Who Can You Trust with Your Trust?

The issue of trust is a biggie for me. I suspect it is for most people. That’s especially the case when it comes to your money, and who will be in charge if you get dementia or if you pass away.

(Don’t know what a “trust” is? You can read a short description here.)

In a typical case, you are the trustee of your own trust. As trustee, you oversee the money and assets in the trust. This is called a “revocable trust”, or a “living trust”. However, if you get dementia or get a head injury (for example) then you probably can no longer serve as trustee. At that point, someone else needs to come on board as the trustee. The question is … who should that person be.

As a probate attorney, I’ve seen lots of situations in which parents named an adult child as trustee, but that person turned out not to be responsible. Or perhaps that child was too busy with his/her career at the time to be able to serve. Then the next child in line became trustee. However, there was a reason that the parents named one child first and the other child second. The second child turned wasn’t good with money and business responsibilities (which are required for a good trustee).

So in the above example, you have an older person with dementia, and a trustee who doesn’t know what he or she is doing. Now what?

Well … a well-drafted trust document will have checks and balances, and ways of solving dilemmas like this. One increasingly common approach is to name a “Trust Protector” who can remove a trustee and appoint a new trustee. When I draft trust documents, I suggest to my clients to name me (or the then-managing attorney of my law firm) as the Trust Protector. Why? Because I’m familiar with my clients’ wishes and can ensure that those are carried out. But that can be a tough pill for some clients to swallow. After all, they may have just met me. And now I’m naming myself as having the ability to remove their beloved children as trustees and appoint a stranger as a trustee.

I’ve only just touched on the subject of who should be in charge of your money when you die or become incapacitated. Other issues include, who should serve as your agents under your financial power of attorney and health care power of attorney. And should you have joint owners on bank accounts. (And so on …)

Estate planning is complicated. And there are lots of ways that people can mess things up by trying to do it themselves. Generally, it’s a good reason for people to have a close professional relationship with their estate planning attorney. That way, issues like this can be talked out and solved. Just like they should probably work closely with an accountant and financial advisor. My suggestion is for people to meet with their estate planning attorney, accountant and financial advisor at least once per year. The meeting with the estate attorney may only last 30 minutes. But it’s a good way of confirming that there are no changes in the law, and that the documents are still valid. If you don’t want to meet with your estate attorney because you don’t like him or her, then that’s probably a good indication that you should look for a replacement.
I hope this short discussion has been helpful. If you have any questions, you can drop me a line at paul@magellanlawfirm.com or call me at 602–443–4888.

Paul Deloughery is an estate and probate litigation, and law insurance dispute consultant in Scottsdale, Arizona. Visit his website to read more of his blogs or follow him on Twitter!


Originally published at pauldeloughery.com on March 14, 2018.

How I Made $48,000 By Making Three Tough Decisions


“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” Mark Twain

I’m a 50-year old lawyer living in Scottsdale, Arizona. I’m married (second marriage) and I have two teenage children. My law firm consists of me and a paralegal. Here’s what the common knowledge tells me:

  • I should own a home because it’s a good long-term investment.
  • I should have an impressive office to attract clients.
  • I should drive a fancy car to impress clients and people who might refer clients to me.

The reality, however, is that when you add up property taxes, water, electricity, landscaping service, and maintenance, it costs me $3,000 per month just to keep my nice Scottsdale home.

Furthermore, my office rent continues to go up. Plus, I’m not in the optimum location. Plus, I don’t have flexibility in case I want to downsize (like I do now with only me and one employee) or grow (by adding more lawyers in the future).

Also, my car never actually helped me get a new client. I think it helped me psychologically feel “successful,” and from that standpoint it may have helped. But no one ever said they would hire me because I had a fancy car.

Where does this all lead? I’m making some big changes in the coming months. I’m selling my house and moving to a smaller house (with fewer plants to water). I’m also leaving my current office and going into a nice executive suite — which will also save approximately $2,000 per month. And I got rid of my Cadillac XT5 (crossover) for a Jeep. The change in cars is saving me approximately 50%.

All told, I’ll have $4,000 more in my pocket each month. That’s a $48,000/year raise just by simplifying my life.

Has anyone else ever thought about making drastic changes like I’m talking about? Let me know. I’d love to hear.

Paul Deloughery is an estate and probate litigation, and law insurance dispute consultant in Scottsdale, Arizona. Visit his website to read more of his blogs or follow him on Twitter!


Originally published at pauldeloughery.com on February 27, 2018.

Example of an Interpleader Case

In the following article, Paul Deloughery discusses a dispute over life insurance policies.


Todd Chance was found dead in an almond orchard near Shafter in August 2013. The police originally suspected that his wife, Leslie Chance, had murdered him. They held her for questioning for a few days, but then released her with no charges filed and without comment. Meanwhile, four life insurance policies totaling around $500,000 have still not paid out. You can read the news story here.

According to the news story, one of the life insurance companies filed a Complaint in Interpleader — meaning that they have sought to deposit the policy proceeds with the court and let the beneficiaries fight over who gets them. When there are competing beneficiaries to life insurance proceeds, the life insurer may hold the money until it gets resolved. Usually, they will go the interpleader route, so they can wash their hands of the situation and not be entangled in ongoing litigation. (In the case of Todd Chance, the litigation between Leslie and Todd’s parents is still going on years later.)

In the case of Todd Chance, Leslie claims that she was the beneficiary, but that she was going to use the money for their daughters. (I can’t tell from the news article whether Leslie was the mother of the children, or if she is a step-mother. That would be a relevant fact.) As a probate lawyer, I can tell you that it’s “possible” that Leslie intended to hold the life insurance money for the minor children. But if that were the case, she and her husband took zero steps to make sure it actually happened. A parents doesn’t just “hold” money for their children. That would be what’s called an oral trust, and it has many problems, such as:

  • If Leslie files bankruptcy, is the money subject to her creditors?
  • If Leslie dies, does the money become part of her estate? And who becomes the successor trustee?

If Leslie and Todd actually wanted to have the life insurance money go to his (their?) children, they should have created a trust for that purpose. The fact that they didn’t makes me doubt very much that Leslie’s intention was to benefit the kids and not her.

Frankly, I’m a little shocked that the two sides in this case haven’t settled. One side is going to win and the other is going to lose. The fact that they haven’t reached a mediated agreement tells me that one or the other side doesn’t want to settle out of principle. Either the parents can’t stomach Leslie getting the benefits of their son’s life insurance policy. Or Leslie (who was a school principal) doesn’t want any appearance of having committed something as horrible as murdering her husband for a mere $500,000. Maybe both are true. We’ll see what the court decides.

Paul Deloughery is an estate and probate litigation, and law insurance dispute consultant in Scottsdale, Arizona. For more information about his advice to maintain a family’s wealth, visit his website or check out his Twitter!


Originally published at pauldeloughery.com on January 2, 2018.