I inferred that he meant "everything that's legally able to be in both names, is in both names". That would exclude 401k and IRA accounts.
Cindy Hamilton
I inferred that he meant "everything that's legally able to be in both names, is in both names". That would exclude 401k and IRA accounts.
Cindy Hamilton
I could have been clearer. OTOH, I have often said that since I do not get paid to post, I can be a little sloppy.
Perhaps I'm better at inference than Marilyn Manson. I suppose I could copy edit everybody's posts, but I don't get paid to do that.
Cindy Hamilton
Actually, you *assumed* that he meant that. Inference requires evidence and none was given.
When it comes to legal and financial situations (as well as many others) inference and assumptions can get you into a lot of trouble.
Ever wonder why business contracts, EULAs, and all sorts of fine print documents are so lengthy? It's to remove the hazards of inference and assumptions.
Here's something that you can take to the bank (pun intended):
If you sat down with an attorney to draft a will or trust and you said "All our accounts are in joint name", you would be asked the exact same question that I asked. That's just too important of an item to make assumptions about.
Thank you, Frank.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required