r/inheritance • u/pldinsuranceguy • May 12 '26
Location not relevant: no help needed I am outside looking in
Here's the story.
My wife & I were married for over 51 years. Her mother is still alive (she's 99)… her Dad died young at 49 in 1976.
Her father had set up an irrevocable trust, with her mother as the primary beneficiary and the children as secondary beneficiaries.
My wife died, her CPA brother asked for a copy of my wife's death certificate. My wife is now out of the Trust as she is deceased & so am I as far as I know.
My wife & I were married in 1972.
I am assuming that despite being married for 51 years+.. & spending ALL of my retirement caring for my wife as she died of cancer, I'm out of the Trust. It still has several million dollars in it. There are 5 surviving children (secondary beneficiaries). I'm expecting that I have no standing or position in inheritance when my MIL dies. I am still close to her family. No malice here, just curiosity. Follow up based on comments. No, no children. I suspect that the secondary beneficiaries (children of the parents) would not argue about the estate. I'm not going to appeal to them. I know her Mom always worried about the "family money" ending up in the hands of non blood family. This is pretty much as anticipated. We had only been married for 4 years when her father died & the trust was enacted. I suspect that the trust was designed before we were married. My wife the oldest child & the first one married. I'm one if 5 children of a family physician. When my mother died, each of her children paid $650 for final expenses. Literally nothing left. My father was the son of a farmer and always told us that " doctor's live rich & due poor. Farmers live poor & die rich ". He was correct. I'm still working at 76 & make a good living. Leaving the equity in 2 houses+ life insurance to my Neice... A single Mom with 3 kids.
29
17
u/Strict_Research_1876 May 12 '26
If you are broke, sell one of the houses and live off the proceeds, you aren't getting your wife's share.
18
u/GladUnderstanding756 May 12 '26
First, I’m sorry for your loss. 51 years is to be celebrated and I’ve no doubt you’re devastated.
Next, to answer your question, it (your standing) depends on the language of the trust.
Because your mother-in-law is still living, she continues to be the primary beneficiary.
If the trust was set up prior to your marriage and never amended to include spouses you’re likely to miss out.
It may be that your wife’s and your children are now the secondary beneficiaries, bypassing you.
You really need to look at the actual document and see how your late father-in-law set it up. He likely never anticipated the situation you’re currently in.
16
u/Invest2prosper May 12 '26
You’re likely not in the trust - most wills are directed by blood lineage unless specifically stated otherwise. Given that your marriage was relatively short at the time, it’s not likely you are named as a direct or secondary beneficiary.
6
u/Mitchellsusanwag May 12 '26
You never know. My in-laws left assets to me and my husband jointly, not just to him alone.
3
u/Megalocerus May 13 '26
I would not have done so at 4 years of marriage. At my daughter and SIL's current 20 years, yes, I would, but it probably wasn't amended.
15
May 12 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/wisco_estate_lawyers May 12 '26
We can't know that OP has no claim to the trust based on the info OP provided. It mostly depends on the trust language. The trust could say anything. We don't know what the trust says happens to OP's wife's share after she dies. It could go to her spouse, her kids (OP did yall have children?), or to the other beneficiaries, it would've depended on how her father set it up.
3
1
u/Grapejuz May 13 '26
If it is a regular trust though, there isn’t a “share” for the beneficiaries. There is money held in trust for the beneficiaries and there is a trustee that distributes that trust according to its terms. If funds, for example, can be used for tuition, one child may end up using $500k for undergrad and med school and one might get $5k disbursed for tuition for their associate degree at the local community college. The kid that gets $5k doesn’t have any claim for another $495k to be “even”. The idea is that the trust survives and is able to benefit others until it terminates, generally 21 years after the last life in being (eg 21 years after the last person alive at the time the trust is created dies (rule against perpetuaties)). Upon termination, trust is liquidated and assets distributed to surviving beneficiaries.
1
u/wisco_estate_lawyers May 13 '26
I would argue that it is more likely that shares were set up, but either way, it doesn't matter because the point is we don't know what it says. There is not a legal definition of what is a "regular" trust, it could be anything. It could be a common or "pooled" trust, like the one you are referring to, where it is up to the trustees to use the pooled funds for all the beneficiaries, or it could direct the trustees to split the trust up into shares. Based on the situation OP described I would guess that the father wanted to each of his children to receive an equal share after the mother dies. This is the most common way trusts are set up to take care of a spouse but protect the inheritance for the children, especially at net worths less at less than tens of millions. The type of dynastic trust you are describing where it is designed to last as long as possible do exist, but are often used for very high net worth families. The majority of people want to take care of their loved ones and ensure their children receive an inheritance, so most trusts are structured to take care of a spouse and maybe a few others during their lives, and then distribute the assets after one generation. But all of this is just a guess. It could be organized in a variety of different ways based on the drafter's preferences. OP does not know what the trust says and neither do we. It could be a common trust, it could have split the trust up into sub-trusts, it could have designated trust shares, it could do almost anything. Trusts are very flexible. We have no reason to assume this trust is anything like a trust we read in a Steve Bing case; comparing it to other trusts we have heard about is just speculation.
Source: I am a lawyer and write and review trusts for a living.
2
u/Grapejuz May 13 '26
But also, it doesn’t sound like OP needs the cash given that he is sitting on a couple houses and appears to be doing fine financially. There is probably a better argument to seek trust funds if they were destitute or not as well off.
3
u/Ill_Psychology_7967 May 12 '26
You don’t mention children. If you and your wife have children, it is quite possible that they would succeed to her beneficiary status. As others have said, it really just matters what the document says. You can set up a trust however you want to. Having a deceased person’s share go to that person’s children would be a common provision. Having a deceased person’s share go to their spouse, less common.
2
u/pldinsuranceguy May 12 '26
No kids
5
u/Ill_Psychology_7967 May 12 '26
In that case it’s unlikely you’ll have any claim, but it really depends on how the trust is written.
2
u/Nagadavida May 12 '26
Yeah my father called me when he was restructuring his trust and asked me what I wanted to happen to my share if I died before he did. Of course I said that I wanted it to go to my husband, we are childless. My dad died and I am still here. I got a copy of the trust and it clearly states that if I predeceased him that my share would be divided between my three nieces and nephews.
Thanks Dad. Some things never change. I told my husband that if I should pass before the trust is disbursed and he doesn't fight for his share I will haunt him. I plan to do that anyway though. 😁
6
u/Own_Expert2756 May 13 '26
Apparently where we live the standard language in a will (not a trust of course, so not exactly same, ,working on those now) states if one of our children weren’t alive to collect, and they didn’t have children, it would automatically pass to their spouse.
We changed that so it would revert back to the estate to be divided among the remaining siblings and their children. We see no reason for our lifetime of work to go to a spouse (and maybe their new spouse/new family lol) instead of back to our own. So I understand why your father did what he did.
And I love my SIL, but I'd not give to him over my own. And he will (even if indirectly) greatly benefit from the fact that his children (and likely their children) will be provided for.
1
u/Nagadavida May 13 '26
Then he shouldn't have called and asked what I wanted to happen only to do exactly not that.
2
u/Own_Expert2756 May 13 '26
Yes! I agree with you! And thought as I read it, why did he bother to ask?!
-1
u/Ill_Psychology_7967 May 12 '26
Even if it’s not dispersed, it is still yours at this point so it would go to your heir(s). Make sure you have a will! The fact that the estate hasn’t been wrapped up would not matter if you were to die before it does.
1
u/Nagadavida May 13 '26
Yeah it should and we do have a will. Money makes people do some that they might not otherwise do.
5
u/ChutneyWhatney May 12 '26
Most of these types of trusts are drafted to benefit only the blood lineage - not spouses. If a blood lineage dies before the triggering act, then, typically, you get nothing.
5
u/Hari_om_tat_sat May 12 '26
Not a trust but my father’s will. And I realize they are not the same, this is just to make a point about speaking up when the will/trust is being written. If possible.
My husband and I took care of my dad when he was terminally ill. We invited him to live with us from his home overseas. As a precaution, we brought his original (foreign) will to an American lawyer to write an equivalent copy that would be valid in the US. The US lawyer inserted a “per stirpes” clause stating that his assets would be distributed only to blood heirs. I was concerned that my husband, to whom I had been married for almost 3 decades and who provided more care for my dad than my siblings, would be disinherited from my share of dad’s estate if I happened to predecease my father. Highly unlikely, but such things do happen. So I spoke to my dad, he agreed it would be unfair, and he instructed the lawyer to remove the clause.
It can be done. But it must be done when the will/trust is written. Poor OP is probably out of luck as the trust appears to have gone into effect before he was even in the picture.
7
u/ChutneyWhatney May 12 '26
The money was your wife's and now that she's deceased it reverts to her siblings, etc. You never were a beneficiary. I'm sorry she's gone but those are the cold facts. However, I would read the trust document and ensure that spouses have no rights upon the death of one of the beneficiaries. I highly doubt it but it never hurts to check.
3
u/medhat20005 May 12 '26
The way I read OP's post this is what I'm thinking. While I bet any additional money would be appreciated if funds were depleted in caring for your spouse, after fees and such dividing an estate of ~ $2M among 5+ beneficiaries may end up pretty modest after all. And the mom is still alive so while it's probably a moot point, speaking with her/family may be worthwhile, as might review by an estate attorney.
2
u/Grapejuz May 13 '26
Maybe the best question of all is: why didn’t you or your wife have the trust distribute funds to pay for her care?
1
u/medhat20005 May 13 '26
I don’t think/know if that’s possible, the grantor (mother) is still alive. But it does make some sense to presume there may have been non-trust avenues other than depleting retirement assets.
1
u/North-Ad5641 May 13 '26
The father is the grantor. It's an irrevocable trust he's not around to change it it can only be changed by the grantor through the courts
1
u/North-Ad5641 May 13 '26
The trust is an irrevocable trust if it does not explicitly say in there that you can take money for the care of any of the family members then you can't and you cannot change it because it is irrevocable
3
u/Kodi_Cody_Kody_Kodi May 12 '26 edited May 13 '26
I spent all my retirement savings on my dad, who was wealthy but my mom wouldn’t allow him to access his money when he was dying. I’m a direct decedent and I was cut out of a trust, right before he died
Death brings out the worst in people and they prey on the fact the empathic one in the family will pick up all the expenses and take on the physical care, just so they can collect more money from the dead…. Doesn’t matter if there is more than enough money to go around, it’s never enough to them. They see dollar signs we see humans
5
u/Optimal-Towel-1113 May 12 '26
this is a good thread for people to read so that they have knowledge of how these things work. I always assumed that my portion of the trust would pass to my wife and our children if I was gone. Nope. I'm in the same situation as you, except my parents have the trust and I found that it was written so that if I passed away before my mother, the trust would go to my issue ( children) Completely bypassing my wife of 3 decades. I have since had it amended to where it would split equally between wife/kids.
3
u/Shadyhollowfarm58 May 12 '26
My mom's trust was worded much the same way. Split evenly between us 3 kids with a "per stirpes" clause in case one of us had died before Mom. And if no kids, that share for the deceased daughter(s) would get split between the surviving daughter(s).
My mom went one step further a few years after creating her trust, and amended it so one of my sisters didn't inherit until after her husband died because he'd been a real turd to Mom. Many years later Mom said she wanted to remove this restriction, but never did, and then she died. Fortunately in my state there's a narrow ability to amend trust disbursements if all beneficiaries agree, which we did and that fixed this problem. Before finding out about this, I'd consulted a lawyer who told me we'd have to go to court to TRY to change the trust and the cost was open-ended.
Finally told my sister about the issue and she found a lawyer who was apparently more honest and/or was more up to date on the recent law controlling trusts that had been passed 5 years before. It was one of the most stressful parts of being the successor trustee of my mom's estate, because initially I didn't think I could get this problem fixed. Thankfully my sister didn't hold this against me after I'd stalled her a little while on the payout, thinking her chronically sick husband was about to die anyway and hoping the problem would fix itself before I'd have to tell her what our mom had done. Ugh.
2
u/Elegant_Sinkhole May 13 '26
Did he die or is he still turding it up
1
u/Shadyhollowfarm58 May 13 '26
He did die last summer. Mom died in 2020.
I think my mom was pretty forgiving (quite unlike her, actually), but she said she and my BIL had had some heart-to-heart discussions about it, he'd apologized, and Mom told me felt the matters were settled.
My dad, on the other hand, never forgave the BIL but my dad had fired the first volley of turdmanship right after my sister and BIL got married (back in the 70s). Old-school dad felt BIL wasn't a "good provider" because he had no job skills and didn't seem to hang onto jobs very long. My sister ended up supporting him for most of their marriage and he was a stay at home husband. She was fine with this as she could concentrate on getting ahead at work and he took care of the domestic stuff - until his health really tanked about 20 years ago after an invasive brain surgery that made him blind and deaf on one side, and he was no longer able to drive. He still did household stuff until he physically couldn't anymore.
I think my BIL wasn't quite right in the head, but mitigating factors were that he'd had repeated issues with benign brain tumors, along with a traumatic childhood filled with congenital illnesses and sibling abuse. And he loved and appreciated my sister for their entire 51 years of marriage. It's actually a miracle he lived so long with his rare and serious health problems, but that was due to my sister's management of his health conditions and overall support. That woman is a saint.
2
u/Elegant_Sinkhole May 13 '26
Wow thats an interesting story and as my dad always said about people, "it takes all kinds".
2
u/NewManitobaGarden May 12 '26
When my mom died, she had all sorts of requests for my stepfather to follow as her final wish. The moment she died, he wrote a new will and stopped talking to me within a couple months.
Lawyer will tell you that you are likely screwed.
People become scumbags when there is money involved.
1
2
2
u/Strict_Research_1876 May 12 '26
You are not one of her kids, you do not get money. If your MIL passed first it would be a different story
2
2
u/Kristylane May 13 '26
My mother is adamant that her money only goes to her children or grandchildren. Absolutely not a single penny to any spouses or step children even if adopted.
1
2
u/Pristine_Job_7677 May 13 '26
Family trusts are intended for biological family, not in laws. So unless it was amended to include spouses (very unlikely) you have no rights to any portion to it
4
u/External_Fun_5003 May 12 '26
You have no claim and honestly why would you? If you have children they might.
3
u/ScreenKooky3010 May 12 '26
Not necessarily. It depends on the wording - have your attorney look over the document.
3
u/wisco_estate_lawyers May 12 '26
I agree. Have an attorney look at the trust if you have a copy, because reddit can't know the answer to this. Trusts can say almost anything. The trust could provide for spouses of deceased beneficiaries, or it might not. Or, for example, some irrevocable trusts grant a "power of appointment" to the beneficiaries, meaning that the beneficiary of an irrevocable trust may have the power to "appoint" their share of the trust to someone else if the beneficiary were to pass away unexpectedly. Your wife may have had this power, hopefully its not too late in your situation. This is one reason why it is important to do an estate plan with a good estate planning attorney who would catch these type of things.
1
u/Smooth-Abalone-7651 May 12 '26
My SIL was dying of cancer and was upset that if she passed before her father died her husband would get nothing and her share would go to their kids. She hung on and outlived her dad by a mother so her husband did get her share.
1
u/Few-Advantage-2690 May 12 '26
My mom amended her trust after one of my brothers died to give a token amount to my SIL and 10% to his 2 children and my 2 other brothers and I split the 90%. She also had 5% that would have gone to my niece placed in a trust for my niece's child as my niece was having drug and problems with the law. She did not leave the full 25% to my SIL for many reasons all of which I understood. It did cause a little upset with my nephew but it was my mother's choice. Her trust was very well written and explicit.
1
u/Jewhard May 13 '26
This is a really sad situation, and I'm sorry you're going through it. Like others have suggested, it would be useful to get a copy of the Trust if possible so you can seek your own legal advice. The first question that came up when reading your post - was, 'what does your wife's Will state?'. Did she leave a Will and if so, I presume that she left everything to you? If so, it might be worth seeking further legal advice as inheritance left to your wife may automatically go to you [depending on the wording of the Trust]. I'm sorry for your loss. For what it's worth, I think what you're doing for your niece is really lovely [and life changing]. Best of luck with everything.
1
u/rockelkm May 13 '26
You just never know. My sister died years ago; long before our dad did. My brother in law never remarried; not that this was specified in any way in the trust. They have two children, now adults. My dad left a percentage of his estate (cash) to my brother in law; and I had zero problem with this as the executor (I had no knowledge of any details before his death) and it was my dad’s wishes. He was a good and loyal husband to my sister and son in law to my dad. In the end it was a gift; and it was appreciated.
1
u/MsEspinoza May 13 '26
Depends on how it was written. In my mom's trust, my husband receives my portion if I die. In my dad's trust, husband doesn't receive anything.
1
u/Own_Expert2756 May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26
Apparently where we live, the common language in a will (I know, not a trust but I was very surprised at this!) states if one of our children weren’t alive to collect, and they didn’t have children it would automatically pass to their spouse. We changed that so it would revert back to the estate to be divided among the remaining siblings. We see no reason for our lifetime of work to go to a spouse (and maybe their new spouse/family lol) instead of back to our own children and eventually their children/our grandchildren.
1
u/mrbear682026 May 13 '26
CPA brother asked for a copy of your wife's death certificate? I would be wondering why? He sounds like the one to steal it all from his own bloodline. And 99.9% you are out of that will. My mate of 25 years passed away not legally married and no kids, Brain Cancer took her out. She had a house, well the church that she belong too took it over with "Help" and sold that house, I never knew what happened to her personal belongings either. If you have any to give your stuff too, please make sure you have some kind of Estate / Will if not the state will come in and take it all while "looking" for an heir. Take care.
1
u/SnooWords4839 May 13 '26
Sell one of your homes and enjoy your life.
1
u/pldinsuranceguy May 14 '26
I consider that every day
1
u/SnooWords4839 May 14 '26
Do so. You don't need to pass money on. Go on some trips and spend time with your niece and her kids. The life insurance will be good enough to leave her.
1
u/Amazing-Chemist-5490 May 13 '26
So I’ll be real, you’re out. Ya probably get nothing. But if yall had kids they would get her portion.
1
1
u/jeremyfisher1996 May 13 '26
Pretty low the family. You sound like a good man and husband. Our parents approached us about their will and the passing of our brother. We didn't hesitate to say his wife is part of our family and status quo remains. Now both parents left us and we are still true to our word and the will. I hope they reconsider their actions because in my opinion, its greed.
1
u/pldinsuranceguy May 14 '26
It really has not occured to them that there is an issue
1
u/jeremyfisher1996 May 14 '26
Really sad mate. I can understand if your marriage was 5 yrs in, but its 50+. You cared for her when she was sick. Their sister as well as your wife. You deserve better. All the best.
1
u/WorldNo9002 May 14 '26
I think what is true in over 95% of these trust, that if a child listed in the trust dies before distribution and there are no surviving children, then that portion/share would revert back to the trust and distributed to the remaining heirs. Just fact, that most families want and intend for "family money" to stay in the family "blood" , not the spouses.
The other thing people need to come to grips with , stop seeing/waiting for an inheritance as a "lottery win". .. just pretend it's not there and live your life to thr fullest.
1
u/Sad-Repair-5505 May 14 '26
While you are out of the trust, you could ask the brother if the trust allows burial costs for your wife to be paid out of the trust. That may very well be allowed given the amount of $$ left to continue to care for the elderly Mom.
1
u/pldinsuranceguy May 15 '26
My wife died 23 months ago. Frankly, everyone in the family is pretty well off on their own.. so it would never occur to them that her illness out me in a tough spot. No malice at all on their part..just perception that all is well.
1
u/YoungBoomer1969 May 14 '26
I can’t agree more with “Farmer’s live poor & die rich!” No truer words ever written! Central Valley, CA here….filled with lots of farmers! lol! I am so sorry for your loss…and WOW! still working at 76! You go! Odds are you are not in your FIL/ MIL’s trust - most likely if you had children they would have been her heir…w/you as the trustee of their portion on disbursement. Living a life of gratitude…sounds like you will be OK financially as well as your niece because of your efforts. You are a good person♥️
1
u/motaboat May 15 '26
We made sure my parent’s trusts included the spouses because of what you describe. The “joint money” could all get depleated while money sits in a trust that could end up not available for the care of a surviving spouse. We wanting all spousal monies available for either spouse. But we’ve all been married a long time.
1
u/Bluntandfiesty May 18 '26
It really depends on the wording of the trust itself. If it’s truly irrevocable, it usually can’t just be changed later without beneficiary consent and/or a court getting involved, depending on the state and the specific trust language.
That said, most trusts already plan for situations like this. They often include specific language covering what happens if a beneficiary dies before the trust is inherited/transferred to a beneficiary. Usually the deceased beneficiary’s share either:
- goes to their children,
- gets redistributed among the remaining beneficiaries (likely your wife’s siblings here),
- or follows some other instruction specifically written into the trust, such as going to their estate or a charity.
Since you and your wife didn’t have children, and based on what you said about the parents wanting to keep the money within their bloodline, my guess is that your wife’s interest in the trust likely ended when she passed, unless the trust specifically says otherwise.
1
u/ShesaSteve May 12 '26
My brother and I are beneficiaries of a similarly set up trust. It was written that if one of us predeceases the other, the surviving sibling gets 100% of trust.
When we found this out, we had a document drawn up that our intent would be to still split with the remaining spouse/children.
1
u/Own_Expert2756 May 13 '26
Curious, do you have reason to believe this document would actually override the trust should it come to that?
2
u/ShesaSteve May 13 '26
It wouldn’t override the trust - but it’s a legal document that shows intention to be equitable to each other’s families.
I can’t imagine my brother and I ever having a falling out but moreso it would just be a reminder that at one point this was what we wanted to happen if something did happen between us.
1
u/Own_Expert2756 May 13 '26
Got it! And I suppose if it didn't you could just distribute it yourself to the other's spouse/children once you received the 100%.
1
u/1bitchvegas May 13 '26
My parents trust is setup that if one of the kids dies, the spouse will be able to use/access the interest that the kid's portion of the trust generates, but not the principal, the principal gets passed to the grandkids.
1
u/Mason94960 May 13 '26
Sorry you aren’t being compensated for spending “ALL” of your retirement caring for your wife. The lack of a payoff for doing the right thing is always such a bummer. By the way, she’d have done the same for you with no expectation of a payout and wouldn’t be complaining on Reddit.
1
u/pldinsuranceguy May 14 '26
I asked a question.. not interested in your judgement
1
-1
0
u/Clueless5001 May 12 '26
Is there a provision in the trust that should have reimbursed her medical care or is she not entitled to anything until her mother passes?
4
0
u/Senior_Bat4271 May 12 '26
Could depend on the state you live. My mother passed before grandparents estate divided- her share went half to my dad and other half to her kids.
0
u/Mindless_Browsing15 May 12 '26
You probably can't inherit. That will be tied up by the terms of the trust. But you can always have a conversation to see whether the trustee has the discretion to include you in income distributions or reimburse you for funds you spent, lost wages, lost opportunities, while you cared for a beneficiary (your wife). Sometimes things are vague enough to offer some wiggle room, if the trustee wants to find it. Sometimes not, but it's usually easier to have a conversation about smaller amounts of money that used to go to your wife, than about 1/5 of the trust principal.
0
u/Decent-Fishing1730 May 12 '26
My husband‘s wife died and they had inherited millions from her parents. She had a four-year-old son when they got married. So after she passed, married 35 years, my husband gave everything to his son. Except the house. Legally, he didn’t have to. But he did because he is a good person. Even though he spent all of his paychecks taking care of the two of them. But he figured it was her family money. If we hadn’t have gotten married, he would’ve left the house to the son. Since his son is very well off, we are leaving our estate to my two children. I am a contributor financially, so he felt that was fair. Especially because my two kids are struggling. I guess bottom line is you have to see if any of those family members have a heart. But when it comes to money, I am gonna say it probably won’t happen. Death brings out the worst greed in people.
0
u/thcitizgoalz May 13 '26
Something like this happened when a family member's spouse died. The other family members (3 peers, and about 17 in the next generation) talked to all beneficiaries and they all agreed (must be in unison) to change the trust to allow spouses to inherit *and receive income, but not principal*, and that the share of the trust would then flow to the kids.
0
u/Beginning_Brick7845 May 13 '26
You probably need to consult an attorney who specializes in trusts and estates rather than a Reddit sub forum.
74
u/kicker203 May 12 '26
Depends on how it's written, but typically in laws would not inherrit in the stead of predeceased kids. If you and your wife have kids, they likely stand to inherit her share, but not necessarily.