Quote:
Originally Posted by AzMike
That seems like a breech to me. He was only made executor under one condition that he has failed to meet (as far as we know).
|
Well, when you put something into a trust, you're trusting someone else to make the decisions for you either while you are alive or after you die. And those decisions may or may not line up with what you wanted to do. That doesn't mean that the trustee did a bad thing.
Now THIS case is different because he made decisions to benefit himself, and not the beneficiary of the trust (his mother). That is a breech of fiduciary duty, not a breech of contract (because the will doesn't really create a contract, it's a guide but not binding on the trustee).
As long as he was acting in the best interests of his mother, the wish for her to remain in the home is just a wish. He wouldn't have been violating his duty as a trustee. But it seems that is not the case here.
Quote:
This is pretty much why my kid will only get the money after me and the wife are dead. Putting your life in anothers hands is never good. Even if they are supposedly after your best interest.
|
Well I wouldn't write off trusts so quickly. There are many many advantages to trusts, especially as you get older. But if you have the money to be creating a trust, you have the money to hire a professional trustee (an actual money manager or whatever) and don't have to worry about the personal interests of the children. And, in many cases, having the kids as a trustee isn't a bad thing because it makes execution of the will easier in many cases. You just have to be able to trust your kids to do the right thing. If you can't trust that is the case, then you can't have a trust.
__________________
Continue that line of reasoning, Muffin... I'm judging you. Harshly.
You get the respect you give. And if you're a Republican, you b*tch about paybacks being a b*tch. So sorry you're mad your guy is getting the respect you gave ours, Snowflakes.