kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:11:56 GMT -5
A trustee has legal obligations to follow the terms of the trust and protect the corpus of the trust. It is not the trustees problem if you disclaimed your right to lifetime use of the jewelry or other items. In that event they go to the beneficiaries of the trust outright, if that is what the trust provides. Obviously the terms of this trust control everything, but, in general terms I dont believe a trustee can horse trade with you to release items early and in return give you ownership of a potentially valuable trust asset, like a painting. You made the decision about the jewelry and personal items. It is not up to the trustee to give you anything that is not laid out in detail in the trust or to reward you for anything. As a Trustee myself, I agree with the first bolded statement. I quibble with the second.
Again, it's how it's written BUT it's ALSO about the Trustee's "willingness to work with beneficiaries" while simultaneously fulfilling their obligations. The two are not mutually exclusive.
BTDT. Have all three t-shirts to show for it. But as always - YMMV.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 17:16:51 GMT -5
Yup, that's true. Hopefully it'll be done. If not, oh, well. I probably shouldn't have been decent about it but I know DH wanted them to have the stuff so I followed his wishes. I was with DH for almost 6 years. I'm getting real tired of having it pointed out my legal marriage was brief. Sounds like the nastiness of a former poster. I stopped posting because of her.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Apr 7, 2016 17:16:56 GMT -5
From what I remember being posted, he really wanted to get married and zib didnt. We kinda talked/eccouraged her to do it. For which I apologize zib.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 17:18:09 GMT -5
A trustee has legal obligations to follow the terms of the trust and protect the corpus of the trust. It is not the trustees problem if you disclaimed your right to lifetime use of the jewelry or other items. In that event they go to the beneficiaries of the trust outright, if that is what the trust provides. Obviously the terms of this trust control everything, but, in general terms I dont believe a trustee can horse trade with you to release items early and in return give you ownership of a potentially valuable trust asset, like a painting. You made the decision about the jewelry and personal items. It is not up to the trustee to give you anything that is not laid out in detail in the trust or to reward you for anything. If it was me, unless the trust has very significant assets, I would give it some thought before I exhausted the estate by piling up the attorney fees to fight over a prenup. Just curious: How long were you married? What is the value of the estate/trust? Did you bring anything to the marriage in the way of assets? Who supported whom and in what percentages during the marriage? Sorry. Not posting any of that info.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 17:19:03 GMT -5
From what I remember being posted, he really wanted to get married and zib didnt. We kinda talked/eccouraged her to do it. For which I apologize zib. It's alright. I'd have stood by him anyway whether we were married or not.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:19:26 GMT -5
From what I remember being posted, he really wanted to get married and zib didnt. We kinda talked/eccouraged her to do it. For which I apologize zib. Why apologize? She wouldn't have a shot at anything if she didn't have a prenup to bust
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:20:40 GMT -5
She was married a very short amount of time and I think that is my biggest issue with suing the trust. I can see a wife of 30 years suing but Im pretty sure they weren't married a year. Things like this make me realize that the only way to protect ones assets is to never remarry. Are you saying or implying that Zib's DH was backhandedly trying to protect his assets from her??
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 14, 2024 15:27:29 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 7, 2016 17:21:02 GMT -5
A trustee has legal obligations to follow the terms of the trust and protect the corpus of the trust. It is not the trustees problem if you disclaimed your right to lifetime use of the jewelry or other items. In that event they go to the beneficiaries of the trust outright, if that is what the trust provides. Obviously the terms of this trust control everything, but, in general terms I dont believe a trustee can horse trade with you to release items early and in return give you ownership of a potentially valuable trust asset, like a painting. You made the decision about the jewelry and personal items. It is not up to the trustee to give you anything that is not laid out in detail in the trust or to reward you for anything. If it was me, unless the trust has very significant assets, I would give it some thought before I exhausted the estate by piling up the attorney fees to fight over a prenup. Just curious: How long were you married? What is the value of the estate/trust? Did you bring anything to the marriage in the way of assets? Who supported whom and in what percentages during the marriage? She was married a very short amount of time and I think that is my biggest issue with suing the trust. I can see a wife of 30 years suing but Im pretty sure they weren't married a year. Things like this make me realize that the only way to protect ones assets is to never remarry. I think the problem here is that things were not quite set up the way they were promised. I don't see it as - in trying to take anything her husband intended for his children, it seems to me that most of the problems are stemming from his failure to put things in place to make sure she got what he told her she would. I'm not familiar at all with estates and trusts, but in my (very) limited understanding it seems like he left some loose ends dangling and it's made things more complicated than they had to be.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Apr 7, 2016 17:21:03 GMT -5
A trustee has legal obligations to follow the terms of the trust and protect the corpus of the trust. It is not the trustees problem if you disclaimed your right to lifetime use of the jewelry or other items. In that event they go to the beneficiaries of the trust outright, if that is what the trust provides. Obviously the terms of this trust control everything, but, in general terms I dont believe a trustee can horse trade with you to release items early and in return give you ownership of a potentially valuable trust asset, like a painting. You made the decision about the jewelry and personal items. It is not up to the trustee to give you anything that is not laid out in detail in the trust or to reward you for anything. If it was me, unless the trust has very significant assets, I would give it some thought before I exhausted the estate by piling up the attorney fees to fight over a prenup. Just curious: How long were you married? What is the value of the estate/trust? Did you bring anything to the marriage in the way of assets? Who supported whom and in what percentages during the marriage? She was married a very short amount of time and I think that is my biggest issue with suing the trust. I can see a wife of 30 years suing but Im pretty sure they weren't married a year. Things like this make me realize that the only way to protect ones assets is to never remarry. We also have to consider what Zib contributed to the relationship as well as the marriage -- companionship, sex, 24/7 nursing care for a VERY ill man for several years. IIRC, she retired to be with him as well and sold a house(?). In other words, she made significant financial and lifestyle changes as a contribution to the relationship and marriage. Just because her DH passed away prematurely doesn't mean she shouldn't be taken care of. It's not the length of the marriage that matters, it's the quality and the behaviors of both spouses during the marriage. I think her late DH got the far better end of the deal.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:22:45 GMT -5
It's not the length of the marriage that matters, it's the quality and the behaviors of both spouses during the marriage. I think her late DH got the far better end of the deal. Amen.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:22:48 GMT -5
She was married a very short amount of time and I think that is my biggest issue with suing the trust. I can see a wife of 30 years suing but Im pretty sure they weren't married a year. Things like this make me realize that the only way to protect ones assets is to never remarry. Are you saying or implying that Zib's DH was backhandedly trying to protect his assets from her?? Im not implyin anything. One gets a prenup to protect ones assets.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 17:22:56 GMT -5
She was married a very short amount of time and I think that is my biggest issue with suing the trust. I can see a wife of 30 years suing but Im pretty sure they weren't married a year. Things like this make me realize that the only way to protect ones assets is to never remarry. We also have to consider what Zib contributed to the relationship as well as the marriage -- companionship, sex, 24/7 nursing care for a VERY ill man for several years. IIRC, she retired to be with him as well and sold a house(?). In other words, she made significant financial and lifestyle changes as a contribution to the relationship and marriage. Just because her DH passed away prematurely doesn't mean she shouldn't be taken care of. It's not the length of the marriage that matters, it's the quality and the behaviors of both spouses during the marriage. I think her late DH got the far better end of the deal. Thank you.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Apr 7, 2016 17:23:45 GMT -5
From what I remember being posted, he really wanted to get married and zib didnt. We kinda talked/eccouraged her to do it. For which I apologize zib. Why apologize? She wouldn't have a shot at anything if she didn't have a prenup to bust because she had qualms and I, for one, encouraged her to dismiss her own gut and doubts. My apology has nothing to do with her trust and money but for pushing an action that had caused her pain.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:24:19 GMT -5
Why apologize? She wouldn't have a shot at anything if she didn't have a prenup to bust because she had qualms and I, for one, encouraged her to dismiss her own gut and doubts. My apology has nothing to do with her trust and money but for pushing an action that had caused her pain. Gotcha.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:27:17 GMT -5
She was married a very short amount of time and I think that is my biggest issue with suing the trust. I can see a wife of 30 years suing but Im pretty sure they weren't married a year. Things like this make me realize that the only way to protect ones assets is to never remarry. We also have to consider what Zib contributed to the relationship as well as the marriage -- companionship, sex, 24/7 nursing care for a VERY ill man for several years. IIRC, she retired to be with him as well and sold a house(?). In other words, she made significant financial and lifestyle changes as a contribution to the relationship and marriage. Just because her DH passed away prematurely doesn't mean she shouldn't be taken care of. It's not the length of the marriage that matters, it's the quality and the behaviors of both spouses during the marriage. I think her late DH got the far better end of the deal. She didn't even want to marry him. Im sorry, but I have a hard time thinking she is entitled to significant assets because she changed her mind at the end of his life. I know that not many agree with me and that's ok. But to sign a prenup and claim to not want his assets only to sue to get money screams greed to me. I won't remarry (this situation is dealing that for me!) but if I was ever dumb enough to, I wouldn't feel entitled to someone's money nor would I think they were entitled to mine. To sign a prenup and then get pissed because you didn't get what you thought you would just doesn't sit well with me.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:32:04 GMT -5
She didn't even want to marry him. Im sorry, but I have a hard time thinking she is entitled to significant assets because she changed her mind at the end of his life. I know that not many agree with me and that's ok. But to sign a prenup and claim to not want his assets only to sue to get money screams greed to me. I won't remarry (this situation is dealing that for me!) but if I was ever dumb enough to, I wouldn't feel entitled to someone's money nor would I think they were entitled to mine. To sign a prenup and then get pissed because you didn't get what you thought you would just doesn't sit well with me. The problem is: you don't know what her prenup says. How do you know she agreed to sign everything away?
It is perfectly reasonable to have a prenup that says "you will be taken care of while you live, but when you're gone the assets/inheritance will go to my children."
It is perfectly reasonable to have a prenup that specifies any manner of a LOT of different things.
Not all prenups are documents by selfish pr*cks who want to screw over a second spouse and leave them in the dust out of a fear they are being "used."
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 17:33:11 GMT -5
The prenup AGAIN was only in case of divorce. His will and trust were drawn up in 2013. Way before our marriage.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 17:34:35 GMT -5
Our prenup also stated in case of divorce I got custody of his cat. It was a joke between us.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:34:41 GMT -5
She didn't even want to marry him. Im sorry, but I have a hard time thinking she is entitled to significant assets because she changed her mind at the end of his life. I know that not many agree with me and that's ok. But to sign a prenup and claim to not want his assets only to sue to get money screams greed to me. I won't remarry (this situation is dealing that for me!) but if I was ever dumb enough to, I wouldn't feel entitled to someone's money nor would I think they were entitled to mine. To sign a prenup and then get pissed because you didn't get what you thought you would just doesn't sit well with me. The problem is: you don't know what her prenup says. How do you know she agreed to sign everything away?
It is perfectly reasonable to have a prenup that says "you will be taken care of while you live, but when you're gone the assets/inheritance will go to my children."
It is perfectly reasonable to have a prenup that specifies a LOT of different things.
Not all prenups are documents by selfish pr*cks who want to screw over a second spouse and leave them in the dust out of a fear they are being "used."
She actually said herself that her prenup gave her nothing if he died. She claims she didn't want his money because she has her own. Yet is now suig to bust the prenup. That says she actually did want his money. She can easily let the estate deal wth the car and the apartment.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:37:11 GMT -5
Yup, that's true. Hopefully it'll be done. If not, oh, well. I probably shouldn't have been decent about it but I know DH wanted them to have the stuff so I followed his wishes. I was with DH for almost 6 years. I'm getting real tired of having it pointed out my legal marriage was brief. Sounds like the nastiness of a former poster. I stopped posting because of her. Im not being nasty by pointing out the truth. You were married a very short time. If you didn't marry before he died you wouldn't be entitled to anything. You didn't even want to marry him so I have no clue why you want to bust the prenup to go after his assets.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:38:28 GMT -5
The problem is: you don't know what her prenup says. How do you know she agreed to sign everything away?
It is perfectly reasonable to have a prenup that says "you will be taken care of while you live, but when you're gone the assets/inheritance will go to my children."
It is perfectly reasonable to have a prenup that specifies a LOT of different things.
Not all prenups are documents by selfish pr*cks who want to screw over a second spouse and leave them in the dust out of a fear they are being "used."
She actually said herself that her prenup gave her nothing if he died. She claims she didn't want his money because she has her own. Yet is now suig to bust the prenup. That says she actually did want his money. She can easily let the estate deal wth the car and the apartment. A prenup would not NEED to give her anything if he died. His Will would specify what arrangements were made for his legal spouse (Zib) and what were made for his children.
Sorry but Zib has my sympathies on this one. He promised to care for her, but apparently never followed up with the paperwork. That's on him, but she lives with the fallout.
She's in a tough spot not of her making. I don't blame her for trying to get the Trust administrator to do right by her - even if it means a lawsuit.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Apr 7, 2016 17:38:47 GMT -5
Yup, that's true. Hopefully it'll be done. If not, oh, well. I probably shouldn't have been decent about it but I know DH wanted them to have the stuff so I followed his wishes. I was with DH for almost 6 years. I'm getting real tired of having it pointed out my legal marriage was brief. Sounds like the nastiness of a former poster. I stopped posting because of her. Im not being nasty by pointing out the truth. You were married a very short time. If you didn't marry before he died you wouldn't be entitled to anything. You didn't even want to marry him so I have no clue why you want to bust the prenup to go after his assets. because she's hurting and feels he didn't follow through with what his promised to her.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:40:17 GMT -5
Yup, that's true. Hopefully it'll be done. If not, oh, well. I probably shouldn't have been decent about it but I know DH wanted them to have the stuff so I followed his wishes. I was with DH for almost 6 years. I'm getting real tired of having it pointed out my legal marriage was brief. Sounds like the nastiness of a former poster. I stopped posting because of her. Im not being nasty by pointing out the truth. You were married a very short time. If you didn't marry before he died you wouldn't be entitled to anything. You didn't even want to marry him so I have no clue why you want to bust the prenup to go after his assets. Again: he verbally promised her some of his assets. That is all she is asking for - to be cared for in the manner he promised. I don't AT ALL see her trying to take an inheritance away from his kids.
Sensitive much?? A personal hot button, perhaps?? Projection is a tricky thing . . .
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Apr 7, 2016 17:40:20 GMT -5
She actually said herself that her prenup gave her nothing if he died. She claims she didn't want his money because she has her own. Yet is now suig to bust the prenup. That says she actually did want his money. She can easily let the estate deal wth the car and the apartment. A prenup would not NEED to give her anything if he died. His Will would specify what arrangements were made for his legal spouse (Zib) and what were made for his children.
Sorry but Zib has my sympathies on this one. He promised to care for her, but apparently never followed up with the paperwork. That's on him, but she lives with the fallout.
She's in a tough spot not of her making. I don't blame her for trying to get the Trust administrator to do right by her - even if it means a lawsuit.
But she said over and over that she didn't need or wanf his money. Not sure why she needs to be taken care of.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Apr 7, 2016 17:46:27 GMT -5
A prenup would not NEED to give her anything if he died. His Will would specify what arrangements were made for his legal spouse (Zib) and what were made for his children.
Sorry but Zib has my sympathies on this one. He promised to care for her, but apparently never followed up with the paperwork. That's on him, but she lives with the fallout.
She's in a tough spot not of her making. I don't blame her for trying to get the Trust administrator to do right by her - even if it means a lawsuit.
But she said over and over that she didn't need or wanf his money. Not sure why she needs to be taken care of. because now she's mad at him and has no way to get even, revenge or even an apology.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Apr 7, 2016 17:49:33 GMT -5
But she said over and over that she didn't need or wanf his money. Not sure why she needs to be taken care of. Um . . . because she's an older middle-age woman who gave up a career to take care of him, and now cannot return to that career? And he promised she would have support so she would not have to worry about her old age?
I don't see her doing any more than trying to get the trust to make good on his promises. She has my sympathies.
|
|
GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl
Senior Associate
"How you win matters." Ender, Ender's Game
Joined: Jan 2, 2011 13:33:09 GMT -5
Posts: 11,291
|
Post by GRG a/k/a goldenrulegirl on Apr 7, 2016 18:22:25 GMT -5
Our prenup also stated in case of divorce I got custody of his cat. It was a joke between us. MT: this is really the point. Pre-nups have NOTHING to do with a spouse's death. They protect assets in divorce. Also, Zib doesn't want her late DH's money -- she wants the life insurance policy he promised to make her the beneficiary for. He never changed the beneficiary. She was counting on THAT money, not his money. If she needs to be made whole from his estate, that's on her DH, not a greedy cash grab.
|
|
CCL
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 19:34:47 GMT -5
Posts: 7,711
|
Post by CCL on Apr 7, 2016 18:46:28 GMT -5
But she said over and over that she didn't need or wanf his money. Not sure why she needs to be taken care of. Um . . . because she's an older middle-age woman who gave up a career to take care of him, and now cannot return to that career? And he promised she would have support so she would not have to worry about her old age?
I don't see her doing any more than trying to get the trust to make good on his promises. She has my sympathies.
Mine, too.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 19:08:12 GMT -5
I'm almost 61. Who would even hire me?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Apr 7, 2016 19:09:21 GMT -5
I will never remarry ever again. I swore it the last time but this time it's certain.
|
|