A woman and her daughter on a joint savings account.?

Question

The woman begins to create a Trust account for her great-grandchildren, with the money that is in the account. The papers to create the trust are signed by the woman and include the names of who the money is for. The papers were submitted to the bank for finalization. The bank never finishes it's part. The woman's daughter, who is on the account, withdrawals the money. She promises to pay it back. The woman passes away, so the woman's daughter never pays the money back, and completely ignores any request for the money to be paid back. This woman then passes away. Would those papers be enough proof to hold up in court that the money is to be repaid to the names on the papers?? Thanks for any advice!!
I'm just curious about the paperwork itself, not whether the bank finished it's part or not. I just want to know if the paper would be proof enough to take court the money is owed.

Answer 1

There is a breech and negligence involved here, please don' t waste anymore time in this forum,,, get yourself a probate and estate attorney right away!!! , not to mention a lawyer versed in corporate law and breech of Fiduciary Responsibilities.be prepared to evidence a loss due to the banks failure to repair....

Answer 2

If the daughter withdrew money from a "joint" account, she withdrew her own money. Her promise to pay it back was in part to herself on that joint account, and that obligation ceased when the only other party to the account died. There is no action against the daughter on your facts.

As far as the bank goes, I doubt that they were converting an existing joint account to a trust account. Even where one person is on an account, they don't usually do it that way. The bank would want an affirmative act beyond creating the Trust, specifically in this case, the deceased would have to write a check to a NEW account. The bank can basically say "We did create the trust. She never funded it with anything."

There may be more than the facts you've given that changes the result, but on the facts presented, there's no case against the daughter or the bank.

Answer 3

This is a recurrent question. There are two kinds of trusts commonly used in cases like this.

The first is an inter-vivos trust. This requires the preparation of a trust agreement. The donor transfers money to a trustee, who is obligated to use the money as directed in the trust and who must account for the money at the time the trust terminates. For example, the agreement could say that "Grandma has transferred $10,000 today to Mom, in trust nevertheless to hold the same for the benefit of the grandchildren of Grandma and to apply the income thereof to the support and education of the grandchildren. This trust shall terminate as to each grandchild on his or her 25th birthday, at which time each shall be paid one half of the principal balance of the trust together with a ratable proportion of the undistributed income thereof in the hands of the trustee at the time of the distribution."

There would be lots more clauses. One needs a lawyer to do this, one does.

The second, much more common approach (and much less satisfactory) is the "Totten Trust." This arises when an account is established in the name of "Grandma in trust for grandchild #1 and grandchild #2, share and share alike." When grandma dies, the account is split between the grandchildren. If grandma withdraws money before then, the trust is pro tanto terminated.

Now we get to this fact pattern. In every state that I know of, the bank made a mistake because you can't tack a totten trust onto a joint account. You COULD tottenize a tenants-in-common account, because then the decedent's one-half interest in the account would go to the beneficiaries.

In this case, I would have to see the papers. My guesstimate at this point is that there is no claim, because mother, as a joint tenant of the account, became the owner of the account when grandma died, and as such could terminate the trust as to all beneficiaries.

THE RIGHT WAY to handle this is to use the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. Grandma transfer the money into an account naming Mom or herself as custodian under the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act. If Mom cleans out that account, the grandchildren could sue Mom to make her give them the money that she stole, and in a wicked enough case, Mom goes to prison for larceny.

Answer 4

Simply put, the first answer you received is wrong and will result in you spending money you don't have to seek legal redress that does not exist.

Any such claim died with the death of the person on the account (other than the great grandmother). As you have explained, the joint account holder died leaving her daughter who is NOT liable for any monies owed.

As for the bank, unless you can show a contractural relationship between the bank and BOTH parties to the account, and that the bank breeched such relationshiip, they too are not liable.

This issue died with the joint account holder(s).

Answer 5

The account was joint, and therefore the daughter was within her legal rights to withdraw the money. Also, the bank would not be able to "convert" the account without both signatures, Grandma had to be setting up something seperate, which didn't get finished.