Far too many people automatically assume that they should use simple wills to facilitate postmortem asset transfers. In fact, a living trust is a better choice in many instances, and these case studies prove the point.
Case Study 1 – Privacy
Thomas, a successful entrepreneur, values his privacy highly. He has prepared a simple will that outlines the distribution of his estate among his three children.
Unfortunately, upon his passing, the will goes through probate, a public process. His estate becomes a matter of public record, accessible by anyone with an interest, which leads to unwanted public attention toward his family and the value of their inheritance.
Had Thomas established a living trust, the distribution of his assets could have occurred privately. A living trust does not go through probate, maintaining the confidentiality of his estate details and protecting his family’s privacy.
Case Study 2 – Speed
Melinda, a widow, has a will that leaves her assets to her two adult children. When she passes away, her estate must go through probate before her children can receive their inheritance. The probate process is lengthy, sometimes more than a year, leaving her children in a state of financial uncertainty.
If Melinda had used a living trust, her trustee could have distributed the assets to her beneficiaries without the need for probate, often within weeks or months of her passing. The prompt distribution could have provided her children with quicker access to their inheritances.
Case Study 3 – Incapacity Planning
James, an 80-year-old widower, has a will, but no arrangements for potential incapacity. After a severe stroke, James becomes mentally incapacitated. Since he lacks a living trust or a power of attorney, his family must go through a court process to appoint a conservator to manage his affairs, a process that is time-consuming, costly, and stressful.
Had James set up a living trust and named a successor trustee, this person could have seamlessly stepped in to manage his financial affairs, providing a smooth transition and less stress for his family during a difficult time.
Case Study 4 – Avoidance of Multiple Probates
Sarah owns properties in three different states. When she passes away, her will must be probated in each state where the real estate is located. This multi-state probate process (ancillary probate) complicates matters, resulting in higher legal fees and longer wait times before the assets can be distributed to beneficiaries.
If she had placed the properties in a living trust, the post-death transfer of all their properties could have been managed in one process, avoiding multiple probate proceedings, saving time, and reducing legal expenses.
Case Study 5 – Asset Control
Elizabeth, a single mother, leaves her entire estate to her 18-year-old son in her will. Upon her untimely passing, he receives his inheritance outright and squanders the money due to financial immaturity.
Had Elizabeth established a living trust, she could have set terms for distributions, such as releasing funds at certain ages or for specific purposes like education or home purchase. This would have provided long-term financial security for her son, ensuring that the assets were used responsibly.
Conclusion
In these scenarios, Thomas, Melinda, James, Sarah, and Elizabeth all could have benefited from a living trust over a simple will. A living trust would have provided privacy, sped up asset distribution, prepared for incapacity, avoided multiple probate proceedings, and controlled asset distribution better than a will.
We Are Here to Help!
If you are ready to work with a Phoenix, Arizona estate planning attorney to put a tailor-made plan in place, we are ready to spring into action. You can send us a message to request a consultation appointment, and we can be reached by phone at 888-222-1328.
