Despite widespread incredulity from the public about the weird details of hotel empress Leona Helmsley’s will, some advisers know that bizarre bequests are not uncommon, having watched their own clients seek to rule their families from beyond the grave.
Despite widespread incredulity from the public about the weird details of hotel empress Leona Helmsley’s will, some advisers know that bizarre bequests are not uncommon, having watched their own clients seek to rule their families from beyond the grave.
Ms. Helmsley, who died Aug. 20, left her dog, Trouble, $12 million. That made the pooch seem like a higher priority than
Ms. Helmsley’s own grandchildren, two of whom received $5 million each and two who were disinherited.
To collect their fortune, the two favored grandsons, David and Walter Panzirer, must visit their father’s grave at least once each calendar year, preferably on the anniversary of his death. Should they miss a visit, they will be cut off from the money left in the trust.
The other two grandchildren, Craig and Meegan Panzirer, were disinherited for “reasons which are known to them,” according to the will.
Advisers and attorneys say they have seen families torn apart as clients disinherit children or grandchildren or require family members to change religion or sign postnuptial agreements before receiving bequests.
Although it’s difficult not to be judgmental, Jason M. Cole, the managing director of Abacus Wealth Partners LLC in Philadelphia, believes it’s his job to ensure that his clients’ wishes are met.
One of those clients directed that all assets be left to a pet shelter. Anotther forbade paper plates and plastic forks and knives at the memorial-service spread.
“We do try not to judge,” Mr. Cole said. “We need to remain as objective as possible about the estate planning process.”
Clients on ice
In the annals of posthumous micromanaging, surely few compare with a client of Rick Van Der Noord’s, a registered investment adviser and certified financial planner with Van Der Noord Financial Advisors Inc. in Greer, S.C.
He helped a divorced man draft a will in which his sons could use the inheritance only for health or medical care — and then only if the costs exceeded $12,000 a year. The sons could get 10% of the inheritance if they completed four-year college degrees, an additional 10% if they received master’s degrees and 10% more should they earn doctorates.
And there’s more. Each son gets a 20% distribution of the trust if he postpones marriage until age 27. They earn another 20% distribution if they are married to their first spouses for five years, and they earn an additional 20% for every five years of marriage until they’ve been married 15 years.
By age 45, the two sons will be paid the full remainder of the trust.
“He was trying to help parent and direct his heirs from the grave,” Mr. Van Der Noord said. “As his adviser, my job is to help him get whatever he wants, and if that’s what he wants, that’s what we’ve got for him.”
Although some clients try to exert control after death, others plan on coming back to life — hence “cryonics estate planning,” in which advisers manage money for clients who have had themselves frozen in the hopes of being revived years, or perhaps centuries, later.
“It’s an emerging field, one that I’m helping to create,” said Rudi Hoffman, a certified financial planner and chief executive of Hoffman Planning in Port Orange, Fla.
“Obviously, there’s no guarantee it will work,” he said. “It’s a best effort.”
Although Gary Altman, an estate planning attorney and owner of Altman & Associates Inc. in Rockville, Md., hasn’t had any clients make plans for their afterlife, he’s had many clients donate their bodies to science at the University of Tennessee’s Forensic Anthropology Facility in Knoxville, which has been nicknamed the “Body Farm.”
Martin M. Shenkman, an attorney in his eponymous Teaneck, N.J., law firm, draws the line when he thinks the fallout from a will could devastate a family. Recently, he refused to work with a client who wanted to give 80% of her fortune to two of her eight grandchildren while ignoring the others.
“I told her I can’t participate,” Mr. Shenkman said. “She’s going to destroy her family.”
Mr. Shenkman also had a client who wanted to leave someone $50,000 to care for an extensive tropical-fish collection. “I told him there’s a problem with that, and it’s one word,” Mr. Shenkman said. “Flush.”
Instead, Mr. Shenkman directed his client to leave the fish in a trust and to be taken care of by a trustee.
But some clients take a more expansive approach when it comes to estate planning. Several years ago, Jeff Sprowles, an adviser with Jeff Sprowles & Associates LLC in Langhorne, Pa., handled the distribution of a will for a childless husband and wife.
The couple directed that the trust be divided between a brother, three nieces and a nephew, but there was a catch: Each of them had five years from the date of the funding to spend their bequest. Anything left at the end of five years would go to charity.
Additionally, the beneficiaries were allowed to use the money only for activities that would generate immediate enjoyment.
They weren’t allowed to gamble or buy anything of permanent value, such as a vehicle or a house.
“It was pretty cool,” Mr. Sprowles said. “It had to be basically blown. They had a hell of a good time.”
However, the brother thought the idea was frivolous and refused to spend his portion of the money.
“I could almost hear him saying, ‘Bah! Humbug!’” Mr. Sprowles said.
