My parents had a family trust and two IRA’s. One IRA had the Trust as designated beneficiary at death. The second, essentially, did not have a beneficiary designation at the passing of the owner but did have a previous designation that was the Trust as well. The second IRA owner (my dad) passed last. Edward Jones holds the second IRA.

I went to an attorney thinking that since there was a pour-over will for the Trust, the IRA could be captured by the Trust – as originally intended by my parents. This attorney, without reviewing the IRA documents and with my explanation of what had happened (to eliminate the beneficiary) and with my belief that the IRA should go into the Trust (as that was clearly the intent of my folks), said that in order to put the IRA back in the Trust through the pour-over will, it would have to be probated.

I hired and paid the attorney for this. The will and trust documents were entered into probate, a hearing was attended and Letters Testimentary were issued. However, Edward Jones would not accept the Letters Testimentary to put the IRA back in the name of the Trust. The IRA contract with Edward Jones required that the IRA pass directly to me as my mother had predeceased my father and I was next in line (I am an only child).

This was the ONLY asset not already included in the Trust. Thus, no other items were included in the probate action. It is (now) my understanding that IRA’s are assets that pass outside of probate and thus, I essentially paid to probate nothing. If this is the case, how could I have known this (I do not have any IRA’s of my own) and thus I sought the advice of an attorney which I now believe was incorrect.

I would appreciate any feedback.