An interesting email to come home from paradise to last night. None the less I appreciate the attempted solution. Nice idea but not the “only option”, and definitely not “easiest”. In fact, it speaks to the need for better knowledge of misperceptions that plagued us from the beginning.
As is the case with banks, redacted private equity fund cannot issue a check in a name other than the investor: https://www.seclaw.com/introduction-private-placements/ Previously the same error was made when you assumed the bank broke that rule with the , redacted when in fact, it was cut in abbreviated stencil to fit the check and was not “fraud” as suggested. Also misunderstood during redacted liquidation was settlement period: https://www.ally.com/do-it-right/investing/what-are-unsettled-funds/
Ignorance to the reality of how things actually work caused malicious accusations that lead to panic and loss of a good financial opportunity. So, rather than continue that flawed pattern of thinking let’s move forward with verifiable facts, that I’m happy to impart, once I get my head around our return and other pressing issues.
For now, as a thumbnail; the easiest option was clearly putting it into the existing “trust savings account at redacted” that redacted refenced when requesting the check. The “redacted meeting cancelled due to redacted absolving redacted as Trustee” is immaterial! Names coming off such accounts is common, as banks prefer singular trustee anyway, but the 2006 Trust title, cannot change and deposit could have been made. If his information was inaccurate and there is no account, as alluded to by redacted, then we should drill down to address options openly as a group, rather than in cloak and dagger, as it were.
Demanded by you early on was, “Also, do not make any decisions for the redacted going forward without all seven redacted agreeing” to which I immediately agreed, but now everyone needs to be involved to avoid hypocrisy. The core decision making group are trustees. Unlike with the bank, redacted can’t remove himself from 2006 Trust (itself) unless group protocols are followed. If that was done during his July 17 meeting, we have not yet seen the 30-day notification. If it was for any other reason and trust recommendations were made as stated. redacted needs to personally send them for our review. This will assure information he received was correct and his resulting advice accurate, thus avoiding confusion experienced with a check request ending up on redacted.
Thankfully, I do have a technical solution to present that will solve issues in order to get this done, but first, we all need to come to common ground otherwise we risk irreversible mistakes if the money is paid out incorrectly or without complete consensus. It was my commitment to guarantee look-back safety on the money. To keep that intact, this needs to be a two-way street with everyone vetting conclusions so our family can commence healing.
Understand redacted is a paid advisor not a decision maker. We can all hire an attorney, as redacted threatened, but it’s ultimately up to trustees (& group of seven peripherally) to decide on actions within limits of the trust document. Also remain aware redacted mental capacity is diminished and her decisions need to be without influence, manipulation or under mental anguish, which mom is now. redacted is in no condition to be making redacted during this trauma and doing so can only raise questions under elder law.
Agreeing to disperse this money to redacted and forging look-back issues is indeed a big leap, especially for those who only a month ago were panicked by “stirring the trust”, or “land the house is on being at risk”. It is wiser to be prudent and take the necessary time to sort this out because an emotional solution, rather than a practical one, could only makes the hornets’ nest this has become, far worse!
At one time or another, everyone has errored in regard to the complications of our redacted estate. Short of listing mistakes by us or our redacted, we should take a closer look at ourselves first, then accept the issue is not a check but misunderstandings, suspicions, or fear of being gypped. This spiraled out of control from the onset because of process ignorance, but as accountability and personal awareness manifest, we will rebuild with true facts.
Any questions not clear from my prior emails can be openly discussed in a new dialog going forward. As paranoid notions fade and forgiveness happens, we will gain clarity and proceed with accuracy. Then, in measured steps, we can execute fiduciary duties of trustees (and redacted), whose obligation is to act in the best interest of the grantor, the trust and trust’s beneficiaries. This seems the best and most reasonable way to get back to the referenced normality.
If this process seems slow and painful remember, so was getting here during a backdrop of the worst period in our life history. Even the best families have had such issues—but only the greatest of them come to resolutions. Consequently, I will muster patriarchal duty, with your input, to provide a proper course of action that does not undermined the integrity of the trust, to keep these funds compliant, as they were in the Private Equity investment.
More importantly, the ongoing process will be a fulcrum that begins family healing and allays questions by agreement and not appeasement by payoff. At that point redacted will truly have genuine harmony between redacted, that redacted so well deserves at this point in her life.
Kevin Palmer Arizona
#authorkevinJpalmer
KevinJPalmerAuthor.com
reawakeninganamericandream.com
KevinJPalmer.com
palmerholdinggroup.com
strategicmanagementadvisors.com
Author and Journalist Kevin Palmer – SMA Institute
Kevin Palmer Terminated From First base on over throw, worked his way up in Wall Street biggest firms. After learning everything he could from them, teamed up with other executives to advise smaller firms. Kept his license with a corporate clients, to day trade…a bad idea (story for another time or book)…but that addiction inspired his Behavioral Finance firm, sMa Institute which did groundbreaking research still used today in investment policies at some Wall Street firms.
