Well, inheritance always goes down the list first.

I don't fully recall your circumstances. For your sister to inherit from you
would mean you had neither living children, grandchildren
(great-grandchildren?) and your parents were also deceased. Or - you choose
to leave her something in your will.

And that's the real thing here. If you have a valid will or your property is
in a valid trust, your property goes in whatever way those legal documents
specify. SO if you say, I'm leaving it all to x charity and my family,
having been provided for in their lifetime (or having been estranged,
or...), are to receive nothing - that's exactly what they get. Or if you put
the property in trust for the benefit of yourself, children and/or
grandchildren, or even your pet, the trustees have to use the property for
the benefit of those people or pet (in US, pets cannot inherit in a will).
You have to state an ending time for the trust (death of pet, youngest
grandchild reaching the age of 30, or somesuch according to some arcane
rules) and also state what happens to the remaining property in the trust
when the trust ends (divided equally, goes to charity...). There are some
special rules if the trust is for your own benefit (legal arcana which must
be adhered to or the trust will be invalid creating all sorts of tax and
inheritance messes). That's why these require an atty and tax consult - just
so you know the current requirements for validity (and best set up for you).

So - perhaps the cost of legal services for the trust your Dad was going to
sign was inappropriate (not sure what complexities were involved, tax
consulting, etc.), but having property in a trust is an excellent way of
passing on your property because it avoids/reduces probate and its inherent
costs in addition to reducing inheritance taxes.

The attorney must have additional monies above the legal fees owed because
you have to begin the trust with a minimal amount of money. There must be
some property for the trust to control. I always used $1.00, because you can
always add money to a trust. But that's where Canadian law may differ.
Dunno. Or, if he was placing the house in trust, maybe there is a problem
with the title search or mortgage discharge that needs to be researched and
fixed. Only the atty who was to do the work could explain his/her fee
structure.

Hoped this helped instead of muddying the picture more.

Adelle

Whats so important about this house?

My father's house was the house I grew up in. It certainly had a lot of
memories. Although a very nice 4 bedroom house, in a very nice
subdivision, realistically, it wasn't the kind of house my husband and
I wanted - it was somewhat out in the styxx as far as we were concerned
(a long way from the city core, a long commute from work, no convenient
public transit, and it required driving for everything, so mummy and
daddy would have been full time chauffeurs). So, for lifestyle reasons,
we gave it a pass. It also wasn't a suitable house for my brother, who
at the time was engaged, no children - i.e. too big for him, in a poor
location for a young couple who want a little more hip urban zing in
their surroundings.

So, we sold it, the procedes were rolled into the estate, along with
the cars, the investments that were cashed out, the pension, the bank
deposits, the insurance - all the financial "stuff" most people have.
There was dispersal of personal items per a codicil to my father's will
that specified exactly who got what - and god bless my dad for that -
there was no fighting about furniture, silverwear, artwork, china etc.
The assets of the estate other than the household items, were
essentially liquified, poured into a tank, and we each got half - there
were no other heirs for the valuable stuff.

I can't begrudge my brother ultimately leaving his share (which is,
after all HIS to do with exactly as he pleases) to his children, as he
can't begrudge me looking out for my own children in my will.

I guess I'm not understanding why you think your sister's half should
not be hers outright, to dispose of as she wishes. If she did own half
the house, and you wanted it, you could buy her interest from her
estate - and you could make an agreement to that effect (i.e. that each
of you has the first right of refusal). If she is only inheriting in
effect a life interest, that really isn't fair - that becomes a form of
your parents reaching out from beyond the grave to try and control what
their descendents do with their assets.

Just seems to me its much cleaner to just put everything in a pool and
then if you want, you can elect to take yours share of the pool in the
form of the house.

If this is about trying to protect assets by putting it into your names
NOW, you may already be too late, as the look back periods for medicaid
can be quite long.

M

this is your opinion, or your understanding, but it is not fact.
i'm not going to try to correct your misunderstandings point by
point because i am not familiar with your local and state laws
regarding estates.  in order to find out how the law works in
your jurisdiction, you should talk to an attorney licensed to
practice there.

i would be more concerned about him naming someone with a durable
power of attorney for health care than i would about him changing
a will that was written years ago and which he probably does not
need to change.