Jump to content

TruthSeeker315

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TruthSeeker315

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. yes the executor. If the executor has never been in this type of position before,assumes they know what they are doing. It really can become a mess.
  2. My reason for asking was that in my mothers will this paragraph was in a previous will, but when the will was updated this paragraph was not updated within the new Will. During this probate process this joint bank account was used to pay her funeral, debts, property taxes, and such. A estate account was set up with the sale of the home proceeds being deposited and a few bills paid out of this estate account. The executor is seeking reimbursement from the probate estate for what was paid out of the JOWRS account that only manifested itself as this type of account a short time prior to her death. The only change in a 30yr Will seems to be inclusion of grandchildren that were minors and a wish/hope for college. On the surface that is a kind act, on the backside the home(probated estate) is only 5% of the gross estate(other accounts) If I should start another thread posing this question if you all think it would be better addressed in a new thread, please let me know.
  3. This is a example in regards to mis-communication, I may pose this question to other common folk to get their opinion/understanding, or maybe I am just blind. Some people are just really uncomfortable in discussing these matters. So in the beneficiary designation part of a ins policy, a person would have to actually write, "the executor of my estate" or better yet, just "my estate" Which then this "action" draws the ins policy into probate of the estate? As opposed to the "action" of naming the person who IS the executor of a Will, creates a whole different intent/meaning or outcome correct?
  4. I'm not sure why the first part of this is written in the second person and then you shifted to the first person. An explanation in shift for one the WILL vs checking, savings, ins, IRA, pensions, etc.....whichever apply Correct, and the point I am making is that banks, financial advisers, lawyers can give wrong/complex information where in communication breakdown, if/when misunderstood information leads to actions by us, not so savy consumers, that the outcome of our actions would not be our true intent had we FULLY understood the effects our actions were going to have after our death. (Speaking in a general context as us/we being consumers obtaining these services.) So then where is the justice for true intent of the Testator, when wills and contracts have conflicts. would these pertain to a persons Will vs what a person may instruct another individual to do with their money after their passing? I may not be understanding that statement. purported intent?? the deceased person's actions??
  5. Partially because I am trying to update/create my own Will on one hand, while currently the beneficiary to my last parent passing recently. While trying to understanding the extent of how far off equitably one document is in relation to the others. And to make it even worse, Will changes were made to my last parents Will, that included some stated wishes for grandchilds future college plans (a minor) And no offense to lawyers intended here, but their language is not that easy for common folk to understand. And sometimes when a individual asks to many questions, in order to better understand, to what extent their actions can have, I think lawyers get frustrated with us lay persons. While talking to other friends about how they have theirs set up, I see this one sidedness of accounts, yet they tell me it is being left to the one with the most(executor) to do the sharing with the rest of the beneficiaries. Most of these friends are of generation way before me. The below statement of how these accounts can go array of your intent if the plan is not made as a "whole" “Unfortunately, people often don’t realize that certain assets, such as retirement accounts, life insurance policies, and annuities, pass to their beneficiaries by contract and not under the provisions of their will or trust,”
  6. could you please elaborate. if he is a beneficiary of my Will and he is the appointed executor in my Will ? I may be miss understanding this.
  7. You give your one son the responsibility to have access to these joint accounts for a purpose if the need arises, you pass suddenly, your intent is truly what you have in your WILL. Now my one son starts to think he is entitled to all I have left him in those joint accounts. When my intent is only to give him access to them if he needs to act on my behalf. But I expect him to share my estate as a whole per my WILL. It is a divide between legalities and moralities. trying to accomplish that seems complicated for us the mere mortals. laymen terms= plain common people language. I'm glad it seems obvious to you, but that does not mean it may be obvious to all.
  8. Thank you, And that would be only if there are any estate taxes. Not likely in most cases of a smaller probate estate with only a home, but still a substantial amount of money over all. When a Testator does not communicate to their financial adviser and Vice versa, they have changed things in their will, the financial adviser can have a half picture of the Testator true and equitable intent.
  9. Sadly I am going through a similar thing, although mine thinks that my parent left them on these accounts implying they were entitled to 80% of the gross estate(none probated part). My sibling is appointed administrator though not a large estate. When one sibling feels more entitled than the other, morals loose out to legalities. Especially when this is the first and only time they have been in this position. Mostly I've heard it said that legally you are not obligated to split those accounts. Morally and equitably go out the window. Hopefully you value your parents intent as a parent and see through the legalities without putting your own selfish spin on what you believe your parents intents were. (not you specifically, just people in general) Just my 2 cents
  10. In laymen terms is there a significance to this paragraph? I direct that all estate, transfer, succession, and similar taxes or duties, including interest and penalties thereon, whether they may be imposed with respect to any property or interest passing under this will, or otherwise, shall be charged against the principal of my residuary estate and treated as an expense of administering my estate. Alot of accounts pass outside of probate. Can one direct that expenses be taking out of joint accounts that were left to a administrator to pay my bills if need be. Or is that just something you have to trust your administrate will do fairly? Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...