Trustee of trust - unknown particulars!

[pb4uski]

Depends on the law doesn't it? And she is in a very grey area. I would argue if they put their lives together and she was living with and helping caretake, she is somewhat more then a guest. Co-habituating has it own set of rules so who knows. Anyway still feel it wasn't cool to enter the house while she was gone and without her knowing what was happening.

I'm not sure what law you are referring to, but I'm unaware of any laws that confer tenant-like rights to guests. Argue all you want, but she is a guest.

A surviving cohabiting partner has no property rights to the deceased partner's individual property - unless a partner leaves property to the surviving spouse by will or trust.

https://family.findlaw.com/living-together/cohabitation-property-rights-for-unmarried-couples.html

https://info.legalzoom.com/livein-girlfriend-legal-rights-estate-deceased-virginia-21608.html

.... the law is the law and they should work with it that way...

On that we agree and legally, she has no rights.

If she and the DB shared ownership of the house or rented a flat together then she would have rights... but that isn't the case... she is a guest... no more and no less.

The reason that the trustees entered the house while she was gone was because they had a legitimate need for things (like the mail or any relevant documents or an inventory of what is there) and she was being uncooperative. If she doesn't like it then she can move out.

 

[RunningBum]

If it came down to needing a lawyer for access and anything else, first thing I'd have the lawyer do is start the eviction process. Ridiculous.

 

[ivinsfan]

I'm not sure what law you are referring to, but I'm unaware of any laws that confer tenant-like rights to guests. Argue all you want, but she is a guest.



If she and the DB shared ownership of the house or rented a flat together then she would have rights... but that isn't the case... she is a guest... no more and no less.

The reason that the trustees entered the house while she was gone was because they had a legitimate need for things (like the mail or any relevant documents or an inventory of what is there) and she was being uncooperative. If she doesn't like it then she can move out.

Jeez I'm not arguing It sounds like they are giving her 90 days total to vacate and I think that's more then fair. Gosh haven't there been stories about people renting VRBO type units for a few days and then refusing to move out claiming some silly law or another. I don't know what the law is which is why they should use a lawyer.

 

[pb4uski]

If the law is on their side, why should the trust incur the cost of a lawyer to get her to move out of the trust's property just because she is being stubborn? The trust owns the property... the trustees make decisions for the trust... end of story.

It seemed like you were arguing to me.

Depends on the law doesn't it? And she is in a very grey area. I would argue if they put their lives together and she was living with and helping caretake, she is somewhat more then a guest. Co-habituating has it own set of rules so who knows. Anyway still feel it wasn't cool to enter the house while she was gone and without her knowing what was happening.

 

[RunningBum]

I don't know about arguing, but it seems like ivinsfan was thinking the worst of the OP. For example calling it "not cool" to enter the house while she was away, as if they hadn't tried to make other arrangements first.

I haven't had to be an executor, but from the stories I hear it's a lot of work, and having someone keep you from accessing necessary information makes it a whole lot worse. That's why I say if the GF can't be reasonable, then adios!

 

[ivinsfan]

If the law is on their side, why should the trust incur the cost of a lawyer to get her to move out of the trust's property just because she is being stubborn? The trust owns the property... the trustees make decisions for the trust... end of story.

It seemed like you were arguing to me:

Perhaps because she's not a squatter and had been with the deceased brother for two years and for 17 months of that he suffered from a eventually fatal disease. Just because brother maybe until the end thought he'd beat the cancer and didn't make provision in his will for her doesn't mean the family can't take the high road and spend a few bucks of the BROTHER'S money to make things a little smoother.

Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I'm arguing … I'm really floored by some of the adjectives that are being used to describe this lady. You know I sat in an OR waiting room for 6 hours last year with absolutely dire reports coming out on my DH surgery. For six hours I thought the next person I would see would be his surgeon telling me "Sorry, we did everything we could".

Thank God that didn't happen but if you haven't experienced emotion, or fear like this, or the resulting care it takes to help your SO recover, you might not have an idea of what she is going through right now. I don't know her, but I do kind of know what she might be feeling only to a degree because my DH is still here with me, planting soybeans as I type.

One good thing that has come out of my experience is that I try to imagine how I can be kinder. If it costs a little money so be it.

I absolutely recognize the siblings are grieving too and don't mean to imply they aren't. There are 3 of them and hopefully they can lean on each other.

 

[CRLLS]

Clear and simple in my mind. OP's sis is trustee. Anything that OP says or does has no validity. Only the trustee not the trustee's siblings. That being said, the girlfriend has no claim to anything but her personal belongings. Not the mail, not the home. she was living in the home for 2-3 months. Unless there was a cohabitation agreement, any comfort that she provided to the brother during that time earns her nothing but gratitude from the grieving family.

Sis has the right, and more importantly, a legal responsibility as trustee, to take control of the home and secure it from any reasonable possibility of theft or damage until the trust can be closed. She has complete access to the home whether the girlfriend grants access or not. IMO, any granting for GF to remain in the home for a short period should be documented signed and signed by both parties.

I have to wonder if DB had hired a live-in nurse 24/7 for his last 2-3 months, would he/she be asking to live there 3 more months rent free?

Unfortunately a trust is supposed to eliminate or at least reduce the need for attorney expenses. This particular situation warrants any legal expenses incurred sooner rather than later.

The above sounds mean, and I don't intend it to be. I think granting her 90 days to remain in the home is more than generous under these circumstances.

 

[pb4uski]

Perhaps because she's not a squatter and had been with the deceased brother for two years and for 17 months of that he suffered from a eventually fatal disease. Just because brother maybe until the end thought he'd beat the cancer and didn't make provision in his will for her doesn't mean the family can't take the high road and spend a few bucks of the BROTHER'S money to make things a little smoother.

Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I'm arguing … I'm really floored by some of the adjectives that are being used to describe this lady. You know I sat in an OR waiting room for 6 hours last year with absolutely dire reports coming out on my DH surgery. For six hours I thought the next person I would see would be his surgeon telling me "Sorry, we did everything we could".

Thank God that didn't happen but if you haven't experienced emotion, or fear like this, or the resulting care it takes to help your SO recover, you might not have an idea of what she is going through right now. I don't know her, but I do kind of know what she might be feeling only to a degree because my DH is still here with me, planting soybeans as I type.

One good thing that has come out of my experience is that I try to imagine how I can be kinder. If it costs a little money so be it.

I absolutely recognize the siblings are grieving too and don't mean to imply they aren't. There are 3 of them and hopefully they can lean on each other.

Don't get me wrong... I am sympathetic to the GF... in post #43, I asked/suggested that they sit down face-to-face and talk with her. OTOH, she is behaving strangely and her being uncooperative looks suspicious. Why would she have any reason to be uncooperative with DB's successor trustee? I can't think of any unless she is trying to pull a fast one of some sort. There is no need for a lawyer to have to be involved.... if it gets to that and it looks like it has or is close, then my sympathy for GF dwindles to not much.

I'm more sympathetic to the OP's sister who as successor trustee having to deal with GF's antics when I can't see any reason for it. The successor trustee wants to get the trust settled and the GF is an unnecessary impediment.

 

[ivinsfan]

Agree that it should be just sister, GF and not a three against one type situation. As usual we never know all the details of what happened before the brother died and after the brother died. However this situation was directly triggered by the brother putting sis as trustee and not giving her any details and/or directions of what he wanted for his GF. If the sis had a detailed of list of accounts and balances and wishes of the brother everyone would be in a less stressful positions.

No one ever wrote a guidebook of the proper way to grieve because there isn't one. I think strange or somewhat unexplainable behavior is pretty common in situations like this.

 

[Scratchy]

I'm not sure what law you are referring to, but I'm unaware of any laws that confer tenant-like rights to guests. Argue all you want, but she is a guest.



https://info.legalzoom.com/livein-girlfriend-legal-rights-estate-deceased-virginia-21608.html



On that we agree and legally, she has no rights.

If she and the DB shared ownership of the house or rented a flat together then she would have rights... but that isn't the case... she is a guest... no more and no less.

The reason that the trustees entered the house while she was gone was because they had a legitimate need for things (like the mail or any relevant documents or an inventory of what is there) and she was being uncooperative. If she doesn't like it then she can move out.

I don't know where OP lives but it seems from an earlier post OP was in California at one time. If he still is in California, I can state from experience that the GF does have tenant rights to the home. I was in a similar situation as OP a few years ago. My attorney explained that the GF had status as a "tenant at will". To evict such a tenant against their will, a 30 day notice has to be served. Even after the 30 days, they still cannot be thrown out. They can contest the eviction and demand a trial and the process can take months. May not sound right or reasonable, but that is the law in California.

One can google "tenant at will in California" to see more details on this.

I am very sympathetic to OP for his loss and to the sister for having to deal with an uncooperative GF. But the fact is that she could make life very difficult for the family. She could refuse to vacate. She might indeed have a claim that her residence was entered without permission. This may sound outrageous to some, but it's conceivable the law might support this-many have already asserted she has no more rights than a guest and that is simply not true. She could assert that the deceased had gifted her things in the home, or contest the will/trust. Perhaps OP and family will prevail in the end but there is no doubt GF could cause problems. If the family tries to deny her the rights she has under the law that will quite likely inflame her and backfire. That's why I believe the sister needs to tread very carefully and act only as advised by an attorney. What seems to be common sense and fair may not be the law and may backfire in this case.

 

[ivinsfan]

Scratchy..it's a real mess isn't it...no one knows anything for sure until they consult a local lawyer on the local laws. Probably the very last thing the departed brother expected or wanted. I hope they work it out so they can move on..

 

[pb4uski]

I don't know where OP lives but it seems from an earlier post OP was in California at one time. If he still is in California, I can state from experience that the GF does have tenant rights to the home. I was in a similar situation as OP a few years ago. My attorney explained that the GF had status as a "tenant at will". To evict such a tenant against their will, a 30 day notice has to be served. Even after the 30 days, they still cannot be thrown out. They can contest the eviction and demand a trial and the process can take months. May not sound right or reasonable, but that is the law in California.

One can google "tenant at will in California" to see more details on this.

I am very sympathetic to OP for his loss and to the sister for having to deal with an uncooperative GF. But the fact is that she could make life very difficult for the family. She could refuse to vacate. She might indeed have a claim that her residence was entered without permission. This may sound outrageous to some, but it's conceivable the law might support this-many have already asserted she has no more rights than a guest and that is simply not true. She could assert that the deceased had gifted her things in the home, or contest the will/trust. Perhaps OP and family will prevail in the end but there is no doubt GF could cause problems. If the family tries to deny her the rights she has under the law that will quite likely inflame her and backfire. That's why I believe the sister needs to tread very carefully and act only as advised by an attorney. What seems to be common sense and fair may not be the law and may backfire in this case.

FWIW, in none of the posts in this thread has the OP mentioned California... I'm not sure where you are getting that from... nothing mentioned by the OP.

If it is California and she is a tenant-at-will, then she has 30 days according to the below.... but the successor trustee may need to get a lawyer involved to serve notice... the successor trustee has agreed to give her 90 days... if it were me I would have the GF served with a Notice to Quit 90 days from when the successor trustee agreed to 90 days and frame it as just a legal formality documenting the 90 days that the successor trustee agreed to give her.... all assuming that the GF is cooperative... if not, then I would shorten the Notice to Quit to something less than 90 days.

.... Anyone who has been on the property for more than three days but less than a year, and has not paid rent, can be served a 30 Day Notice to Quit that serves to terminate their Tenancy At Will. Homeowners or apartment-sharers should talk to a lawyer about how to properly file and serve the notice. ...

https://sfvbareferral.com/when-does-a-guest-become-a-tenant-in-california/

 

[Scratchy]

Scratchy..it's a real mess isn't it...no one knows anything for sure until they consult a local lawyer on the local laws. Probably the very last thing the departed brother expected or wanted. I hope they work it out so they can move on..

For sure-these things can bring out the worst in people too. Inheritance issues have probably torn more families apart than anything else. I do hope this gets resolved amicably.

 

[Scratchy]

FWIW, in none of the posts in this thread has the OP mentioned California... I'm not sure where you are getting that from... nothing mentioned by the OP.


.

Correct, OP has not mentioned where he lives in this thread. It was in another thread, in 2017, OP stated he is in California. Even if he is not in California now, the jurisdiction the GF lives in may afford her some rights. And sometimes cities go beyond state laws.

http://www.early-retirement.org/for...to-get-my-act-together-84397.html#post1841851

 

[pb4uski]

Got it... but it is where DB lived that is key.

 

[Travelfreek]

Trustee of trust - unknown particulars

California is the state. So, things got even more interesting since I last posted. Just found out a couple of hours ago that my sis (trustee) is the beneficiary on a $200k IRA all by herself. My brother and I and her are beneficiaries on the house and other money (bank account and trust account worth $70k total - the amount owed on the house). It's really hard to accept that he (our deceased brother) would favor one of us so much over the others. But, it is what it is, legally. When my sis first found out, she thought my deceased brother made an error and meant for it to go to the trust and maybe just got confused and listed her as beneficiary vs. trustee. She said she would make it right with the two of us left out with the attorney helping her figure it out.

She learned earlier this week that the attorney clarified w/ our now deceased brother that he wanted it this way when he was alive. Ouch! My sis now seems like she's going to leave it the way my brother had it. Oh, well, I guess that's legal and okay. He was closest to her as far as their personalities go. But we all got along fine and spent all of our holidays together for the last 63 years. It hurts, but I can power through this. So his gf got nothing and no recognition though he was crazy for her and spent the last 2 years dating her exclusively. My one sis got the lion's share and my brother and I each got 1/3 of house and bank account. I never knew how this trust was written as my sis never shared with us till now. But I do believe that she knew nothing about the IRA until he passed on.

Kind of messy in my opinion but he's entitled to do what he wanted. It just leaves hard feelings for 3 of us out of 4 (including the gf).

 

[Bamaman]

Our accountant daughter is.on.our checking and.savings accounts and she is our executor. She can also get into our safety deposit box where our will, POA, etc. are kept. Our directives are with the will on what she needs to do. Our IRA rollover accounts have the beneficiaries named and is excluded from probate--where the real money is.

No one should agree to be an executor of trusts without the tools to do their job. And that includes having access to the defendant's funds and get the ball rolling on settling the estate.

As far as the girlfriend goes,.ask her to vacate the premises by written certified mail. State laws.stipulate days required to evict and they are not slanted toward the property owner or estate. Then file for an eviction hearing in Circuit Court. It can take a month or two to get anyone out even if they are a squatte because the person must be served summons.and a court.hearing.scheduled. I performed an eviction and it still cost $320 court costs and sheriff's fees--with no lawyer's fees.

 

[Winemaker]

Does OP know her legal name to even give/serve legal notice?

Has GF transferred utilities into her name? Or is she expecting the estate to pay those? The estate can't pay if they don't get the bill. Does CA permit the utilities to be turned off if not paid? In PA, the sewage authority is a quasi- government agency, if sewage not paid, water goes off.

If she has switched them to her name, it could be a sign of good faith, or a sign of hunkering down. Since she does have landlord experience, she knows the laws and the limits. One of the reasons I don't rent to lawyers, and they're not a protected class.

 

[pb4uski]

Our accountant daughter is.on.our checking and.savings accounts...

Depending on how it is titled, technically those accounts would be your daughter's upon your passing, whether that was your intent or not. Also, if your daughter were sued those accounts could be viewed as some of her assets. There are lots of benefits of joint accounts but pitfalls as well.

 

[footenote]

Travelfreek - I feel your pain. DF disinherited both my brother and me because of my brother's irresponsible money habits, leaving the bulk of his estate to his second wife. It took years to get over this emotionally.

(At the time, stepmom vowed to leave her estate equally to DB and me. She and I have kept a cordial, long-distance relationship, but she has grandkids from her first marriage going to college right now, so I count on zero inheritance from her.)

Be kind to yourself - working through your feelings will take time.

 

[ivinsfan]

California is the state. So, things got even more interesting since I last posted. Just found out a couple of hours ago that my sis (trustee) is the beneficiary on a $200k IRA all by herself. My brother and I and her are beneficiaries on the house and other money (bank account and trust account worth $70k total - the amount owed on the house). It's really hard to accept that he (our deceased brother) would favor one of us so much over the others. But, it is what it is, legally. When my sis first found out, she thought my deceased brother made an error and meant for it to go to the trust and maybe just got confused and listed her as beneficiary vs. trustee. She said she would make it right with the two of us left out with the attorney helping her figure it out.

She learned earlier this week that the attorney clarified w/ our now deceased brother that he wanted it this way when he was alive. Ouch! My sis now seems like she's going to leave it the way my brother had it. Oh, well, I guess that's legal and okay. He was closest to her as far as their personalities go. But we all got along fine and spent all of our holidays together for the last 63 years. It hurts, but I can power through this. So his gf got nothing and no recognition though he was crazy for her and spent the last 2 years dating her exclusively. My one sis got the lion's share and my brother and I each got 1/3 of house and bank account. I never knew how this trust was written as my sis never shared with us till now. But I do believe that she knew nothing about the IRA until he passed on.

Kind of messy in my opinion but he's entitled to do what he wanted. It just leaves hard feelings for 3 of us out of 4 (including the gf).

Ok, well let's see what happens going forward. Your sister will be entitled to pay herself out of your joint holdings for doing the work connected to settling the estate. How are you going to feel if she takes money. To be frank your DB is starting to sound like a bit of a character. No it's not your sisters fault he wanted her to have that money, but your brother knowing he was probably dying gave little thought to your siblings relationships and any possible hard feelings that might result from his actions. It's the "Mom liked you best" aspect that is hard to get over.

As to the GF, it's obvious now that DB made a deliberate decision to give her nothing for whatever reason. I sense a little more sympathy to the GF in your last post. So maybe she like you, hurts but in the end she will be able to power through, because what choice do you have. All I ever said from the beginning was not to judge her so hastily and to give a little time for processing things before assuming the worst of her.

Good Luck

 

[Travelfreek]

Trustee of trust - unknown particulars

The Trust was executed in 2010 and not updated since (almost 9 years ago). The IRA was dated 2012 with my sis (trustee) as beneficiary (7 years ago).

The attorney is going to write GF letter to vacate in 60 days from now. GF is not being charged at all. She's not cooperating as far as mail goes or access to house to review bills and accounts. Utilities and other payments are being handled by sis/trustee from new account set up with our DBs assets. Mail is now being forwarded to my sis (trustee). House payments are now current ($2k a month). GF is getting free rent at no cost to her. An appraisal is going to be done in June on the house. We are hoping to sell by early Sept. Gonna be messy one way or the other.

I believe my sis (trustee) should be paid for the work she is doing though the other 2 of us are or will be helping out in a very big way, esp when it comes time to clear out the house (ugh). But if she's also going to keep the proceeds of the big IRA, that's kind of over the top in my opinion. I guess you could argue it's apples and oranges. The amount owed on the house is about equal to the cash available in the trust account. So it's going to be tight as far as what's left if any after house sale. I wish my DB would have paid off the house - it would have made things so much easier. Now, we may have to come up w/ money to repair to sell!

 

[RunningBum]

The amount owed on the house is about equal to the cash available in the trust account. So it's going to be tight as far as what's left if any after house sale. I wish my DB would have paid off the house - it would have made things so much easier. Now, we may have to come up w/ money to repair to sell!

I don't follow the logic here. The house is worth $X, and $Y is owed on it. Presumably X>Y, but even that is beside the point, though I'd probably just let it default if that's the case. The trust also has Y in cash. The Y's cancel themselves out, so you have X to split, or at least X after repair expenses. How are you going to wind up with nothing left over from the house sale?

If you're doing extensive clean up work, you could lobby for that as an estate expense. If sis has to hire people for cleaning and repairs, it comes out of the estate, and if she's going to charge the estate for her own time, yours is worth something too. Just a thought. But she may only charge for any actual expenses incurred, not for her time.

 

[Scratchy]

California is the state. So, things got even more interesting since I last posted. Just found out a couple of hours ago that my sis (trustee) is the beneficiary on a $200k IRA all by herself. My brother and I and her are beneficiaries on the house and other money (bank account and trust account worth $70k total - the amount owed on the house). It's really hard to accept that he (our deceased brother) would favor one of us so much over the others. But, it is what it is, legally. When my sis first found out, she thought my deceased brother made an error and meant for it to go to the trust and maybe just got confused and listed her as beneficiary vs. trustee. She said she would make it right with the two of us left out with the attorney helping her figure it out.

She learned earlier this week that the attorney clarified w/ our now deceased brother that he wanted it this way when he was alive. Ouch! My sis now seems like she's going to leave it the way my brother had it. Oh, well, I guess that's legal and okay. He was closest to her as far as their personalities go. But we all got along fine and spent all of our holidays together for the last 63 years. It hurts, but I can power through this. So his gf got nothing and no recognition though he was crazy for her and spent the last 2 years dating her exclusively. My one sis got the lion's share and my brother and I each got 1/3 of house and bank account. I never knew how this trust was written as my sis never shared with us till now. But I do believe that she knew nothing about the IRA until he passed on.

Kind of messy in my opinion but he's entitled to do what he wanted. It just leaves hard feelings for 3 of us out of 4 (including the gf).

if I were you I would have a heart to heart with your sister and tell her that what your brother has wrought is painful for you but you recognize you have to accept it, and that she had no part in its design. And that you will allow her to do her job as trustee and executor, and you will step back from the process, as that will allow your healing process to begin. It is her job to handle things from here on out and any involvement of the siblings may be counterproductive.

Sorry to hear of this development, I agree it sounds unfair, but who knows what your brother was thinking or even how much he thought about it, or understood the implications.

 

[Sunset]

Travelfreek - I feel your pain. DF disinherited both my brother and me because of my brother's irresponsible money habits, leaving the bulk of his estate to his second wife. It took years to get over this emotionally.
....

Interestingly I'm in the same situation, but as the DF.
My will should I die before my DW , leaves 5% to each of my children from a shorter previous life, and 1% to my sibling.

The bulk of my estate goes to my DW, and I'm totally comfortable with that as she needs/deserves the money for the remaining years.

This has nothing to do with loving the children.