Advice About Being A Trustee

[Skirmish]

I wonder if anyone can help me.

I was a Trustee in a club but due to ridiculous internal politics and nasty arguments I tendered my resignation. At the time I asked that my name be removed from the Trust deed however I was told that the solicitor said that I had effectively resigned once I had sent my resignation letter.

It was decided, to save money, that my name would only be removed at a point in the future when a new Trustee is appointed.

The current situation is therefore that my name is still on the Trust deed.

Simple question. Am I stil a Trustee or not?

[LuckyOne]

I wonder if anyone can help me.

I was a Trustee in a club but due to ridiculous internal politics and nasty arguments I tendered my resignation. At the time I asked that my name be removed from the Trust deed however I was told that the solicitor said that I had effectively resigned once I had sent my resignation letter.

It was decided, to save money, that my name would only be removed at a point in the future when a new Trustee is appointed.

The current situation is therefore that my name is still on the Trust deed.

Simple question. Am I stil a Trustee or not?

It would be a good idea to retain your own solicitor. Whenever things like this end acrimoniously, it seems that risks rise exponentially.

[6538]

I wonder if anyone can help me.

I was a Trustee in a club but due to ridiculous internal politics and nasty arguments I tendered my resignation. At the time I asked that my name be removed from the Trust deed however I was told that the solicitor said that I had effectively resigned once I had sent my resignation letter.

It was decided, to save money, that my name would only be removed at a point in the future when a new Trustee is appointed.

The current situation is therefore that my name is still on the Trust deed.

Simple question. Am I stil a Trustee or not?

You probably aren't. You have resigned but your letter of resignation is only evidence to that effect. If the letter goes missing then you would have to prove that you did indeed resign.

I fail to see how this is going to cost a lot of money for the trust. As far as I'm aware the deed can just be amended by noting on it the fact that you have resigned and the date on which you did so. They wouldn't even need to bother the solicitor as they could append that themselves.

Personally, I'd insist that it was done. Not doing it probably won't cause problems but if it were me I'd prefer to get it done now rather than argue the toss at a less advantageous time - like when the trustees get sued for something.

[6538]

You probably aren't. You have resigned but your letter of resignation is only evidence to that effect. If the letter goes missing then you would have to prove that you did indeed resign.

I fail to see how this is going to cost a lot of money for the trust. As far as I'm aware the deed can just be amended by noting on it the fact that you have resigned and the date on which you did so. They wouldn't even need to bother the solicitor as they could append that themselves.

Personally, I'd insist that it was done. Not doing it probably won't cause problems but if it were me I'd prefer to get it done now rather than argue the toss at a less advantageous time - like when the trustees get sued for something.

Okay, now that I've actually looked it up.

Although trusteeship is technically lifeliong. There are several mechanisms for a trustee to retire;

First. Take advantage of any power to retire contrain within the trust instrument - uncommon these days.

Second. If a replacement can be found he can retire under the provisions of sec.36(1) of the Trusteee Act 1925.

Third. If no replacement can be found he can retire under the provisions in sec.39 of TA'25 if;

(i) The trust is left with not less that 2 individual trustees or a trust corporation;

(ii) The remaining trustees consent, and;

(iii) Anyone empowered to appoint trustees must consent.

Retirement under sec.39 must be in the form of a deed.

Fourth. The beneficiaries may consent to his retirement.

Fith. A court may discharge the trustee.

Six. die!

The things you find out when sadly spending your Friday evening in a law library.

[Skirmish]

Okay, now that I've actually looked it up.

Although trusteeship is technically lifeliong. There are several mechanisms for a trustee to retire;

First. Take advantage of any power to retire contrain within the trust instrument - uncommon these days.

Second. If a replacement can be found he can retire under the provisions of sec.36(1) of the Trusteee Act 1925.

Third. If no replacement can be found he can retire under the provisions in sec.39 of TA'25 if;

(i) The trust is left with not less that 2 individual trustees or a trust corporation;

(ii) The remaining trustees consent, and;

(iii) Anyone empowered to appoint trustees must consent.

Retirement under sec.39 must be in the form of a deed.

Fourth. The beneficiaries may consent to his retirement.

Fith. A court may discharge the trustee.

Six. die!

The things you find out when sadly spending your Friday evening in a law library.

Thanks for that. I imagine you being a dusty old dark wood pannelled room helping me out here!

So, back to my original question. Do you think my resignation as a Trustee is effective?

[6538]

Thanks for that. I imagine you being a dusty old dark wood pannelled room helping me out here!

So, back to my original question. Do you think my resignation as a Trustee is effective?

A '60's tower block in the middle of a city which is a uni library, actually. Sorry to ruin the mental image. I'd prefer the wood panneling, personally.

I would think you'd have to look at the trust document to see if it's got a clause to let you retire and, if not, work out which of those other methods were applied to your case. Presumably not number 6 though.

[Skirmish]

A '60's tower block in the middle of a city which is a uni library, actually. Sorry to ruin the mental image. I'd prefer the wood panneling, personally.

I would think you'd have to look at the trust document to see if it's got a clause to let you retire and, if not, work out which of those other methods were applied to your case. Presumably not number 6 though.

According to my Trust Deed it says

"Any Trustee may at any time resign from office by serving written notice on the other Trustees"

It's just the name and signature still being on the Deed that I am unsure about.

[6538]

According to my Trust Deed it says

"Any Trustee may at any time resign from office by serving written notice on the other Trustees"

It's just the name and signature still being on the Deed that I am unsure about.

If that is the case then this must equate to no.1 in my list - a power contained in the trust instrument. If you have served notice of your resignation on all of the other trustees then you are no longer a trustee whether your name and signature is still on the trust document or not.

So, as a matter of law you are no longer a trustee. However, you may still need evidence of the fact at some point in the future. I can't see that noting the fact of your resignation, along with a copy of your letter of resignation, on the trust document is such a great problem.

[SNACR]

Cheap ways of serving notice would be letter by recorded delivery, keep copy of letter and print copy of POD. Another, and one of the best, is to fax it on a fax machine that prints out a transmission successful report that also prints the top half of the letter. If the receiving fax machine has name details etc on it even better. Combination of both of these would be good idea if possible.

More expensive but most watertight would be to employ a process server - slight overkill and everyone might think you're a d1ck but makes having served notice unequivocal in court.

This is from years of experience of serving notices on time being of the essence lease clauses, like breaks etc., on landlords and them pretending not to have received them.

[6538]

Cheap ways of serving notice would be letter by recorded delivery, keep copy of letter and print copy of POD. Another, and one of the best, is to fax it on a fax machine that prints out a transmission successful report that also prints the top half of the letter. If the receiving fax machine has name details etc on it even better. Combination of both of these would be good idea if possible.

More expensive but most watertight would be to employ a process server - slight overkill and everyone might think you're a d1ck but makes having served notice unequivocal in court.

This is from years of experience of serving notices on time being of the essence lease clauses, like breaks etc., on landlords and them pretending not to have received them.

Depends what the relevant legislation defines as "served" though. In some cases it means actual delivery to the person concerned but in others it may be less than this. Service as relating to certain road traffic notices can mean merely putting it in the post, evidence of actual delivery is not required. If a co-owner of a property wants ot serve notice of his intention to sever a joint tenancy to create a Tenancy in Common he can do that by simply leaving notice in writing at the co-owners address or place of business - there is case-law (I think) of such a notice being scrawled in lip-stick on a bathroom mirror.

You can serve a notice by any legally accepted means at all. Most of the more elaborate methods serve only to provide stronger evidence of the actual service, rather than to make the service its self any more legally valid.