"Will Trice" <me[at]invalid.com> wrote in message
news:gsojrf$1gc$1[at]news.motzarella.org...
- quote -

Does the giver have any other options for bequeathing the item in question?
S/he needs to think about this. No museum will take it - s/he's sort of
stuck, right?

I saved money for my grandchildren to help them with college. It wasn't a
lot of money and it certainly wasn't going to provide a 4 year college
education. I am mindful that the money was a gift, so, while I had ideas on
its use, it was no longer mine to spend. Your heirloom giver is in the same
shoes. Once the item is given, it no longer belongs to him, and he'll be
dead anyway.

Elizabeth Richardson

HW "Skip" Weldon wrote:

- quote -

Thanks, Skip. I was trying to leave out some details in the interest of
privacy (because I'm a little paranoid when posting to a public forum)
but it seems a little more detail may be in order.

The item in question is a grand piano of significance in Oklahoma
history as well as in my family history. The presumed recipient is the
only member of the family willing or able to take it because of its
size. There's not much worry on the part of the giver about theft,
defacement, or loss. The main worry is where it goes when the recipient
dies (either another member of the family, or to an Oklahoma museum), or
to be sure that the recipient doesn't turn around and sell it out of the
family after the giver dies. Ironically, if no recipient is found to be
acceptable, the giver intends to sell the piano out of the family (with
the reasoning that it might as well be the giver that gets money from
any sale of the piano). It is unlikely that the recipient would be
willing to buy the piano given the sums already required to transport
and restore it.

To my knowledge, there is no reason for this distrust of the recipient.
I also assume that this is not just a case of the giver having a
change of heart and wanting to scare up some extra dollars.

The interested museums are in Oklahoma, the piano is currently in Texas,
and the presumed recipient is in a third state. If an estate planning
attorney is consulted, in which state should that attorney practice? I
don't think the trust or agreement or whatever needs to be ironclad,
just enough to reassure the giver, though I don't know how close to
ironclad "close enough" would have to be.

-Will

william dot trice at ngc dot com

Avrum Lapin wrote:
- quote -

At this point the museums that are interested will not take the heirloom
due to its condition.

- quote -

These are apparently hard questions for the giver to answer. The
recipient is willing to spend considerable sums to transport and restore
the heirloom to museum quality over several years and makes claims that
it will be transferred to another family member or to a museum upon the
recipient's death. For some reason the giver does not take this at face
value and the recipient is looking for a way to reassure the giver.

-Will

william dot trice at ngc dot com

On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:28:58 -0500, Will Trice <me[at]invalid.com> wrote:


- quote -

Very interesting question. As you know, trusts do this for financial
assets. For real estate, a life estate may do what you want.

If a client asked this of me, I would check with an estate planning
attorney in the state involved. Beyond that - assets like jewelry,
old cars, works of art, etc. - would be tricky (for example, what if
someone stole it, defaced it, lost it, ran away to god-knows-where
with it, etc.) so it seems impractical to leave it to person A while
ASSURING that eventually it will belong to Person B.

Look forward to other replies.


-HW "Skip" Weldon
Columbia, SC

In article <gsn625$pjv$1[at]news.motzarella.org> ,
Will Trice <me[at]invalid.com> wrote:

- quote -

the family member can hold it during their life time. Hopefully the
museum will follow up

Does the family member appreciate the heirloom and will they properly
care for it. How will they dispose of it after death or when no longer
of value value to the givee.

Hey all,

This may not quite be a financial issue, but we talk about inheritance
issues a lot here so I thought I'd throw this out. Sorry if this is too
far off topic.

Let's say I have a family heirloom that I want to hand down to another
member of the family upon my demise. However, I want to ensure that the
heirloom remains in the family (or goes to a museum) after I die. In
other words, I don't want this family member to have a change of heart
down the road and sell this thing. Is there a trust structure or some
other instrument that I can put in place, other than family guilt (of
which there would be plenty), to enforce my wishes once the heirloom
changes possession?

And just so I don't sound too morbid, this question isn't actually for
me, but for yet another member of my family. Writing it in the first
person was just easier...

Thanks!
-Will

william dot trice at ngc dot com