[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Two Cities on February 13, 1998 at 16:25:58:

In Reply to: Re: TRUSTS posted by Common Right Group on February 12, 1998 at 08:45:09:

: Now, if you want to develop a trust, and are the Trustor, not planning on being the Trustee, and are willing to work through a third party Creator, and can appoint a Protector to assure the trust is not mishandled by the Trustees, we could help if you were local, and would guarantee in the PRIVATE CONTRACT IN TRUST FORM that the Trustee(s) have a recission period of three to five days or the resolution of any problems.

Afaik, there has to be three (3) separate and distinct "persons', natural or otherwise in
order to form these contracts. Since the Trustor originally conveys property (consideration)
into the trust, the Trustor cannot be the Trustee, or the beneficiary. Sometimes the
object of the exercise is to convey property of worth into the trust, then placed into the
control of the Trustee, and perhaps the appointed Manager(s) for the day to day operation, if
such is neccessary, the idea of the Protector seems superfluous to me. Since I'm not experienced
with this, I'm asking questions.

If the object of the exercise is to place SOME PROPERTY in trust, why would the following not
obviate the need for a Protector, and "stranger" trustees.

A Trustor contracts with the Trustee and places 21 dollars in trust for the Beneficiary.
Some Certificates of Beneficial are delivered for this exchange. The certificates have
no fixed monetary value. The Trustor gives these certificates to the Beneficiaries.
According to the terms of the contract, additional certificates of Beneficial Interest may be
issued. The trustee (not in his capacity of Trustee) conveys (sells irrevocably) SOME PROPERTY into the trust in
exchange for additional certificates of Beneficial Interest. These certificates do not entitle
the trustee (in his private capacity) to any interest and control. The trustee gifts these
certificates of un-determined value to the Beneficiaries.

So where does it break down? I much prefer the idea of an initial "stranger" Trustor. And the
initial consideration forming the basis of the contract, not neccessarily being the
sole or primary object of the property holdings of any trust.

In particular the Trustor and Creator are out of the loop, making it the private concern
of the Trustee to execute the terms of the contract.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]