6:49 pm
October 27, 2013
Loonie said
It was Norman's post that referred to probate.
Yes, I understood it was he who surfaced that comment. It was my intent, obviously poorly worded, to reinforce that an FI won't necessarily need to have a Will probated to release registered funds to a named beneficiary on file. It comes down to an FI's confidence on the validity of the Will being presented.
8:06 pm
April 6, 2013
Loonie said
Really, the whole situation calls into question why we even have beneficiary forms. They are provided for in law so there must be some validity to them. If you are going to require a will probated regardless, then what's the point? I don't think the TFSA will be listed as an asset for probate because it's not subject to probate tax, although it could be mentioned. Perhaps the only use of the form would be for someone who didn't have a will, but how do you prove a negative and how long would the FI insist on waiting?
…
The TFSA issuer could wait for the probate court to issue letters of administration (instead of a grant of probate) that appoint an executor when there is no valid will. The letters of administration issued is court confirmation that no valid will was discovered.
The TFSA will be subject to probate tax if the probated will revokes the beneficiary or successor designation on the TFSA or the designation is ruled to be invalid.
These simple estate planning devices are never final. Not even joint accounts.
The surviving owner of a joint account can be compelled to turn the money over to the estate. If someone convinces probate court that the deceased did not intended the survivor to inherit the account on death, then the survivor is deemed to be holding the money in trust for the estate.
What is a Resulting Trust? is an interesting article from Toronto lawyers Wagner Sidlofsky LLP about joint ownership and the matter of resulting trust.
4:58 am
October 27, 2013
2:24 pm
September 20, 2016
10:14 pm
October 21, 2013
skibum said
I just sent in forms for Successor Annuitant for my RRIF at RBC. No witness needed. If my signature on a cheque, (which could empty the account) doesn't have to be witnessed, declaring a beneficiary, etc. should meet the same standard.
One of the excuses they are giving for trying to eliminate cheques (a bad idea in my view) is the risk of forgery. However, it's more likely they find it too much bother to check signatures as that requires a human with eyes and brains.
Please write your comments in the forum.