Why Choosing Two Co-Trustees May Not Have Been a Good Idea

Choosing two co-trustees can sound like a built in safety feature, but in real life it often creates friction that slows everything down. Some trusts require co-trustees to act together, which means routine tasks like paying bills, selling a home, investing funds, signing tax returns, or even just responding to a bank can turn into a two signature process. If the co-trustees do not communicate well, live in different states, or have different views on what is best, administration can stall, and beneficiaries can end up caught in the middle.

Even when both co-trustees are honest and have the best of intentions, the co-trustee structure can increase cost and create unnecessary conflict. Disagreements can trigger delays, missed deadlines, and sometimes court involvement, which eats into the trust funds and destroys relationships. For many families, a cleaner approach is one primary trustee with a strong successor trustee, plus clear rules, reporting requirements, and oversight that keep everyone protected without creating gridlock.

Common problems we see with co-trustees

• Decisions get delayed because both signatures and approvals are required

  
  

• Disagreements on investments, distributions, or selling property create stalemates

  
  

• Higher administrative cost, more attorney involvement, more back and forth

  
  

• Banks and title companies add extra hoops, sometimes refusing partial instructions

  
  

• One co-trustee does the work while the other slows it down or second guesses

  
  

• Sibling dynamics turn trustee work into a power struggle, and beneficiaries and relationships suffer

If you chose co-trustees in your estate plan, please call our office to discuss your family’s specific circumstances and to determine if this structure is right for you.