share".
Are there any other legal ways of overriding the specific instructions of the will with a more equitable distribution that everyone involved (and alive) agrees with?
trusts-and-estates
New contributor
add a comment |
My mother recently passed away and her will includes a testamentary trust for a portion of the estate designated for her grandchildren. Unfortunately, the terms of this trust seem to unfairly benefit my children vs. my brother's, which is creating family drama -- so much so that extended family (cousins) designated as trustees want to refuse to get involved. My brother and I are aligned on a more equitable arrangement (with which the trustees concur) but my initial research indicates that testamentary trusts must be followed exactly.
The trust is for the benefit of five grandchildren: Two from my brother, presently age 27 and 22, and my three children, ages 17, 13, and 11. However, rather than equal distribution, the trust specifies the following (excerpting some of the exact legal language):
- for the benefit of any one or more of the living benficiaries
- for their health, and education (including room and board)
- without the necessity of equalization among them at any time
Education is more fully defined in another paragraph and largely applies to tuition, room, board, books, etc. at an accredited college, university, or trade school. The trustee has "absolute discretion" but is advised to "consider all funds or resources available to a beneficiary".
When the youngest beneficiary is 21, the trust is to be divided into two trusts (no specific split percentage is mentioned) based on children of myself and my brother, from which income is paid at the trustee's discretion to the children until the youngest of each of these two trusts reaches age 25, at which point the trust(s) terminate with equal division.
As written, the trust would seem to possibly unfairly benefit me/my children:
- My brother's children have both graduated college, and do not plan to pursue postgraduate education
- His two children's college was funded primarily through Pell Grants; they do not have student loans
- My three children do have college coming up (the first next year!) and my income precludes any significant financial assistance, but is not enough to avoid taking out loans
Obviously there's no clear cut "need" and the "absolute discretion" allows the trustee to make that judgment (which our relatives don't want to have to make.)
Everyone (my brother, myself, trustees) would love to just equally split the benefits to all five grandchildren; however, there does not seem to be a way to do that within the constraints established. Even if we "designated" 60% to be disbursed to my children and supported their college, we would have to wait 10 years until my youngest child reaches age 21 before we could "divide" the trust (100% to my brother's children, 0% to mine) to pay out to the other beneficiaries.
One thought I've had to reduce family drama is to request the trustees disburse all the funds for my own children's education and simply gift my brother's children their "share".
Are there any other legal ways of overriding the specific instructions of the will with a more equitable distribution that everyone involved (and alive) agrees with?
trusts-and-estates
New contributor
add a comment |
My mother recently passed away and her will includes a testamentary trust for a portion of the estate designated for her grandchildren. Unfortunately, the terms of this trust seem to unfairly benefit my children vs. my brother's, which is creating family drama -- so much so that extended family (cousins) designated as trustees want to refuse to get involved. My brother and I are aligned on a more equitable arrangement (with which the trustees concur) but my initial research indicates that testamentary trusts must be followed exactly.
The trust is for the benefit of five grandchildren: Two from my brother, presently age 27 and 22, and my three children, ages 17, 13, and 11. However, rather than equal distribution, the trust specifies the following (excerpting some of the exact legal language):
- for the benefit of any one or more of the living benficiaries
- for their health, and education (including room and board)
- without the necessity of equalization among them at any time
Education is more fully defined in another paragraph and largely applies to tuition, room, board, books, etc. at an accredited college, university, or trade school. The trustee has "absolute discretion" but is advised to "consider all funds or resources available to a beneficiary".
When the youngest beneficiary is 21, the trust is to be divided into two trusts (no specific split percentage is mentioned) based on children of myself and my brother, from which income is paid at the trustee's discretion to the children until the youngest of each of these two trusts reaches age 25, at which point the trust(s) terminate with equal division.
As written, the trust would seem to possibly unfairly benefit me/my children:
- My brother's children have both graduated college, and do not plan to pursue postgraduate education
- His two children's college was funded primarily through Pell Grants; they do not have student loans
- My three children do have college coming up (the first next year!) and my income precludes any significant financial assistance, but is not enough to avoid taking out loans
Obviously there's no clear cut "need" and the "absolute discretion" allows the trustee to make that judgment (which our relatives don't want to have to make.)
Everyone (my brother, myself, trustees) would love to just equally split the benefits to all five grandchildren; however, there does not seem to be a way to do that within the constraints established. Even if we "designated" 60% to be disbursed to my children and supported their college, we would have to wait 10 years until my youngest child reaches age 21 before we could "divide" the trust (100% to my brother's children, 0% to mine) to pay out to the other beneficiaries.
One thought I've had to reduce family drama is to request the trustees disburse all the funds for my own children's education and simply gift my brother's children their "share".
Are there any other legal ways of overriding the specific instructions of the will with a more equitable distribution that everyone involved (and alive) agrees with?
trusts-and-estates
New contributor
My mother recently passed away and her will includes a testamentary trust for a portion of the estate designated for her grandchildren. Unfortunately, the terms of this trust seem to unfairly benefit my children vs. my brother's, which is creating family drama -- so much so that extended family (cousins) designated as trustees want to refuse to get involved. My brother and I are aligned on a more equitable arrangement (with which the trustees concur) but my initial research indicates that testamentary trusts must be followed exactly.
The trust is for the benefit of five grandchildren: Two from my brother, presently age 27 and 22, and my three children, ages 17, 13, and 11. However, rather than equal distribution, the trust specifies the following (excerpting some of the exact legal language):
- for the benefit of any one or more of the living benficiaries
- for their health, and education (including room and board)
- without the necessity of equalization among them at any time
Education is more fully defined in another paragraph and largely applies to tuition, room, board, books, etc. at an accredited college, university, or trade school. The trustee has "absolute discretion" but is advised to "consider all funds or resources available to a beneficiary".
When the youngest beneficiary is 21, the trust is to be divided into two trusts (no specific split percentage is mentioned) based on children of myself and my brother, from which income is paid at the trustee's discretion to the children until the youngest of each of these two trusts reaches age 25, at which point the trust(s) terminate with equal division.
As written, the trust would seem to possibly unfairly benefit me/my children:
- My brother's children have both graduated college, and do not plan to pursue postgraduate education
- His two children's college was funded primarily through Pell Grants; they do not have student loans
- My three children do have college coming up (the first next year!) and my income precludes any significant financial assistance, but is not enough to avoid taking out loans
Obviously there's no clear cut "need" and the "absolute discretion" allows the trustee to make that judgment (which our relatives don't want to have to make.)
Everyone (my brother, myself, trustees) would love to just equally split the benefits to all five grandchildren; however, there does not seem to be a way to do that within the constraints established. Even if we "designated" 60% to be disbursed to my children and supported their college, we would have to wait 10 years until my youngest child reaches age 21 before we could "divide" the trust (100% to my brother's children, 0% to mine) to pay out to the other beneficiaries.
One thought I've had to reduce family drama is to request the trustees disburse all the funds for my own children's education and simply gift my brother's children their "share".
Are there any other legal ways of overriding the specific instructions of the will with a more equitable distribution that everyone involved (and alive) agrees with?
trusts-and-estates
trusts-and-estates
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 5 hours ago
Daniel WiddisDaniel Widdis
1063
1063
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
There is no requirement that a will, or a trust created by a will, be "fair". The will could have left $500,000 in trust for one set of siblings, and $5,000 to another set. It could specifically exclude one beneficiary from some of the benefits, or specify an unequal division. That is all the choice of the testator.
As described in the question, the trust does seem likely to give greater benefits to one set of children than to their cousins. Unless there are grounds to upset the will, that is just how it is. However, the wide "absolute" discretion granted to the trustee might allow the trustee to modify this outcome, but the trustee is not allowed to simply rewrite the trust. How much the payments can be varied will depend on the exact terms of the trust. It does sound as if this trust was not worded as carefully as it might be, since it does not specify a ration when the trust is to be split.
The designated relative can decline to serve as trustee, then any specified alternate would serve, or if there is none, or none who will serve, the court would appoint a trustee.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Daniel Widdis is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38616%2flegal-workarounds-for-testamentary-trust-perceived-as-unfair%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
There is no requirement that a will, or a trust created by a will, be "fair". The will could have left $500,000 in trust for one set of siblings, and $5,000 to another set. It could specifically exclude one beneficiary from some of the benefits, or specify an unequal division. That is all the choice of the testator.
As described in the question, the trust does seem likely to give greater benefits to one set of children than to their cousins. Unless there are grounds to upset the will, that is just how it is. However, the wide "absolute" discretion granted to the trustee might allow the trustee to modify this outcome, but the trustee is not allowed to simply rewrite the trust. How much the payments can be varied will depend on the exact terms of the trust. It does sound as if this trust was not worded as carefully as it might be, since it does not specify a ration when the trust is to be split.
The designated relative can decline to serve as trustee, then any specified alternate would serve, or if there is none, or none who will serve, the court would appoint a trustee.
add a comment |
There is no requirement that a will, or a trust created by a will, be "fair". The will could have left $500,000 in trust for one set of siblings, and $5,000 to another set. It could specifically exclude one beneficiary from some of the benefits, or specify an unequal division. That is all the choice of the testator.
As described in the question, the trust does seem likely to give greater benefits to one set of children than to their cousins. Unless there are grounds to upset the will, that is just how it is. However, the wide "absolute" discretion granted to the trustee might allow the trustee to modify this outcome, but the trustee is not allowed to simply rewrite the trust. How much the payments can be varied will depend on the exact terms of the trust. It does sound as if this trust was not worded as carefully as it might be, since it does not specify a ration when the trust is to be split.
The designated relative can decline to serve as trustee, then any specified alternate would serve, or if there is none, or none who will serve, the court would appoint a trustee.
add a comment |
There is no requirement that a will, or a trust created by a will, be "fair". The will could have left $500,000 in trust for one set of siblings, and $5,000 to another set. It could specifically exclude one beneficiary from some of the benefits, or specify an unequal division. That is all the choice of the testator.
As described in the question, the trust does seem likely to give greater benefits to one set of children than to their cousins. Unless there are grounds to upset the will, that is just how it is. However, the wide "absolute" discretion granted to the trustee might allow the trustee to modify this outcome, but the trustee is not allowed to simply rewrite the trust. How much the payments can be varied will depend on the exact terms of the trust. It does sound as if this trust was not worded as carefully as it might be, since it does not specify a ration when the trust is to be split.
The designated relative can decline to serve as trustee, then any specified alternate would serve, or if there is none, or none who will serve, the court would appoint a trustee.
There is no requirement that a will, or a trust created by a will, be "fair". The will could have left $500,000 in trust for one set of siblings, and $5,000 to another set. It could specifically exclude one beneficiary from some of the benefits, or specify an unequal division. That is all the choice of the testator.
As described in the question, the trust does seem likely to give greater benefits to one set of children than to their cousins. Unless there are grounds to upset the will, that is just how it is. However, the wide "absolute" discretion granted to the trustee might allow the trustee to modify this outcome, but the trustee is not allowed to simply rewrite the trust. How much the payments can be varied will depend on the exact terms of the trust. It does sound as if this trust was not worded as carefully as it might be, since it does not specify a ration when the trust is to be split.
The designated relative can decline to serve as trustee, then any specified alternate would serve, or if there is none, or none who will serve, the court would appoint a trustee.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
15.4k3361
15.4k3361
add a comment |
add a comment |
Daniel Widdis is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Daniel Widdis is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Daniel Widdis is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Daniel Widdis is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f38616%2flegal-workarounds-for-testamentary-trust-perceived-as-unfair%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown