Beneficiary turned 18

Sea_Shell

xylophone said:

 There are two trustees, the new partner and her friend but we have only ever dealt with the friend. 

Both are equally responsible for the  management of  the Trust.

Perhaps they took the advice of a solicitor on setting up the Trust and are now waiting for his advice on winding it up?

But that's no excuse for radio silence.

Why no open and honest dialogue about the process, even if it may take longer for them to get their ducks in a row?

brooke68

Sea_Shell said:

xylophone said:

 There are two trustees, the new partner and her friend but we have only ever dealt with the friend. 

Both are equally responsible for the  management of  the Trust.

Perhaps they took the advice of a solicitor on setting up the Trust and are now waiting for his advice on winding it up?

But that's no excuse for radio silence.

Why no open and honest dialogue about the process, even if it may take longer for them to get their ducks in a row?

My thoughts exactly. The last communication my daughter had from her was 22nd April, despite further attempts to contact. I know I’m biased as this is my daughter who is being subjected to this but I think it’s utterly appalling.
Would genuinely appreciate the thoughts of those posters who initially accused us of being impatient and (suggested) unreasonable.

naedanger

brooke68 said:

Sea_Shell said:

xylophone said:

 There are two trustees, the new partner and her friend but we have only ever dealt with the friend. 

Both are equally responsible for the  management of  the Trust.

Perhaps they took the advice of a solicitor on setting up the Trust and are now waiting for his advice on winding it up?

But that's no excuse for radio silence.

Why no open and honest dialogue about the process, even if it may take longer for them to get their ducks in a row?

My thoughts exactly. The last communication my daughter had from her was 22nd April, despite further attempts to contact. I know I’m biased as this is my daughter who is being subjected to this but I think it’s utterly appalling.
Would genuinely appreciate the thoughts of those posters who initially accused us of being impatient and (suggested) unreasonable.

Not sure if I am one of the posters you thought was implying you (or your daughter) were impatient. If so it wasn't really my intention but I was just trying to make you consider the other side - i.e. that the trustee was providing their time for no payment. That was in response to your daughter having heard nothing for a couple of days.

After this length of time I think it is perfectly reasonable to be annoyed by the lack of communication, and it is not surprising if your daugher is anxious. Therefore I think she should keep at them until they provide a full update. 

brooke68

naedanger said:

brooke68 said:

Sea_Shell said:

xylophone said:

 There are two trustees, the new partner and her friend but we have only ever dealt with the friend. 

Both are equally responsible for the  management of  the Trust.

Perhaps they took the advice of a solicitor on setting up the Trust and are now waiting for his advice on winding it up?

But that's no excuse for radio silence.

Why no open and honest dialogue about the process, even if it may take longer for them to get their ducks in a row?

My thoughts exactly. The last communication my daughter had from her was 22nd April, despite further attempts to contact. I know I’m biased as this is my daughter who is being subjected to this but I think it’s utterly appalling.
Would genuinely appreciate the thoughts of those posters who initially accused us of being impatient and (suggested) unreasonable.

Not sure if I am one of the posters you thought was implying you (or your daughter) were impatient. If so it wasn't really my intention but I was just trying to make you consider the other side - i.e. that the trustee was providing their time for no payment. That was in response to your daughter having heard nothing for a couple of days.

After this length of time I think it is perfectly reasonable to be annoyed by the lack of communication, and it is not surprising if your daugher is anxious. Therefore I think she should keep at them until they provide a full update. 

You weren’t, but thank you.

xylophone

Is there a reasonable timeframe that should be allowed for this? 

When I was a trustee for a young person, I was fully aware that he was entitled to access and control at age 18 and all was prepared to facilitate this.

It is not impossible that the Trustees had contacted the solicitor some weeks before your daughter's birthday but perhaps could not arrange a meeting earlier than just before the bank holiday.

Knowing the speed at which some solicitors work (I have seen it described as "glacial" in another post), it would not be surprising if the Trustees were still waiting for a response.

That said, in courtesy the Trustees should respond promptly to your daughter's enquiry and tell her when they  hope to be in a position to release her inheritance.

Sea_Shell

xylophone said:

Is there a reasonable timeframe that should be allowed for this? 

When I was a trustee for a young person, I was fully aware that he was entitled to access and control at age 18 and all was prepared to facilitate this.

It is not impossible that the Trustees had contacted the solicitor some weeks before your daughter's birthday but perhaps could not arrange a meeting earlier than just before the bank holiday.

Knowing the speed at which some solicitors work (I have seen it described as "glacial" in another post), it would not be surprising if the Trustees were still waiting for a response.

That said, in courtesy the Trustees should respond promptly to your daughter's enquiry and tell her when they  hope to be in a position to release her inheritance.

Do trustees usually NEED to consult a solicitor, if their duty now involves confirming the 18th Birthday has passed (ID check?)  and releasing/transferring the funds.   Does there have to be "official" winding up, that needs legal help/advice.

brooke68

Sea_Shell said:

xylophone said:

Is there a reasonable timeframe that should be allowed for this? 

When I was a trustee for a young person, I was fully aware that he was entitled to access and control at age 18 and all was prepared to facilitate this.

It is not impossible that the Trustees had contacted the solicitor some weeks before your daughter's birthday but perhaps could not arrange a meeting earlier than just before the bank holiday.

Knowing the speed at which some solicitors work (I have seen it described as "glacial" in another post), it would not be surprising if the Trustees were still waiting for a response.

That said, in courtesy the Trustees should respond promptly to your daughter's enquiry and tell her when they  hope to be in a position to release her inheritance.

Do trustees usually NEED to consult a solicitor, if their duty now involves confirming the 18th Birthday has passed (ID check?)  and releasing/transferring the funds.   Does there have to be "official" winding up, that needs legal help/advice.

I would be really interested to know this. The reason my daughter contacted the trustee prior to her birthday was to ask if she needed to provide any documentation. When £5.5k was released from the trust early (for educational purposes), that was done within days of the request with no documentation at all.

xylophone

Do trustees usually NEED to consult a solicitor, if their duty now involves confirming the 18th Birthday has passed (ID check?)  and releasing/transferring the funds.   Does there have to be "official" winding up, that needs legal help/advice.

We don't know the exact circumstances of this particular case.

There is just one thought that occurred to me when reading 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78310330/#Comment_78310330

which contains the terms of the bequest to the OP's  children.

It seems to me  that if  (no expert) I am interpreting the wording correctly, that this  was not a bare trust in  their  favour  because the bequest did not indefeasibly vest in them at the date of  the step grandfather's death.

The will  did not   simply say  "I give  half the residue of my estate  to my step grandson Tom Brown  absolutely and half to my step granddaughter Mary Brown absolutely, to be held in trust until they respectively reach the age of 18 years".

If it had done, then the bequests would have indefeasibly vested in each child and had one or both died before reaching the age of 18 years, then the bequests would have formed part of each child's own estate.

In this case, it  seems to me that the bequest did not vest until each child reached the age of 18 years  so that had either or both died before attaining that age, the portion of the money appertaining to each child  would have reverted to the testator's Partner.

If so,  and this was not a bare trust, the Trustees may have had to make tax returns and deal with other aspects of administration, took legal advice on this and are now awaiting final instructions from the solicitor?

Sea_Shell

Ah, interesting.   That slight difference in wording, as you've explained it, shows how it could change things.

brooke68

xylophone said:

Do trustees usually NEED to consult a solicitor, if their duty now involves confirming the 18th Birthday has passed (ID check?)  and releasing/transferring the funds.   Does there have to be "official" winding up, that needs legal help/advice.

We don't know the exact circumstances of this particular case.

There is just one thought that occurred to me when reading 

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78310330/#Comment_78310330

which contains the terms of the bequest to the OP's  children.

It seems to me  that if  (no expert) I am interpreting the wording correctly, that this  was not a bare trust in  their  favour  because the bequest did not indefeasibly vest in them at the date of  the step grandfather's death.

The will  did not   simply say  "I give  half the residue of my estate  to my step grandson Tom Brown  absolutely and half to my step granddaughter Mary Brown absolutely, to be held in trust until they respectively reach the age of 18 years".

If it had done, then the bequests would have indefeasibly vested in each child and had one or both died before reaching the age of 18 years, then the bequests would have formed part of each child's own estate.

In this case, it  seems to me that the bequest did not vest until each child reached the age of 18 years  so that had either or both died before attaining that age, the portion of the money appertaining to each child  would have reverted to the testator's Partner.

If so,  and this was not a bare trust, the Trustees may have had to make tax returns and deal with other aspects of administration, took legal advice on this and are now awaiting final instructions from the solicitor?

Thanks for the clarification. It may explain the delay but I have just read this to my daughter and, as she said, “I don’t have a problem if it takes a bit longer to sort out, I just think she should acknowledge my emails” and I have to agree that this is the most annoying/concerning aspect.