# Land Trust



## QuickSilver (Aug 30, 2016)

Can someone explain the benefits of putting your house in one?  What are the cons?  

Can anyone explain the property ownership status of "tenants in entirety"  as opposed to "joint tenancy"


----------



## Butterfly (Aug 30, 2016)

This from the interwebs:

*A Tenancy by the Entirety allows  spouses  to  own  property  together  as  a  single  legal  entity.  Under  a  tenancy  by  the  entirety,  creditors  of  an  individual  spouse  may  not  attach  and  sell  the  interest  of  a  debtor  spouse:  only  creditors  of  the  couple  may  attach  and  sell  the  interest  in  the  property  owned  by  tenancy  by  the  entirety.

There are three types of concurrent ownership, or ownership of property by two or more persons: tenancy by the entirety, Joint Tenancy, and Tenancy in Common. A tenancy by the entirety can be created only by married persons. A married couple may choose to create a joint tenancy or a tenancy in common. In most states a married couple is presumed to take title to property as tenants by the entirety, unless the deed or conveyancing document states otherwise.

 The most important difference between a tenancy by the entirety and a joint tenancy or tenancy in common is that a tenant by the entirety may not sell or give away his interest in the property without the consent of the other tenant. Upon the death of one of the spouses, the deceased spouse's interest in the property devolves to the surviving spouse, and not to other heirs of the deceased spouse. This is called the right of survivorship.

Tenants in common do not have a right of survivorship. In a tenancy in common, persons may sell or give away their ownership interest. Joint tenants do have a right of survivorship, but a joint tenant may sell or give away her interest in the property. If a joint tenant sells her interest in a joint tenancy, the tenancy becomes a tenancy in common, and no tenant has a right of survivorship. A tenancy by the entirety cannot be reduced to a joint tenancy or tenancy in common by a conveyance of property. Generally, the couple must Divorce, obtain an Annulment, or agree to amend the title to the property to extinguish a tenancy by the entirety
*
I hope this helps.  I've never seen tenancy by the entirety here.  I'm not sure New Mexico recognizes it.  (ALL property law is state law and varies by state.)  Usually here, married couples hold property as joint tenants.   Tenancy in common is used more by business partners, etc., who want to protect their interests in the event of their death. 

It appears to me (and I'm NOT a lawyer, only a retired paralegal, and this is in no way legal advice) is that the main difference between joint tenancy and tenants in the entirety is whether or not a creditor can attach and sell the interest of the debtor spouse (if only one of them is the debtor).  To me, this would be important if one spouse was a spendthrift, as in someone with a gambling problem, etc.  This wouldn't make any difference here, it seems to me, because NM is a community property state and ALL debt  entered into by either party after marriage is community debt (i.e., debt of both spouses).

Does this help?


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 30, 2016)

This Tenancy by the Entirety is a newish thing?  I never heard of it before.  I have always owned property with a spouse as Joint Tenants.  It sounds like a good thing.


----------



## Butterfly (Aug 30, 2016)

QS, if tenancy by entirety was legal here, that's the way I'd want to hold land with a spouse.


----------



## Butterfly (Aug 30, 2016)

I looked it up, and Illinois is not a community property state -- rather, it is a common law state.  So tenancy by entirety was probably thought up to protect a spouse's interest in a home against debts by a spouse -- like if he went nuts and went out and bought a brand new red Lamborgini for $100,000 or something.  

It wouldn't work here, because NM is, as I said, a community property state.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

Just recently, I put my husband on the deed to my house..  This is how our lawyer set it up.   We also put it into a land trust, with my two sons as beneficiaries.  It was the best way the lawyer could think of to protect my husband should I die first,, and yet have the property go to my kids when he dies.   It's not perfect... he could still change the Trust, but the best that could be done.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

be careful with your home and trusts .

if you ever need medicaid long term care a home held in personal names is a protected asset and is not counted as an asset for purposes of qualifying for medicaid nor can they take it as long as you claim one day you will return . .

once you put a house in any kind of revocable trust name it loses that protection .

you may actually be forced to sell the house just to qualify for medicaid because once in a revocable trust the house counts as dollars  .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> be careful with your home and trusts .
> 
> if you ever need medicaid long term care a home held in personal names is a protected asset and is not counted as an asset for purposes of qualifying for medicaid nor can they take it as long as you claim one day you will return . .
> 
> ...



They have to find it first.. However.. our attorney has assured us that isn't true..  We STILL own the home..and it remains a protected asset as our only residence.   The title is only held in a blind trust by a title company.  If anything it offers some protection AGAINST what you descried.   It also avoids probate upon the passing of the surviving owner.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

oh it is very true . it has nothing to do with probate or not .

it has to do with the fact the  value of the house is not counted as an asset for Medicaid purposes when it comes to how much gets spent down before Medicaid pays anything when held in personal name only or irrevocable trust . , 


while Medicaid can not usually go after anything not probated a revocable trust is a catch 22 .

while they can't take the house  because the trust is not probated ,the value of the house when applying for Medicaid becomes countable dollars  once it is moved to a revocable trust . it can only remain a protected not countable asset in personal name only and not a revocable  trust . 

that can require you to have to sell and  spend down the house in order to qualify for Medicaid in the first place .

if your attorney does not know this I strongly suggest you speak to another attorney . .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

There is very little one can do to avoid having to deplete ones assets if applying for Medicaid.   That said.. we are still the owners of the property, and would not be required to sell the house to qualify for Medicaid if one spouse needs nursing home care.  Spending down is very different from liquidation.  The remaining spouse is protected from becoming homeless to pay the others NH bills.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

check with an attorney then , your attorney may not be well versed in this if he did not tell you the pitfalls . with the house held in a revocable trust the problem is you lost the protection of the law that you had prior to moving it in to the trust .

you now can not qualify to even get Medicaid until all assets are spent down to their requirement even if it now means the house has to go .the law went away with the change .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> check with an attorney then , your attorney may not be well versed in this if he did not tell you the pitfalls . with the house held in a revocable trust the problem is you lost the protection of the law that you had prior to moving it in to the trust .
> 
> you now can not qualify to even get Medicaid until all assets are spent down to their requirement even if it now means the house has to go .the law went away with the change .




Totally disagree..  the State will not insist the house be sold and the remaining spouse become homeless..   The State will put a lien against the property so it will get it's money WHEN the house is sold.    The state is not in the habit of turning little 90 year old ladies out on the street.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

you don't understand . just based on what you are replying you are missing the point .

Medicaid rules prohibit some one getting a penny from  Medicaid until they spent their assets down to the states requirement level .

there is a penalty period based on how much you are over asset wise .

normally the house in your personal name is exempt from being part of the asset calculation to determine if there will be a penalty period .

once you move the house to a revocable trust you blew it and the dollars become counted the same as any other asset . they are no longer exempt from the penalty calculation .

if the house is still over the limit you will have to sell it to get your assets below the required level  BEFORE MEDICAISD EVEN PAYS A DIME .

you are arguing against something that is fact . you can google it . it is the major disadvantage of putting a house in a revocable trust .

you are talking about liens and recovery but that has nothing to do with this aspect .

in this case you would owe them nothing since you don't qualify for Medicaid  BECAUSE NOW THE HOUSE WON'T LET YOU CLEAR THE PENALTY PERIOD . you need to get your assets below a certain level to see your first dollar from Medicaid paid and in this case the house is counted in that figure .

folks blow this all the time and is the reason I am bringing it up .


----------



## Gemma (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> you don't understand . just based on what you are replying you are missing the point .
> 
> Medicaid rules prohibit some one getting a penny from  Medicaid until they spent their assets down to the states requirement level .
> 
> ...



I totally agree with this.  Went through this with my mother.  Any payment medicaid wouldn't pay, came out of her own pocket.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

3:
revocable trusts 

It does not help you qualify for Medicaid. Medicaid is a federally funded health care program that was created primarily to provide health care services for the poor. It also pays for an unlimited number of days of nursing home care, which makes it appealing to some people who are not poor. To qualify for Medicaid, you can only have a limited amount of assets and receive a certain amount of income.

Some people think putting their assets into a revocable living trust will help them qualify for Medicaid because the assets are no longer titled in their individual names. But because a living trust is revocable, you still have control of your assets and have access to them. As a result, assets in your living trust are “available” and counted if you apply for Medicaid—so transferring your assets to a living trust will not help you qualify for Medicaid. 

a primary home held in personal name is not counted as available  by law but it loses that distinction when put in a trust


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

I think you both are forgetting about the fact that if ONE spouse is institutionalized and the other is NOT..  The healthy Spouse is known as the Community Spouse.. The Federal government passed the Spousal Impoverishment ACT to prevent just what you are saying..   Also most States have laws protecting the Community Spouse from impoverishment...  So NO.  while the house may be used as a countable asset.  The State cannot take it before the surviving spouse dies..


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> 3:
> revocable trusts
> 
> It does not help you qualify for Medicaid. Medicaid is a federally funded health care program that was created primarily to provide health care services for the poor. It also pays for an unlimited number of days of nursing home care, which makes it appealing to some people who are not poor. To qualify for Medicaid, you can only have a limited amount of assets and receive a certain amount of income.
> ...



I don't have a living trust..  I have a land trust.. Both my husband and I are tenants in the entirety..  which essentially converts the house to "personal property"... and protects each of us from liability of the other partner.   Now perhaps they can sue HIM.. but not me.  perhaps his half of the asset must be paid down.. but not mine.

https://www.medicare.gov/what-medicare-covers/part-a/paying-for-nursing-home-care.html



> *The state can't put a lien on your home if there's a reasonable chance you'll return home after getting nursing home care or if you have a spouse or dependents living there*. This means they can't take, sell, or hold your property to recover benefits that are correctly paid for nursing home care while you're living in a nursing home in this circumstance.In most cases, after a person who gets Medicaid nursing home benefits passes away, the state must try to get whatever benefits it paid for that person back from their estate.
> However,* they can't recover on a lien against the person's home if it's the residence of the person's spouse, brother or sister (who has an equity interest and was residing in the home at least one year prior to the nursing home admission),* or a blind or disabled child or a child under the age of 21 in the family.
> *Your assets*
> 
> ...


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

the link you posted has nothing to do with the qualifying for Medicaid .  no one is disputing they can not take the house , why do you keep mentioning it ?  . the dispute is you cannot qualify with the house for Medicaid without it becoming part of the assets that have to be spent down once it goes in a trust.

a land trust is a revocable trust .

A Revocable trust will not do anything to "protect" home from consideration by Medicaid in determining eligibility for nursing home coverage. 

only a home outside the trust is exempt from being counted as a spendable asset  to qualify .once it goes in the trust it is counted . anything over 119,220.00 to be spent down before you can get Medicaid and with a trust that number now includes the house .

without a trust the number does not include the house , the house is exempt if not in a trust .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

I didn't say that it didn't have to be paid...  I only said that they cannot force a Community Spouse out of the home to pay for the nursing home..  Guess we were talking about two different things. 

However, since the trust is revocable.. If it becomes apparent that a spouse will need nursing home care in the future.. the trust will be revoked.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

there may be a 5 year look back  before taking it out of the trust is accepted . you have to check on that , .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> there may be a 5 year look back  before taking it out of the trust is accepted . you have to check on that , .



Far as I know... only for transfer of assets.  Revoking a trust isn't transferring anything.. we still are the owners of the house.    The assets are done by Snapshot on the day a person applies for Medicaid.   But we are talking about something that may not even happen..


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

you would think that was the case but I am pretty sure they do not let you double dip ,  I believe re-titling from a trust is considered a transfer for Medicaid purposes .


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

I found something on it. it looks like the house has to be out of the RLT when you apply for Medicaid . that can be a bit hard to do in advancwe when someone has a stroke and you first have to have things re-titled .

"*So what’s the problem with RLTs from a Medicaid planning perspective*? First, you have to understand the goal of Medicaid planning. That goal is to re-title/re-position a client’s assets in to “exempt” assets that do not count against the client when it comes to the spend-down rules.
As a general rule of thumb, single clients have to spend down all of their “countable” assets to *$2,000* in order to qualify for Medicaid assistance for nursing home care.

What if the client does proper planning but leaves the home in a RLT before applying for Medicaid? The house which would normally be an exempt asset if not owned by a trust then becomes a countable asset and the client will NOT qualify for Medicaid.
*Example*: Assume a client has a house in a RLT and then spends down all her other assets to $2,000 (therefore, she thinks she will qualify for Medicaid when she applies).  She applies for Medicaid in December hoping to get Medicaid benefits backdated to December 1.  In January the Medicaid agency finds out that her house is owned by a RLT. Instead of being approved for Medicaid with payment going back to the time of application, she receives notice that she has too many resources and is *denied approval because her home is a countable asset.*
The client quickly removes the home from the RLT and reapplies for Medicaid before the end of February.  Because of this screw up Medicaid will only be approved back to February 1. This cost the client a $6,000 bill for December and a $6,000 bill for January.  This financial punishment could have been avoided if she or her team of advisors (attorney, financial planner, etc.), knew proper Medicaid Planning.


----------



## Ina (Aug 31, 2016)

Some of what you were explaining made sense to me, some not so much. But, these are things that have been on my mind.

Mu husband passed away 1&1/2 years ago, and I have decided to down size, and move away from Houston.  I've decided to move to a small community of 7,500. 

I live on disabilty and a pension, and I turn 65 in December.  Because I know I'm looking at heart surgery in a few years, I was wondering if I should put my new home in one of my grandchildren's name. I was hoping that would keep my new home out of the equation.  Now I'm wonder about my pension.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

i wouldn't . it can be a problem in the event of the kids being sued , divorce , etc . also if you need care the home would be a protected asset . you can have it it in case you need a reverse mortgage .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> I found something on it. *it looks like the house has to be out of the RLT when you apply for Medicaid . that can be a bit hard to do in advancwe when someone has a stroke and you first have to have things re-titled*


.




Not really hard at all...  When a person has a debilitating illness and needs Nursing Home care,  this is called a "Skilled Need"..  MEDICARE picks up the first 100 days at 100%.  The time to remove your property from the RLT would be then.  You have 100 days before you become what is known as self pay...    This is assuming you have no other assets.  Those have to go first.. so PLENTY of time to get the house out of the RLT before even thinking of applying for Medicaid.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

. most folks and general practitioners have little clue about this when they put homes in a trust . i wouldn't trust our state to do anything in 100 days . it took 4 months to get a will probated and a new deed titled .

but be aware :


 Medicare will only pay for skilled nursing care after a patient has been hospitalized for at least three days. And, at least for now, a patient who is in a hospital for observation but has not been formally admitted does not qualify. Medicare will pay for no more than 100 days of skilled care after a hospitalization. And Medicare will not pay for skilled care if needed services can be provided by the patient herself, her family, or by home health aides.

personally i would not bet my  long term care  plan on the fact i will have time or the ability to retitle . in fact if all we had left were those assets that qualified  and a house the life one of us would lead here is a life of impoverishment .

i wouldn't  ever call that my long term care plan . except for avoiding probate which is no big deal the  advantages of a  revocable trust are pretty limited .

basically if you have instructions you want carried out on what you leave or minor children use it  , but i would not use them for much else


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> . most folks and general practitioners have little clue about this when they put homes in a trust . i wouldn't trust our state to do anything in 100 days . it took 4 months to get a will probated and a new deed titled .
> 
> but be aware :
> 
> ...




I'm really glad we had this thread...  I was not aware of the RLT and Medicaid situation.    And I also now see why my attorney felt it a very good option for us.. We have substantial assets...  It would be a blue moon anyway before either of us would be able to even think about applying  for Medicaid.. 

 In the meantime.. an RLT does exactly want I wanted it to do.. Since my children are from a previous marriage it  protects my husband from my children in the event  die before him..they can't take the house from him... and it protects my children by having them as beneficiaries when he dies as they are not his heirs.  It also avoids Probate.

Should either one of us languish in a nursing home for years... when our assets get close to depleted.. the house will be taken out of the trust long before applying for Medicaid.  It really is a moot point


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

as our attorney told us anything revocable is no legal protection , it can be changed by the surviving spouse . it is worth as much as a handshake is legally . amything you do that is revocable is more a moral agreement than a legal one .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> as our attorney told us anything revocable is no legal protection , it can be changed by the surviving spouse . it is worth as much as a handshake is legally . amything you do that is revocable is more a moral agreement than a legal one .



I think I understand that MathJak...    I trust my husband... however this is one thing he doesn't have to do..  If I die before him, he doesn't have to do anything....  If he wants to rob my kids of my house, he would have to go to the attorney and remove them from the trust.  In any case... what could I do about that anyway.  There is no way to stop it.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

both my wife and i  have kids from a first marriage .

both of us were screwed over by our parents remarrying and ultimately the will being changed ruling us out . so having both got burned it was on our minds when we did all our paper work .

the only way to protect assets for your kids is to use irrevocable trusts . we did not want to start with that crap .

so we gave each other our word never to disinherit the others children and that is about as good as we can get things ,.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

we both have disclaimer trusts in place . but that is for state estate tax purposes .  in case we are over the asset limit in ny and would have estate taxes the surviving spouse has 9 months to throw a switch ,split the assets in two and create an irrevocable trust on 1/2 the assets .

we can pass 2x the amount with the trusts tax free to the kids. if we are not over the limit than it is business as usual and the trust is not activated .


----------



## Ina (Aug 31, 2016)

When things go through probate what percentage is lost from the estate to probate? Is it different from state to state? I'm in Texas.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

mathjak107 said:


> both my wife and i  have kids from a first marriage .
> 
> both of us were screwed over by our parents remarrying and ultimately the will being changed ruling us out . so having both got burned it was on our minds when we did all our paper work .
> 
> ...



Yep... we sat with our lawyer for 90 minutes talking about all options... and the RLT seemed best.  the house was in my name only.  After 15 years of marriage I decided I needed to protect him from my kids in the event of my death... I didn't want them throwing him out to sell the house..   I also wanted  the house to go to MY kids when he dies..   he has given his word he will not remove them from the trust.. and that is about as good as we can get things.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

every locality is different some are not much at all .


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

we tried to put as comprehensive plan together as we could including putting long term care insurance in place . the more we mitigate and rule out the better my wife likes it . she was a widow once already and had a pile of investments she knew nothing about dumped on her . the guy she trusted at the bank lost half of it in the dot com bust .

so all my planning takes her needs and wants in to consideration too .


----------



## Ina (Aug 31, 2016)

Then why is there so much distrust in making wills?


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

because when kids are not your own and drift out of the picture after their parent passes ,many times the documents get changed by the other spouse . especially if they remarry and the new spouse pressures them .

not all kids remain close with their parents spouse after they pass . out of site out of mind .


----------



## Ina (Aug 31, 2016)

Thank you Mathjak107 for the information. My assets are simple so maybe a will is the best way for me to go.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

Ina said:


> Then why is there so much distrust in making wills?




Because you cannot will property to someone and tell them what they have to do with it when they die.   Once you will something to someone and you die.. it's their property and they are free to do what they please.. including cutting their deceased spouses kids out of all assets.  Step children are not your legal heirs... and they have no claim on your assets.. You can change wills, and beneficiaries as you please.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

wills work . but they can be anything but simple . we already ran in to defects in a will and a trust that were done by different people . one word missing can cause lots of grief . never do this stuff with canned documents . see an actual estate attorney .

as we learned there are no do overs when things are not perfect


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

Ina said:


> Thank you Mathjak107 for the information. My assets are simple so maybe a will is the best way for me to go.



It's simple when there are no remarriages and no children from previous marriages..   When there are...simplicity goes out the window.. it gets really complicated... and most times it boils down to trust... which is pretty scary.


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

My lawyer told us that the only thing that should be willed are  fine artwork and jewelry..  In other words things that have no co-owner or beneficiary..   My house fell into that category until I decided it was time to protect my husband.   All my other assets have assigned beneficiaries which trump everything.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

a simple will can still cause grief . we inherited a house and the will was done by a general practitioner  . well we refinanced and the title company asked to see the will .

they stopped the closing .

the will read to my child beth i leave my house and possessions .  the will was missing the word "only" as in only child .

we had to pay all the lawyers , lost our rate and had to get affidavits from relatives there were no other children .

what could be simpler than that will .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

Only thing in my will is personal property..which all goes to my husband.. except for my jewelry which goes to my granddaughter


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

realize too that laws are always changing in states and canned documents and general practitioners  may not be up on the latest changes .


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

QuickSilver said:


> Only thing in my will is personal property..which all goes to my husband.. except for my jewelry which goes to my granddaughter




everything we have is benificiary . the kids all put in their requests for any major  personal effects and that is already off the table .


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

since we are basically leaving everything to each other we each got a life insurance policy to leave our kids something up front . that way they do not have to wait until the other spouse dies to get something .

it helps keep the peace


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

I had substantial assets before my remarriage... Most of that has my kids as beneficiaries.. so they won't have to wait before getting something.  It was the house causing me concern.   As I said.. I had it willed to them.. BUT after 15 years of marriage I needed to put my husband on the deed to protect him.   Then the concern was how to make sure my kids get the house after he dies.   No way to do that without an irrevocable trust.. or putting it in their names.. with lifetime tenancy to my husband.. BUT then my kids would be responsible for the taxes.. and they wouldn't get the homeowners exemption on it either..  Hubby couldn't claim the senior discount if he didn't actually own the property.   So we went round and round and came up with the land trust.  The best we could do it seems.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

we just retired last year so we are still refining things .


----------



## QuickSilver (Aug 31, 2016)

would love to hear from others here with kids from previous marriages and now with long term 2nd marriages and how they have handled this problem.


----------



## mathjak107 (Aug 31, 2016)

we went through a terrible time with a trust where a sentence pertaining to predeceasing was left out .   the courts singled right in on that .


----------



## Butterfly (Aug 31, 2016)

Ina said:


> When things go through probate what percentage is lost from the estate to probate? Is it different from state to state? I'm in Texas.



Yes probate law is very different from state to state.  The IRS exemption from federal estate taxes is federal; however, if you have a state estate tax, that law would be state law.  The only way to get a straight answer about your question would be to ask a Texas estate attorney.


----------



## Ina (Sep 1, 2016)

Thank you Butterfly, Michael took care of the family legal matters, and now it is in my hands. I'm down sizing everything, and thought now was the time to settle these matters. I'm not anywhere near well off, but I do have a little, and I didn't want that little bit going into probate. I don't even know what probate is. So I'm listening to those that have experience in the subject. Senior's!!   :wave:


----------



## Butterfly (Sep 1, 2016)

Ina, probate is the legal process that takes place in order to see that the property, etc., of a deceased person is distributed pursuant to a will or, in the absence of that, in accordance with the laws about who gets what if you die without a will.

Not every estate has to be probated, and if it doesn't have to go through probate, it saves a lot of money.  There are many ways, particularly if the estate is not extensive, that matters can be settled without formal probate, and this saves a lot of money.

I am the Houston area there is a  senior citizens' law office, where you can get free or drastically discounted legal advice about the best and simplest way to handle your estate and whether or not you even need a will.  Look up on the internet and see if you can find them and call them and make an appointment to go see them and they will take very good care of you and answer any questions, and give you guidance on how matters can best be handled.  

Here, I've arranged my affairs so no probate is necessary.  Texas law is different, but I'm sure you can find a way there, too.

Do check into it -- the senior citizens' law offices are the best bet for seniors because they deal with this stuff all the time and will give you very good guidance.


----------



## Ina (Sep 5, 2016)

Thank you Butterfly. I will take your advice and see what the Houston area offers. I don't have much, but I was wanting to set aside a little for my four great-grandchildren's education.  :wave:


----------

