As usual, much is happening in the world of estate abuse.
A Hong Kong judge has ruled against the claim put forward by feng shui master Tony Chan that he was entitled to the $13 billion estate of the late Nina Wang, once Asia’s richest woman. Chang said Wang intended to leave everything to him and produced a “will” to prove it. The will was believed to be a prop used in a feng shui ceremony, and of course, Wang didn’t happen to mention this major change to any of her close family members or business associates. Her actions gave no indication of a massive alteration to her estate plan. The only one who knew was Chan, the guy who stood to inherit it all.
The judge issued a 300-page ruling and appears to have gotten this decision right. It’s unfortunate, however, that significant money was squandered defending these charges (including a 40-day trial) instead of being put to a more productive use. As always, the lawyers are the real winners.
And speaking of situations appearing to be uncharacteristic end-of-life estate changes that surprise many involved, the Simon estate disute has a new development.
In the interest of full disclosure, after an early December incident of being trapped in an underground parking garage at the Galleria Houston (owned by Simon Properties Group) along with about 200 other people, we’re not fans of the company. The garage was far less than half-full, but mall customers were unable to exit due to Simon Properties’ failure to coordinate traffic control personnel for cars attempting to exit the garage onto a busy street. The back-up left people in their cars for nearly three hours awaiting any type exit access. Again, the garage was not even at half capacity. The situation posed a public safety hazard and the mall personnel’s lackluster response to the situation made clear the potential threats facing patrons in the event of a real crisis situation. After multiple attempts to communicate, mall management responded. It’s not worth further space on this site, but suffice to say that at least they are consistent.
Back to the estate —- it’s completely understandable that Deborah Simon would now seek to have stepmother Bren removed as trustee. Trusts involve all that language about trustees having a fiduciary responsibility to protect beneficial interests. At EstateofDenial.com, we’re not lawyers, but common sense presents some pretty basic points. First, a trustee, not beneficiaries, has authority to act. A trustee also has a responsibility for those actions to be reasonably prudent and in the best interest of beneficiaries. Regardless of provocation claims, if a trustee elects to exhibit hostility or animosity toward beneficiaries (in word or deed), why would clear-thinking beneficiaries not seek to have the trustee removed and replaced with a neutral (or at least non-hostile) party?
Click here to view additional news reports, including Bren Simon’s response, on this case.
Bren Simon’s desire to “diversify” the portfolio at the time chosen is an interesting choice, but certainly consistent in the type cases followed by EoD. Many of us seeking to preserve assets would appreciate (although haven’t experienced) an institution that would disallow divesting assets that are the subject of litigation.
With the Simon case, we once again have an example in which estate planning documents are potentially being used to divert - not implement or honor - the final wishes of a decedent. EoD in no way discourages people from addressing their probate needs, but it’s important to understand how in today’s litigious society where everyone feels entitled and attorneys always stand ready to aid anyone’s “pur$uit of ju$tice,” these documents do not offer the fail safe mechanism claimed by many instrument preparers. Additionally, one need not have an estate of billions, even millions of dollars. Similar asset “diversions” are happening with estates of far more modest means.
And on that front, these cases recently reported on through an Arizona Republic blog (posting #1, posting #2) serve as another important reminder that asset looting via probate instruments can also occur prior to death via guardianships.
As we always say, forewarned is forearmed.