Tara (00:56):
Welcome back to episode 24 of the Art of Estate Planning podcast. As usual, I am joined by my delightful co-host, Carrie Payne. Hi Carrie.
Carrie (01:08):
Hi. I love these descriptors. Delightful a word that will never be an epitaph for me. Oh, you're selling yourself short.
Tara (01:17):
You delight me on the daily.
Carrie (01:20):
Oh, thank you. Thank you.
Tara (01:21):
Today's episode is how much does a client need to comprehend of their testamentary trust will? Now, this comes up quite a lot. It comes up for people who are not fans of testamentary trust, and it is one of their arguments highlighting the complexity of testamentary trust. It comes up with people who are new to testamentary trust and wondering how much detail they need to go into. And as enormous fans of testamentary trust ourselves, I think it's an important point to give consideration to and to come to a position. If you're a drafter of testamentary trust wills, that feels like a good balance for you. So Carrie, have you given this much thought before?
Carrie (02:10):
I do, and I don't in many regards, Tara, because I don't think people read everything we give them anyway. So I know that's a bit of a hard thing to say, but I think that as practitioners, there is some case law out there. I didn't delve into this when I was prepping for the podcast because I'm trying not to make it a highly technical podcast. There are people out there that are much smarter to do that than I am, but I do know that there is some case law out there about not having to know and understand every single word. And that's probably the gist of what I wanted to talk about today is that I think we need to let go that part of our lawyer brain that wants to go through every word for word and make sure our client understands it because the law supports us that we don't need to go into every single thing, but we do need to make sure they have knowledge and understanding and approval of the contents of the document. So I think there's some tips that I'm going to share today about how I make sure that I'm comfortable that the client does have those requisite parts, but this is my saying, giving you permission to free yourself from the legal jargon.
Tara (03:18):
And look, Carrie, let's face it, I don't even know if most of the lawyers drafting testamentary trust wills know what all the words and clauses mean. So how can we expect that of our clients?
Carrie (03:30):
Yes, I do. When I send out draught documents and even in the meeting before in the strategy meeting, I do warn them there's lots of legal jargon. Don't get lost in the legal jargon when you are doing your at-home review. It's my job in a second meeting to make sure that you're understanding what you're signing.
Tara (03:49):
Yeah, I mean I definitely think if there's an analogy that we can use in terms of clients who have their family trust deed, self-managed superfund deed or a company constitution, they do not know three quarters of what are in those documents. That said, I do think there is a higher standard of a test when it comes to wheels and testamentary documents rather than these more commercial documents. And it's a really fine tightrope that I think we have to walk in terms of being commercial and practical and not turning a client off the whole estate planning process, but still making sure that we have satisfied our duty to the client and that the will is going to be upheld and valid if it's ever challenged about the test status understanding of what is contained and their ability to comprehend the document. So yeah, I think it's a bit of a balancing act.
Carrie (04:50):
I think the couple of things that I usually do from a client take home perspective and then we'll talk about later on what I do during the actual meeting itself or be explaining documents. Number one, give the client sufficient time between when you provide them documents or when the meeting is to go through the documents. I think that there's an argument that if you haven't given the client a proper amount of time to peruse the document that they didn't read it. So I think that sometimes, I mean I know there's always cases where you have to do wills on the fly. I know that those cases exist, but giving your clients sufficient time to actually digest the document, go through the document, whether they do or don't is not something you can necessarily control. But certainly giving them that time. And the second thing is giving them the resources to help them understand the document.
(05:41):
So this is something that I'm actually working on at the moment to build a bit more of in my own practise. And this is some either written materials or videos to help the client understand some of the key standard terms that come in your document so that if they want to watch those prior to the meeting to help them kind of get across those. So this is things like short videos saying this is the power to do this and this is why we have this all the way up to a written document that sets everything out for them. And again, with those two things, you don't have to be oldie Latin explanations, it's more about what does it say and then how do you say that in the client friendly manner. So that's probably one of my sort of things to begin with is first thing is giving the client the tools they need to do an at-home review. Tara, what's your sense?
Tara (06:32):
Yeah, I love it. I think as lawyers we can become a bit complacent or lazy around some of the non-legal skills that we need to support the client journey so we can really find ourselves leaning into the legal jargon and the legal technical or responding to what our insurer might be telling us or guiding us without thinking about what is the client experiencing in this process. But testamentary trusts are a really beautiful prompt to actually force you to get up to speed on these skills and look at your processes because they are a bit more challenging than the basic will. Obviously those challenges come with enormous benefits and overall I think they're worth doing. But Carrie, as you said, they can be harder for the lay person to just quickly get their head around. So I love what you're saying in terms of leaning into other forms of communication to support the legal will.
(07:37):
I love diagrams and flow charts, videos as you said with plain English explanations, flyers, all of that supporting material. Now we don't want to just double down on all this extra homework for clients either, but we know that people learn in different ways or receive knowledge in different ways and I think that if we can embrace that and be prepared with systems and templates in our business that does their best to explain some of these legal concepts in a practical way, I think that is really going to ease a lot of the pain and also help us to show on our file that the client did understand what they're signing.
Carrie (08:25):
Yeah, I think too when we talk about the actual information that we are giving, I think it's a reminder too that people learn differently. Not everybody can sit there and listen in a 60 to 90 minute estate planning meeting about everything, estate planning, and there's lots of literature out there to support that. People only take in a certain percentage of what you're saying. So having different touch points really does help. And the way that you can present that is in your material say, Hey, if like to watch videos, here's the information in a video format, here's the information in a written format. You can kind of access it as you see fit, but that whole, some people are audio learners, some people are aesthetic, some people are visual, give people the tools they need to be able to understand.
Tara (09:12):
Yeah, I mean also I think having a plain English document goes a really long way both for us as drafters, but also for the clients and the accountants and financial advisors who have to use the document. I think if it's written in plain English, then they look, they may not understand the full legal context or the scenarios that those clauses will be used in, but they have a fighting chance. I hate it when I get a testamentary trust will and I'm trying to work out what the drafter means. It's just so confusing. So I just think plain English. I actually think sort of tying into that, some of these, and maybe I'm deviating off the topic, but some testamentary trust precedents are really open-ended with their drafting in terms of the executor or the beneficiaries can choose how many testamentary trusts they want to set up and who's it the trustee.
(10:12):
And there's just sort of no specificity. And I find by trying to build in all this flexibility and the strategy, the drafting gets really confusing a lot of the time as well. And it's really hard to go, well, who makes the decisions about the money here and what if there is a dispute and exactly who are the beneficiaries. Again, you really have to connect the dots between this clause and that clause and another clause and whatever the decision might be made after death. And I'm not a big fan of wills drafted that way. That's certainly not how we do the precedents at the art of estate planning. I'm actually almost the polar opposite of that and prefer that with the tester we make really specific decisions about what are our asset protection objectives, what are our control objectives for the beneficiaries? Are we giving them total control or ruling from the grave? How many testamentary trusts, and we actually are very specific about this, testamentary trust is for this person and their lineal descendants and these are going to be the controllers of that trust and we just really lock it in from the beginning.
Carrie (11:30):
Yeah, I think that's sort of leaving the flexibility to the people left behind is a bit of a false, I don't know the word I'm looking for. Yeah, I haven't had my second cup of tea yet today, but it's a false economy. I think that's the word I'm thinking of because if you can't decide then that person is the decision maker, so you may as well put them in the control roles, number one. Number two, having been personally having to go and set up different things either connected to an estate or a trust, have you ever tried to communicate with a bank who the controller of an entity is? If you can't clearly see it in a document, it's a pain in the butt. So if your document precedent makes you jump over 6,000 clauses and four documents to see who exactly controls the trust, you're going to have a hard time explaining that to a bank because since the Royal Commission in Banking, it's actually really difficult to open a trust account now. I mean you have to have a special appointment, you have to bring all your documents if you don't bring all the documents and then it takes you a week or two to open the actual bank account. If you are making that step harder just for the sake of not having a clean drafted precedent, then that's the opposite of what estate planning is. Estate planning is about making it easier for the people that you've left behind.
(12:45):
So when we talk about that kind of the reason we're saying that is very practical,
Tara (12:51):
And I suppose that ties into one of the things that I used to do when explaining the testamentary trust to clients is just get really practical about how it's all going to work. So on the whiteboard or in the pre-prepared flow charts, I'd be like, this is the exact number of trusts and here's who is in charge of each trust here. Who can benefit from each trust and this asset is going into this trust or this trust will have this much money and really lay it out super specifically. And then also walk through a tonne of specific examples of like, okay, this is what the trustees can do over this money. This is what they can't do. If a beneficiary is unhappy, here's what they can do. Here's where their rights end really highlighting the power of the trustee and the fact that the rights of the beneficiaries are quite limited to due administration and a right to be considered.
(13:58):
I'd talk about the types of assets they could make. Hey, they've inherited a property. What happens if they want to sell the property? What happens if they only have half of the property and this other trust owns the other half and they want to sell? Okay, what happens when so-and-so who is the trustee and appointor dies? Then what happens? Okay, it's the end of financial year. What exactly happens? Alright, the trust wants to end just on and on about here's how it's going to work. And I feel like having those really practical discussions, a lot of the clauses and the meaning behind the clauses get drawn out of the will anyway. The client has a much better understanding of how is this going to work and is this what I'm envisaging for my family as part of my legacy them the opportunity to ask questions.
(14:54):
I actually have a YouTube video that I made which we might put in the show notes and it's called something like, oh, my testamentary trust will is too long. I hate it. Which is common, maybe not common, but it's valid feedback that comes up from time to time. And when I made that video, I was really just trying to get practitioners to think about different ways they can present the will to try to avoid that feedback coming through. And if you watch it, I'm super pregnant in it, so that'll be a good laugh. But then also in that video I'm basically like don't even open up the will until three quarters of the way or two thirds of the way through the meeting. I would just spend so much of that meeting time explaining the long will by working through the whiteboard and the diagrams and talking over the practical scenarios so that by the time we're opening up the will to read through it together, they're really confident about the testamentary trust and on board with it. And it just takes so much pressure off what is actually in those clauses. And Carrie, I probably wouldn't read through any of the clauses in the trust powers in that meeting unless the client wants to or ask questions.
Carrie (16:21):
Tara, I thought I might share how I actually explained those powers to clients because I take a very top to bottom approach with the way I go through the wills with the clients. Obviously go through the standard start first, and I like how in your precedence the key structure of the testamentary trust is up early because then that saves us having to get concerned about the trust later on. If I explain that from the outset, then when we get to the actual gift clause to the trust, it's like as described, this is controlled as above. When we get to that part down the bottom, that's just all executor powers and trustee powers basically, I'll always say to the client, now, the rest of the document are the powers of the executors and trustees and executives and trustees have powers on legislation saying what they can and can't do.
(17:07):
But the powers are really narrow because the government really wants to make sure that if you are promised something, you get it. And that's kind of the end. Subsequently, whenever you go to actually set up a comprehensive estate plan and a testamentary discretionary trust that is an intergenerational wealth vehicle, we will add a bunch of powers on top of what legislation gives you to enable the flexibility and the long-term wealth vehicle to continue. So I sort of explain to a client that lawyers will always start off with a really big template of powers. Any sort of document we draught in law, we'll always start off with the full document and then we narrow it down and amend it based on the client's scenario. And I'll say to the client, when it comes to executor and trustee powers, I do the same thing, but there's only two reasons I've found in practise that we need to narrow down powers.
(18:01):
Number one is if your circumstances suggest that we need more certainty rather than flexibility, and then I usually explain to the client that that's not them. Okay? The second one is if you're the sort of person that likes to rule from the grave. So I give them a story about clients of mine down in New South Wales. This is a very real story. They hated their summing law with the fire of a thousand flames. And so we were going through every single clause of the trustee and executive powers and making sure that he couldn't get within a hair's breath of anything to do with the trust. And so we were going through a narrowing. Now that's the exception. So I say to the clients, usually if they're not that person, I didn't take you as that person. It's the same powers I've got in my will, which is true because I update my will with the precedent and it's exactly the same powers.
(18:54):
And I say, I'm not going to bore you to death with all of the legal jargon, but I am going to draw your attention to some key clauses and some key definitions. But I am certainly happy to discuss any specific clauses or questions that you have. And most people sort of 90 something percent of the time say, thank God we're not going through the whole document. But the people that do ask questions, they're the ones that will be your best teachers because if they ask a question about a power that you don't understand, you will pretty quickly have to learn about that. So don't be afraid of the clients that do want to go through specific powers because they're the ones that will end up making you the best version of yourself. But certainly my experience is that very little people actually want to, I usually make a joke that I say, listen, I'm not going to bore to death with it. You should legally read anything before you sign it. But generally speaking, breathing this document is the cure for insomnia.
Tara (19:49):
You are the queen of little estate planning jokes in your meeting.
Carrie (19:54):
Trauma makes us funny people, Tara.
Tara (19:56):
I don't know anyone who's got more little funny little quotes and sayings than you keep the meaning light.
Carrie (20:02):
All I talk about all day is estate planning, so I've got to find some way to make it a little bit funny. There are clients where you don't do that approach on. There are clients, they take it incredibly seriously and you know that you can read that pretty quickly in the room. But what we're talking about here is that the vast majority of people just want a really great estate plan in place. They don't want to be bored to death by the lawyers. They want to know that their wishes are coming to pass and they're documented correctly basically.
Tara (20:31):
Yeah, I mean I think the way you approach that and just explained it now is absolutely perfect. Coming up later today, we have a question in the TT precedents club hot seat where one of our lawyer members has said, oh, the client wants pull out a whole bunch of the discretionary powers and limit investments. And so I feel like you've been thinking about that quite a lot in the last few days.
Carrie (20:58):
I think when we talk about those lengthy powers, again, I'm putting this person, obviously this client of one of the lawyers into that grave ruler department. They do exist, and I'm giving a bit of shade here, but I'm also not, I know that the document has to reflect your wishes, but I think when you drill down into that person and say, what are they actually trying to do here? You can figure out that they're not really, well not always really trying to control too many things. And what I mean by this is that you ask that potential client of that person, I'm happy to do, for example, I'm happy to do these changes for you, but here's the consequences of doing these changes. Do you really actually want that? And so when you do have a client that does do those sorts of things, making sure you can explain to them, I'm here to respect your wishes and I'm certainly happy to do that.
(21:53):
Here's the consequences, or here's a plan B. So the plan B is usually what we suggest, which is transmit those wishes over into a letter of wishes style of document so that the trustee provided you've got the control mechanisms of the trust sorted. That person will follow those directions in the letter of wishes ideally. And that way we don't have to kind of hamstring the flexibility of the trust explaining to the client that it's an intergenerational wealth vehicle. It's not this just for this one person for the point in time. And that's done. Trusts can go for 80 years in every state except South Australia and soon to be 125 years in Queensland. We're waiting for the Queensland government to announce that it's now 125 years.
Tara (22:34):
That's how old I might be by the time it debuted.
Carrie (22:37):
Tara, I'm on death's door already, so I'm hoping it'll come through soon enough. We've got a conservative government in mind, so I think that that will come out. But in the meantime, like 80 years, still a long time, that's like two generations of people. So do they know exactly what the landscape of the world is going to look like in 80 years? I don't know what's going to look like in 80 seconds, let alone 80 years. So you're trying to tell them that what we're doing here is an intergenerational wealth vehicle. It's not just picking a point in time. The other thing I do is, and this is probably the lawyer coming out, but this is probably something you are going to talk about soon, Tara, but in our costs agreement, we make it really, really clear that the document we're going to be drafting for you under this fixed price is going to be using our standard terms and powers.
(23:25):
So if the client, they surprise you and all of a sudden they're a grave rule or come meeting too and they say, I want to change this and this, you can say, absolutely, if that's really what you want me to do, I'm here to help you, but here are the consequences. Number one, your wishes might not come to pass or they might make it more difficult, but number two, that I'm going to have to charge you more money so that's not covered under our current scope of work. And you can pretty quickly see the backtracking, here's the alternative that's free, which is just pop it over in your letter of wishes or here's the consequences which include a cost consequence of me making those amendments.
Tara (24:00):
And I think it was only two episodes ago that we talked about the importance of a cost agreement that protects you. And I just think this is regardless of how you handle the request from the client, I think having that protection in your cost agreement, just you to be a little bit more on the front foot about the way that you handle it and politely say no or ask for more costs. I think going back to your point about the grave ruler, I keep thinking grave digger, the grave rulers. And sometimes I feel like that comes as a response when we haven't done enough preparation building a rapport and establishing a client's confidence and trust in us. And Carrie, I totally agree with the way that you suggested to handle it, and I actually find sometimes you can either two reactions when we haven't done enough of that preparation work.
(25:04):
Either they just sit there and nod and barely say anything at all and then a few days and then they either just refuse to sign or a few days later get emails saying, we're not really happy about this or whatever, and they're just kind of feeling so overwhelmed or intimidated and not confident to speak up. Or you get the overreaction around like, okay, they don't really understand some of the philosophy behind the purpose of the trust deed and the expensive powers and they want to control. And to be honest, if I was not an estate planning lawyer myself, I'd probably be a grave ruler. I'm such a pest when I'm with my accountants and my financial advisors. I'm sure I'd be exactly the same. And yeah, I totally understand Kerry, how if you just kind of take a step back and say, well, what are you trying to achieve?
(25:56):
Because let's just talk about some of the value and philosophical decisions behind the way this is set up. As you said, you can very often find a solution that makes them happy. They feel even more empowered. They are making a choice and they know what's going on. And you can often get around this. And I think it comes up less and less. I think the more experience you get with testamentary trust and the more that you can invest in the client experience of your testamentary trust customers, we are seeing that in the members of the TT precedents club. When we get the people going, help the client's giving me this feedback. Usually they're new to testamentary trust and they haven't quite found their mojo on the client meeting delivery yet.
Carrie (26:49):
Yeah, I totally agree, Tara. I think if someone's coming to the meeting second meeting with that energy, and it's a surprise, it's usually because there's not enough prep. I will give people the permission that sometimes people are just as surprised as people. I don't think we need to blame everything on someone not doing the prep, that you can always do the best you can. And there are still people. I mean, I had one man that was a total surprise and he accosted me for my gender neutral language in my precedence, and I had a great pleasure in telling him Chaucer and Shakespeare used gender neutral pronouns, and it's not a woke terminal. I think there are always people that do come out of the woodworks, but I do agree that having that material available and building that rapport with the clients, which is part of the reason I make my stupid jokes, right, if a person, if you seem accessible as a human being, people find a common ground with you, so they're more likely to trust you when you say, Hey, X, Y, Z.
Tara (27:45):
Totally. I wasn't trying to have a go at you about the jokes either. I think that's actually so important, as you said, for rapport and just getting, breaking a bit of the tension and the intimidation and just talking about something other than you just like us telling and teaching the whole time. I don't want to be blaming even lawyers delivering testamentary trust because you're doing God's work. People, I guess I see it in the years that we've been doing this at the art of Estate planning. When people, lawyers message us and say, oh, I've had this feedback, or My clients are telling me the will's too long or whatever. I'm like, okay, my job is to help you find a way that we can simplify this communication. Real excellence is being able to communicate a really complex topic as simply as possible. And so Carrie, you and I spend a lot of energy trying to think about how can we create these centralised resources for our out of estate planning precedent users so they don't all have to have the time and energy to do it, and we can make your life easier.
(29:02):
So within our precedents, we do have plain English flyers that all our members can rebrand and give to the clients. It's usually at the pitching stage at the stage when the wheel's gone out in draught and then in the meeting to take home with them. We've got the estate planning flow chart templates with coding for leap and action step and smoke ball and just no coding as well to help create the practical flow charts. And in the TT Precedents club hot seats, we do so much work just trying to make sure that everybody is really comfortable with the deed. So if the client is asking you about some random clause three quarters of the way through, you are not going to break out in a hot sweat and start showing those nerves. You're confident you know how to explain it and the practical effect of it. And I see our job as just supporting everyone who is trying to add testamentary trust to their service delivery to be able to do it as confidently as possible. And the reason we sort of share and have these discussions is just to try and give everyone the shortcuts that we've spent years doing. I was just actually couldn't, I was like, surely my maths is wrong. I feel like I've lost a decade somewhere between the two thousands and now, but I did for different reasons.
(30:36):
I've been doing estate planning law for 17 years now, which is just crazy to me. And Carrie, you've been doing it for a similarly long time. So it's just the shortcuts that you pick up from seeing different, working with different lawyers and seeing different things, and obviously all the things that have gone pear shaped on our matters that we've resolved never to experience again. And it's just about sharing that knowledge and hopefully others can learn from things that we've learned without the pain of it.
Carrie (31:12):
Yeah, I mean to give, I always think sharing anecdotes really helps to give people more, two more pieces, two more tools. I had one man that rang me and he said, Carrie, this wheel is too long. And I was actually driving at the time and was, I said, I only wanted a short wheel, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And I said, Alan Allen, go into your office and open up your family trust deed and tell me how many pages is in your family trust deed. And he sort of went in and he opened it up and he said, 43. And I said, well, I've done it in 38, so I win. I said, and I've included a will. So that's one of the things I did is obviously getting, as you said, comparing them. I also said once to a client, I think you've got to pick the right client to say these sorts of things too, but building up those analogies, they were a surgeon and they're like, why do I need this really long testamentary trust will?
(32:04):
And I said, well, would you go into surgery with a book that was three pages thin or do you want to go in with that full Grey's Anatomy book, not the TV show? And I said, this is the rule book. This is teaching your trustees how to manage your money. So this is teaching them the surgery of the trust. So I think that when you're trying to find anecdotes, don't be shy of actually finding things that connect that person to their own reality using everything you've got in your toolbox to help people understand that we're here to actually give them the best version of their will that we can.
Tara (32:38):
I love it. I do. I love those stories. I think I've said it in our last episode. I love it when clients actually challenge us or ask these questions because engaged in the process, it's the people who say nothing and just sign. That's where I'm like, okay, so if there's a challenge against the dispute and the test data's capacity to have entered into, sorry, a challenge against the dispute. Did I just say that God power against the will, and they're saying, oh, the test data didn't have capacity to understand it or whatever. That's where I get nervous when you're like, they really didn't challenge me or ask me any questions they just signed, and how can I really say or test how much they comprehended? Whereas if you're having robust discussions and debates, they're engaged, they know what's going on, and you know that they're not going to sign it just because they're feeling pressured or they just want the whole thing to go away.
Carrie (33:41):
Yeah. I mean, I don't know. I've been lucky so far to not have someone that hasn't signed it. So if you have had that and you're looking for some help, come and see us at the TT Precedents Club. We can help you with those conversations with your client. But maybe I'm just a power manipulator, Tara. Maybe I have an unknown talent I didn't know I have.
Tara (34:03):
No, I think that's part of the, I think with testamentary trust, especially because of the price point over the basic, will, I feel like you having the debate or discussion, maybe not a debate, the discussion about it at the beginning before they even decide to go ahead, and so they're usually quite on board with it by the time.
Carrie (34:28):
Yeah, I think it comes back to that touch points. I send them out the testamentary trust flyer, but when I send them fixed pricing packages, so they already know this is the serious business one. And then again, in the planning meeting, I say it multiple times in the summary document I send following the meeting, there are multiple, multiple, multiple touch points so that it shouldn't be a surprise when you get to the point where the client sort of says, what about this power?
Tara (34:54):
Carrie, I've got just a few things I wanted to say to round it out, but did you have other examples or points you wanted to hit home?
Carrie (35:02):
No, I think I've covered off most of the stuff I want to, but I'm ready, willing, and able to listen to what you've got.
Tara (35:09):
Well, I just had a look at some of the summaries in terms of our obligation as lawyers in terms of what we have to ensure the testator understands or our duties for when a testator is entering into a will. And sort of just to paraphrase it, I think there's three things that the test data needs to do. They have to firstly understand the nature of making a will, its effect. They have to understand the extent of the property that they're disposing of and lastly, comprehend and appreciate potential claims on their estate. So I think our conversation today really goes to that first one of how do we satisfy that the test data understands the nature of making the will and its effect, and I feel like the words nature of making the will and its effect, that doesn't mean understand every word in the document.
(36:10):
That's the case that I would be arguing. They need to know the broad principles around this is disposing of my assets. It happens when I die. It's legally binding, that type of thing. And I think I feel pretty confident that if you focus more on these people, communication skills, skills, rather than stressing about have they read every single clause, that we will actually do a better job at satisfying our obligation. When you go through all those practical case studies and scenarios and really workshop what is going to happen in different scenarios, I actually think that meets that test to a higher standard than making sure that you sit down and force them to read the whole thing in front of you personally. That's the argument that I would make for anyone who's a testament two trust objector, I really feel pretty comfortable. They don't need to read every clause of the will.
Carrie (37:13):
And again, I think that there is case law on that. I believe there was a chat in, we've got a free Facebook community called the Art of Estate Planning, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, Kate, but I think Kate Brewer mentioned that there is some case law to suggest that they don't need to understand every full stop and everything on that. Kate has been a wonderful supporter of our community. We had a recent podcast with her involved where we chatted about things. She's a well-known succession barrister in Queensland, so I'm pretty much, if Kate says something, listen, when we talk about, we're not saying this just because we're only focusing on the soft stuff, we're focusing on the soft stuff. We believe that's the stuff that hits hard.
Tara (37:52):
Yeah, I love the way you've explained that. Well, I think we've made our case, so we'll wrap it up there. If you have another opinion or a different view or more case studies for us to consider, we'd love to hear from you. Otherwise, we will have you tuning into us next week. Thanks so much.
