[WSBAPT] TOD Deeds

[Kate Szurek]

I'm not so sure there is an objection so much as the fact that there is a governing statute.  Try RCW 64.80.100.  I haven't looked at it carefully enough (yet) to be absolutely certain it answers the current question, but Dwight Bickel, regional counsel for title companies across 6 northwestern states, indeed told us at the RPPT seminar last Friday that all interests given must be equal and concurrent, and if there are multiple grantees, the share of a deceased grantee passes to the other grantees.  He also said a grantee must be alive at the time of transfer, and the interest is not subject to right of representation or anti-lapse rules.  I do not recall, however, his specifically discussing specifically stated contingent interests - but I cannot see how contingent interests can be concurrent.  Dwight also referred us to Al Falk's summer 2014 article in the RPPT newsletter.  Al worked hard on the legislation and was instrumental in getting it passed, so I suspect his article covers the bases.

Kate


[SkagitLaw_Signature (2)]
Kate Szurek, J.D., LL.M.
P.O. Box 336 / 227 Freeway Drive, Suite B
Mount Vernon, WA  98273
360.336.1000
360.336.6690 (fax)
kate at skagitlaw.com<mailto:kate at skagitlaw.com>
http://www.skagitlaw.com<http://www.skagitlaw.com/>



From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 5:16 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] TOD Deeds

It's not my issue here but, why is there a problem with giving to one named person (who just happens to be a son) and also give to several other named persons (who just happen to be son's children)?  Is your objection that it is a multi-generational gift or is there an objection if I say to "Son and to Son's children" (that is, I don't specifically name the son's children?)
________________________________
From: heatherd at westseattlelaw.com<mailto:heatherd at westseattlelaw.com>
To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 00:16:58 +0000
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] TOD Deeds
The consensus of the panel on this subject at the recent Estate Planning CLE was that you cannot do what you propose effectively. As I understand it, all grantees must be given simultaneous and equal interests and cannot be survival contingencies in the document. Similarly, you could not give ½ to son and ½ to son's children equally.

Heather

Heather S. de Vrieze
Attorney-at-Law
[cid:image001.jpg at 01D013C2.30F35160]
3909 California Avenue SW
Seattle, WA 98116-3705
(206)938-5500
heatherd at westseattlelaw.com<mailto:heatherd at westseattlelaw.com>
www.westseattlelaw.com<http://www.westseattlelaw.com/>

CONFIDENTIAL & PRIVILEGED. This e-mail message may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this e-mail message and any attachment.

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Paul Neumiller
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 3:48 PM
To: wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBAPT] TOD Deeds

Listservers: Has anyone done the following yet?

Client wants to use a Transfer on Death Deed to transfer residence to Able, and if Able is deceased or disclaims the residence (RCW 64.80.110 says the beneficiary may disclaim), then residence goes to Baker.  RCW 64.80.100(1)(b) says the transfer "lapses" if the beneficiary fails to survive the transferor.  Does the collective mind of the listserv believe that it would be an effective TODD if I put:  "To Able, and if Able either fails to survive me or chooses to disclaim Able's beneficiary interest in this Revocable Transfer Upon Death Deed pursuant to RCW 64.80.110, then to Baker."???  Thanks for your input.


_______________________________________________ WSBAPT mailing list WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141212/d74ae8b1/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6650 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141212/d74ae8b1/image001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8009 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20141212/d74ae8b1/image002.jpg>