|
Hi all,
This lawyer set up a living trust for my father, naming both myself
and my sister as co-trustees, and 50% beneficiaries. Although
the will and the trust clearly indicate that my father intended
for his estate to administer the proceeds of his life insurance,
and use that money for such things as paying for funeral, paying
death-related expenses, my father apparently never made his
living trust a beneficiary of the life insurance.
He did not leave the policy, only contact information to the
benefits department of his former employer, and the amount
of the insurance.
I looked through the trust paperwork again, and found that the
lawyer did indeed advise my father that he needed to make
the trust the beneficiary of the insurance. It's on paper. My father
even wrote a note indicating how long they discussed the matter -
15 whole minutes. (if he did not intend to include the insurance
in the estate, why did they even discuss it that long?)
I am completely mystified. It was seven years ago; the lawyer
certainly isn't going to recall the conversation. The assets were
never listed in the trust paperwork. There is no record of my father
ever following through on it. Of course, no probate court can touch
life insurance.
I've been told by subsequent lawyers that the assets most certainly
should have been listed in the trust paperwork (despite what the
lawyer's daughter said). Do I have any recourse against the lawyer,
and/or should I have to pay him to even reply to me?
I've even got the receipt for how much my father paid him, not that
that would be useful.
I don't get it - was it my father's monumental screw-up, or the
lawyer's? The lawyer's daughter was b.s.-ing me, and I did
not appreciate it.
Thanks for any thoughts,
Pipian
PS it is at least a valid trust - as I was advised by other probate
lawyers. ( but it's not a complete one).
|
| |
| |
Hi all,
This lawyer set up a living trust for my father, naming both myself
and my sister as co-trustees, and 50% beneficiaries. Although
the will and the trust clearly indicate that my father intended
for his estate to administer the proceeds of his life insurance,
and use that money for such things as paying for funeral, paying
death-related expenses, my father apparently never made his
living trust a beneficiary of the life insurance.
He did not leave the policy, only contact information to the
benefits department of his former employer, and the amount
of the insurance.
I looked through the trust paperwork again, and found that the
lawyer did indeed advise my father that he needed to make
the trust the beneficiary of the insurance. It's on paper. My father
even wrote a note indicating how long they discussed the matter -
15 whole minutes. (if he did not intend to include the insurance
in the estate, why did they even discuss it that long?)
I am completely mystified. It was seven years ago; the lawyer
certainly isn't going to recall the conversation. The assets were
never listed in the trust paperwork. There is no record of my father
ever following through on it. Of course, no probate court can touch
life insurance.
I've been told by subsequent lawyers that the assets most certainly
should have been listed in the trust paperwork (despite what the
lawyer's daughter said). Do I have any recourse against the lawyer,
and/or should I have to pay him to even reply to me?
I've even got the receipt for how much my father paid him, not that
that would be useful.
I don't get it - was it my father's monumental screw-up, or the
lawyer's? The lawyer's daughter was b.s.-ing me, and I did
not appreciate it.
Failure to make the trust the beneficiary under the life insurance
policy was the lawyer's fault if and only if (you can prove that)
the lawyer agreed or promised to assume that responsibility.
If, as you say, the lawyer advised your father, in writing, that
he (your father) had to change the beneficiary, then the failure
to do it would seem to be nobody's fault but your father's.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 22:48:06 GMT, "B" <nospamblam@nc.rr.com> wrote:
Is the problem that the insurance goes to his non-trust estate and will be
divided among heirs other than you and your sister? If there are no other
named heirs like uncles, aunts, neices and nephews and friends and
neighbors, etc., then you'll end up with the money and not pay tax if the
estate is $1M or less.
I can't know for sure who it goes to, or even if
the estate was named beneficiary, only that I
personally was not named (by my name not
as a trustee), as a beneficiary, 10 years before
this trust was created. Yet it's the same contact info
that he left with that exact trust paperwork.
There are no other named heirs in the will. None.
But the will is completely meaningless here;
it's outside the purview of any probate court.
My father would not have known that, but the
lawyer would have.
Pipian
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 16:47:11 -0500, "tomG" <tmg@jorsm.com> wrote:
Failure to make the trust the beneficiary under the life insurance
policy was the lawyer's fault if and only if (you can prove that)
the lawyer agreed or promised to assume that responsibility.
No evidence of that.
If, as you say, the lawyer advised your father, in writing, that
he (your father) had to change the beneficiary, then the failure
to do it would seem to be nobody's fault but your father's.
I feared as much.
Thanks,
Pipian
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 22:48:06 GMT, "B" <nospamblam@nc.rr.com> wrote:
Is the problem that the insurance goes to his non-trust estate and will be
divided among heirs other than you and your sister? If there are no other
named heirs like uncles, aunts, neices and nephews and friends and
neighbors, etc., then you'll end up with the money and not pay tax if the
estate is $1M or less.
I tend to think that neither the estate, nor I, will see a penny
of it.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 16:09:21 -0700, pipian_verde@hotmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 22:48:06 GMT, "B" <nospamblam@nc.rr.com> wrote:
I tend to think that neither the estate, nor I, will see a penny
of it.
Have you gotten in touch with the insurance company and tried to
collect the insurance yet?
Instead of spending so much time trying to figure out what the lawyer
did or didn't do, and whether you can sue the lawyer, why don't you
FIRST find out to whom the life insurance is payable? It may turn out
that it doesn't make any difference whatsoever whether or not the
insurance beneficiary designation was changed.
And, contrary to what "B" posted, changing the life insurance
beneficiary designation would never have saved any tax, regardless of
the size of the estate.
So, the ONLY issue worth talking about is whether the life insurance
ends up payable to the right people, and you don't know yet whether or
not there is a problem.
**Dan Evans
**I post information, not advice.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:29:49 GMT, Dan Evans <dan@evans-legal.com>
Have you gotten in touch with the insurance company and tried to
collect the insurance yet?
Instead of spending so much time trying to figure out what the lawyer
did or didn't do, and whether you can sue the lawyer, why don't you
FIRST find out to whom the life insurance is payable?
I, as an individual, was not made a beneficiary, 17 years ago. They
will not tell me anything other than that. Insurance seems to be a
sacred cow.
It may turn out that it doesn't make any difference whatsoever
whether or not the insurance beneficiary designation was changed.
It would have made a difference.
And, contrary to what "B" posted, changing the life insurance
beneficiary designation would never have saved any tax, regardless of
the size of the estate.
So, the ONLY issue worth talking about is whether the life insurance
ends up payable to the right people, and you don't know yet whether or
not there is a problem.
His intentions as stated in the trust (set up 7 years ago) were
pretty clear. He did not do what he intended to do, at the time the
trust was set up. It seems clear he is the only one responsible.
Thanks,
Pipian
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 10:58:22 -0700, pipian_verde@hotmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 17:29:49 GMT, Dan Evans <dan@evans-legal.com>
I, as an individual, was not made a beneficiary, 17 years ago. They
will not tell me anything other than that.
They won't tell anyone who the beneficiaries are?
That doesn't make any sense. Suppose the named beneficiaries are
dead? The insurance company is going to just sit on the proceeds and
not pay the policy to anyone?
Talk to the insurance company again. Find out how to find out to whom
the insurance is payable. If there is no living beneficiary, then the
insurance should be payable to the decedent's estate, and you can take
out letters testamentary in order to collect the insurance.
So, the ONLY issue worth talking about is whether the life insurance
ends up payable to the right people, and you don't know yet whether or
not there is a problem.
His intentions as stated in the trust (set up 7 years ago) were
pretty clear. He did not do what he intended to do, at the time the
trust was set up. It seems clear he is the only one responsible.
With that and a quarter you can make a telephone call.
I'm getting the sense that you are more interested in placing blame
than finding out whether there is a problem, or how to fix the
problem.
**Dan Evans
**I post information, not advice.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:56:34 GMT, Dan Evans <dan@evans-legal.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 10:58:22 -0700, pipian_verde@hotmail.com wrote:
They won't tell anyone who the beneficiaries are?
The informed me that they had mailed the information to the
beneficiary listed on the policy.
That doesn't make any sense. Suppose the named beneficiaries are
dead? The insurance company is going to just sit on the proceeds and
not pay the policy to anyone?
Either you don't have previous experience with this, or I was advised
wrong by two different lawyers, and the insurance co. By law, they
cannot divulge who the beneficiary is. They can only tell me that I
am not it. I brought up the trust, and they would not admit anything.
All they would say was that they had mailed the paperwork to the
beneficiary. End of story.
Talk to the insurance company again. Find out how to find out to whom
the insurance is payable. If there is no living beneficiary, then the
insurance should be payable to the decedent's estate, and you can take
out letters testamentary in order to collect the insurance.
I found in my fathers effects, there was a piece of not very
official looking paper in his files, on which he had named only my
sister (now also a co-trustee of the trust) as his beneficiary, ten
years before he set up this trust. At the time, I was out of the
country, and she was at the height of her cocaine and alcohol
addiction.
Ten years later, he creates the trust, and yes he does state in there
that the proceeds of the insurance are to be used for death-related
expenses. He also left a personal note (not that that has any legal
import) in the trust binder to the effect that he had left a life
insurance policy *to pay for funeral*. He ended up with a
cardboard box and a quick cremation. This is not a wealthy trust.
His intentions as stated in the trust (set up 7 years ago) were
pretty clear. He did not do what he intended to do, at the time the
trust was set up. It seems clear he is the only one responsible.
With that and a quarter you can make a telephone call.
Exactly.
I'm getting the sense that you are more interested in placing blame
than finding out whether there is a problem, or how to fix the
problem.
Do you? I pretty much feel I had my question answered by the first
person that replied. Everything else has been, well, icing on the
newsgroup cake.
Pipian.
|
| |
| |
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:35:51 -0700, pipian_verde@hotmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:56:34 GMT, Dan Evans <dan@evans-legal.com>
wrote:
The informed me that they had mailed the information to the
beneficiary listed on the policy.
Either you don't have previous experience with this, or I was advised
wrong by two different lawyers, and the insurance co. By law, they
cannot divulge who the beneficiary is.
By law, the executor of an estate MUST list on the federal estate tax
return (Form 706) all of the insurance owned by the decedent. The
insurance company is required to provide this information to the
executor on Form 712.
Now, you might not be required to file a federal estate tax return,
but you don't really know that until you know how much insurance the
decedent owned.
So, if you really want to know about the insurance, and to whom it is
payable, all you need to do is get letters testamentary and request a
Form 712 from the insurance company.
**Dan Evans
**I post information, not advice.
|
| |
| |
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 15:54:46 GMT, Dan Evans <dan@evans-legal.com>
wrote:
By law, the executor of an estate MUST list on the federal estate tax
return (Form 706) all of the insurance owned by the decedent. The
insurance company is required to provide this information to the
executor on Form 712.
Now, you might not be required to file a federal estate tax return,
but you don't really know that until you know how much insurance the
decedent owned.
So, if you really want to know about the insurance, and to whom it is
payable, all you need to do is get letters testamentary and request a
Form 712 from the insurance company.
Thanks, I'll download those forms today.
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 06:35:35 -0500, "tomG" <tmg@jorsm.com> wrote:
If nothing else, then at least the executor of the estate would have
the right to this information, for estate tax return purposes.
Tom, it was never made an asset of the estate.....
Nevertheless, it is a part of the -taxable- estate and must be
included in the executor's federal estate tax return.
|
| |
| |
|
