Cautionary Tales - Personal Property Planning: The $225 Family Feud - Episode 202

Hey there, Legal Tea Listeners –This is your host, Jenny Rozelle! Today’s episode of Legal Tea is the “cautionary tales” topic. And on these “cautionary tales” episodes of Legal Tea, we normally talk about real-life cases with real-life clients that are things me or my office have worked on -or they are things that I think are generally good things to be aware of, so you don’t turn into a cautionary tale on my Legal Tea podcast one day! So today … oh, I've got a story for you today that's going to have this perfect "wait, what?!" moment, and trust me, when we get there, your jaw will drop just like mine did. Today's episode is about siblings fighting over their mom's wedding ring, and it's going to highlight some important lessons about planning for your personal belongings in your estate plan.

So let me introduce you to our cast of characters with some fake names. We have Mom—let's call her Nancy—and her two sons, Tim and Shane. Nancy had done everything "right" by creating a comprehensive estate plan. After Nancy passed away, it was time to administer her estate—that's fancy legal speak for "let's put this plan into action, get the person in charge moving, figure out assets and debts, and determine the overall game plan." In this case, Tim was the designated "Executor" of his mom's Will and the successor "Trustee" of her Trust—essentially, he was the one in charge of handling everything.

Things were going relatively smoothly until one day, I got a call from Tim about a heated dispute between him and his brother. They were both adamant about wanting their mom's wedding ring, and neither was willing to back down. They just couldn't reach a "fair" solution on their own. After some negotiation, I managed to get them to agree that one brother would take the ring while the other would receive cash equal to the ring's value. (Yes … Yes, I know there's sentimental value involved, but we couldn't magically create a second identical ring! This seemed like the most equitable compromise.)

Thankfully, they agreed to this approach, so the next step was getting the ring appraised. To keep things neutral, I proposed taking the ring to several appraisers myself (as in, I would pick the appraisers and take them in) and we would average the values. This way, neither brother could claim bias in the appraisal process. They both “signed off” on this plan. So off I go … I went to a respected local jeweler known for doing reliable appraisals. I explained the situation to the jeweler, left the ring with them, and they promised to call me in a day or so when the appraisal was complete.

Fast forward time and they called me back a couple days later, so I headed over to pick up both the ring and the paperwork. The same gentleman who had helped me initially recognized me immediately and said, "Let me grab the ring and the paperwork for you." When he returned, he had this mysterious smile and said, "We could have told you this over the phone, but honestly... I wanted to see your face when I told you." My mind started racing—was this ring worth a fortune? Then came the bombshell: "This ring is made with cubic zirconia. They're not real diamonds."

My jaw literally hung open for a good 15 seconds. Okay, maybe not that long, but it was a long time. The jeweler handed me the appraisal showing the ring was worth just $225—and that was primarily for the gold! He admitted he was being generous with even that valuation and said, "I don't envy you having to tell those kids that Mom's ring is only worth a couple hundred dollars." Transparently, I looked at the appraisal, saw that $225 figure, and I just had to laugh to myself. The ring looked quite nice on the surface with four sizable "diamonds" (air quotes very much intended), and judging by how the brothers were behaving, it seemed like they were more concerned about who was "winning" than about the sentimental value.

When I got back to the office from the jeweler, I drafted an email to both Tim and Shane explaining my discovery (that the ring was done with cubic zirconia – not diamonds) and attached the appraisal. Would you believe that after learning the ring wasn't worth much, neither of them (Tim nor Shane) wanted it anymore? I remember thinking to myself, “Well, so much for sentimental value!” If the ring had truly meant something to them beyond its monetary value, you'd think one of them would have still wanted it as a memento of their mom. Nope! Tim, in his role as Executor and Trustee, ended up selling the ring primarily for its gold value, as the jeweler suggested. Those proceeds went into Nancy's estate and trust and were ultimately split between the two brothers along with her other assets. All $200- bucks.

You know what this situation reminds me of? That classic episode from Season 1 of Frasier—Episode 11, I think, where Frasier becomes completely obsessed with his own mortality after his father's doctor suddenly dies. There's this hilarious scene where Frasier hands everyone a label gun and instructs them to go around his apartment marking all the items they want when he dies! In all seriousness, can you imagine if Nancy had done something similar? "Here boys, take these label guns and mark what you want!" Maybe that wedding ring would have had a big label on it from both sons, and they could have addressed the issue while Nancy was still alive to mediate—or to reveal the cubic zirconia secret herself!

What's particularly funny about that Frasier episode is how it shows our sometimes absurd relationship with material possessions and mortality. Frasier, in his neurotic but well-meaning way, thought he was solving a future problem, but instead, he created an awkward situation for everyone involved. Much like our ring situation, what seemed valuable on the surface turned out to be something else entirely.

So what can you learn from this story? When it comes to tangible personal property—things like jewelry, guns, tools, collections, and other physical items—there are several approaches you can take in your estate planning:

1.     Approach #1 - Specific bequests: In your estate plan, you can designate who gets what specific items. The fancy legal term is "specific bequests." For example: "I want my diamond ring to go to my granddaughter, Susie" or "I want my classic car to go to my son, Johnny." These specific bequests get honored first, before any final distributions of money are made. You can also stipulate whether the monetary value of the “thing” should count as PART OF their share, if they are a beneficiary. That matters if the “thing” has a good-sized value to it.

2.     Approach #2 - Memorandum of personal property: This is a flexible approach that more people should know about! A memorandum of personal property is a separate document referenced in your Will or Trust that lists who gets which specific items. The beauty of this approach is that you can update the memorandum without having to redo your entire estate plan. So when you buy that new piece of jewelry or inherit grandma's antique clock, you can simply update your memorandum. Just make sure you date and sign it each time you make changes. It's a much more nimble way to handle personal belongings that might change over time. (As it probably sounds like, it’s different than a specific bequest because specific bequests actually go inside your Will or Trust document. This is a separate document that your Will or Trust actually references. I hope that makes sense!

3.     Approach #3 - Let them figure it out: If you don't specify who gets what, all your personal property becomes part of your estate and is subject to your Will or Trust. Your Executor or Trustee will then have to deal with distributing these items—which, as we saw in our story, can sometimes lead to unexpected disputes.

4.     Approach #4 - Give it away while you're alive: I'm seeing more and more clients give meaningful items to family and friends during their lifetime. This way, they can actually witness their loved ones enjoying these treasured possessions. Just this week, I had a meeting where a father teared up seeing his son wearing a necklace he had given him, saying, "I decided to give them some stuff now so I can see them enjoy it!" How sweet is that?

One important point to remember, if I can say something respectfully, is that people often overestimate the value of their personal belongings. I need to be straight with you here—and I say this with all the compassion in the world—you need to be honest with yourself about what your stuff is actually worth. That beautiful china set that's been in your family for generations? That antique furniture you paid top dollar for in the '80s? Those collectible figurines you've carefully displayed? I've seen families shocked when they discover these treasured items fetch pennies on the dollar at estate sales or are completely unwanted by heirs. In fact, studies show that younger generations are increasingly less interested in inheriting physical items. They often have different tastes, smaller living spaces, or more minimalist lifestyles. This shifting attitude results in these possessions having much lower monetary value than expected—or sometimes no value at all. It is something I see repeatedly in my practice, and it can be really disappointing for clients who assumed certain items would be considered to be … valuable.

Remember our cubic zirconia ring story as you navigate personal property in your estate planning journey. Remember these siblings that thought they were fighting over something precious, only to discover it was NOT what they imagined. It is a perfect metaphor for how we sometimes attach inflated value to our possessions. I promise I am not saying your items are not special—they absolutely are to you! But when planning your estate, it is crucial to separate sentimental value from market value and be realistic about both. So, whether you choose to be like Frasier with his label gun approach or prefer to make these decisions quietly in your estate documents, the key is to think about these issues before they become problems for your loved ones.

Alrighty, let’s shift to a sneak peak of next week, which we’re circling back to the “current trends” topic where we talk about things that are going on currently that impact my estate and elder law world – or maybe, things that I have stumbled upon on the news or social media that is relevant to this podcast. Next week is going to be inspired by a Wall Street Journal that was shared with me about transfer on death deeds backfiring … and I’ve been asked more-and-more about these estate planning tools called transfer on death deeds, so let’s talk about them next week, Legal Tea Listeners, so until then, be well and talk soon!

Sources:

None.