Avoiding the Pain of a Poorly Planned Estate, with Attorney Jenna Glassock

0:00 Cows that got out of the barn before you closed the doors. What are the one or two biggest realizations they have about the probate process that they come to you and say, "Oh my gosh, I need your help."

0:11 I think just learning about probate is the problem. And I think people have a general expectation that things like court and bureaucracy takes a long time, especially in California. I think we're pretty used to that. But I think the two things about probate that really shock people is that it's all public and our filings in probate court in California are very detailed. So that means that their loved ones, their family members, their contact information is all available to the public as well as a list of all of the deceased persons, the decedent's assets and their date of death values. all of that becomes public and so inevitably people are calling or reaching out to the beneficiaries at a time that is otherwise very emotional to bother them or sell them something or try to scam them or whatever it is. So I think how public the process is really surprises people and then the cost of it I think is really the kicker for a lot of people. there are the question I constantly get people come to me they say I need to do an estate plan so if something happens to me the government doesn't take all my money or I need to do it to avoid all these taxes and really the costs involved are not that the government takes all your money and it's not that there's a big tax difference in probate versus otherwise but that there are costs incurred in the probate court process that can add up really quickly. There are court costs which actually are the more reasonable part of the calculation.

1:40 Why do you say that? Go ahead. I'm sorry. I know. and even that I mean that I'd say for a lot of people that's in the three to $7,000 range, but it can go up from there. the biggest cost that really shocks people is that there's someone in charge, usually a loved one. The executor is how we kind of colloquially think of that role. that person needs to hire an attorney because this is a complicated legal process. And in California, both the executor and the attorney are entitled to legal fees or just fees for their time and their energy and their services that are calculated as a percentage of the assets, not discounted by debt. And it's that not discounted by debt thing that really surprises people, right?

2:21 Because that means we are using the full value of your home and any other real estate you own in calculating those fees, not just your equity in it. And those fees, it's a sliding scale, but once you hit a million dollars of value, which for homeowners in California, you're pretty much guaranteed to be over that. the attorney and the executor each get $23,000, and it goes up 10,000 for every million above that. And so even on a kind of California quote unquote modest estate that has a home in it worth a million, even if there's an $800,000 mortgage on it and maybe some small bank accounts, we have at least about $50,000 coming out before the loved ones get everything. So I think how public it is and how much it costs is are the two biggest surprises to people when they end up unfortunately in this situation. And so just to recap, because I again, I just don't think people understand this. For a million-dollar house, if you own a free and clear and you pay $50,000 of attorney's fees and filing fees and you know, the administrator or whatever, okay, you end up with 950. I mean, you know, maybe 930, maybe a little more, whatever. But if there's a $700,000 mortgage, there's only $300,000 total. and then you'd be paying the mortgage until the house sells and the taxes to the house sells and other expenses. All of a sudden, 50,000 out of 300,000 seems like a lot more and you have two or three heirs. All of a sudden, and I've had many clients say to me, well, it's hardly even worth selling at this point. There's just not much left for all the aggravation went through. I think that's that can be the issue if you don't plan properly. I'm just curious. So, the same person who has a million dollar house, let's say with a half million dollar mortgage, I guess doesn't matter the mortgage, but a million dollar house and odds and end typical personal property and assets for somebody of that, you know, net worth, doesn't have a business, let's say, what is an estate plan going to run them that instead of $50,000, what are they looking at if they plan ahead?

4:20 So, it's going to vary definitely. There's different attorneys out there with different processes and different pricing of course. I would say for a married couple for a really quality estate plan that takes into account their situation and is customized to them somewhere probably in the $5 to $7,000 range for an individual. Maybe a little less maybe in the more the 4 to $6,000 range. There's going to be people who charge a little less. there's going to be people who charge a little or a lot more, but that's probably a good median right now in 2026. so I know that feels like a lot to people and it is a lot to people, but compared to the other side of things, it really is so much more financially efficient to plan in advance.

5:04 And it's like so many other things that a little bit of work ahead time and prepaying ahead time saves maybe 10 times that or eight times that at the end. But we're all busy and we all are, you know, we all have things to spend money on and we all have, you know, and I'm as guilty of it as anybody. There's a couple things to our plan I wanted to change. I, you know, keep saying I'm going to do it. I'm going to do it. And it's like everything else. So the challenge of the whole reason probate exists in California is because people didn't plan ahead to avoid probate for the most part, right? I mean, almost by definition. So let's talk about why people don't and what we can do to overcome it. For me, one of it is not seeing the need for it. Hence, that's why I have the podcast. But there are many people who see the need for it and make some effort and don't finish. I saw a statistic once that for online estate planning services, you know, the cheap easy ones, you get what you pay for, by the way, the cheap easy ones that 90% of the people who pay the fee to start the plan never execute and fund the plan. Now, that means that there's a problem there that you have to solve as a as a customer for your business or as a provider for your business. So, tell me about how do you approach people who show an interest, start the process, how do you help them push them over the finish line to finish including funding the property, make that as successful or as likely as possible.

6:26 Yeah, that actually that statistic I hadn't heard and does not surprise me at all because we get so many people who reach out to us and say, "I started this. I got kind of confused. It was a little overwhelming. I never finished it. I realized I need some help and then come to us to have to help do it properly. And these companies are just making money off of people not finishing, right? so this is

6:47 And they don't care because they're never going to see the client ever again. They're just an internet company and they're on to their next venture if it doesn't work out or they're bought by Google and they'll never see the client again. They could care less. That's the truth of that.

7:01 It's not just that. it's actually in their best interest for someone to pay them and not finish because if doesn't finish, they have no liability around it. Nobody can come back and be mad at them about it and they made the same amount of money. So,

7:12 I never thought about that. You're so right. Oh my gosh. Yeah. So, we encounter this all the time. And it's funny when I started my firm way back at the beginning. I'm I can be a little bit of a people pleaser and I would say, you know, take as long as you need. I want you to feel comfortable. I don't want you to feel rushed. And then I remember at some point I had this memory back to one of my MBA classes about how that actually is not best for people. People kind of flounder in that situation and structure and rules and having a process actually is much better for people. So we've tried to find a happy medium. So on our end, we check in regularly. That's the best we can do, right? We check in every one to two weeks. We will do this for years for some clients. We will email regularly. If we haven't heard back in a while, we will call. So, a big part of our job and I think a big part of the value in someone coming to us is that we are going to nudge them and pester them and in for their best interest, right? to try to get this done. And I understand it, right? It's it's opaque. It's it's confusing. It's not something people think about or necessarily know about in their day-to-day. And it's also not the most pleasant thing to have to think about. We're thinking about our mortality. For parents of young children, the thought of having to name a guardian and someone else caring for your children, that's it's a horrible thing to have to think about. so a huge part of our practice is demystifying things, trying to educate, explain the options. You're not going to have an online system taking the time to explain it to you, and that's where people get overwhelmed and kind of fall off the that process. So, it's the education to try to demystify and then the regular check-ins. and especially to your point, the question about funding, which for any listeners who don't know is the process of retitling assets from the person's personal name into the name of their trust. It's the way we avoid probate. It's an incredibly important part of this process. It's also the one part of the process we can't just go do for the clients. We do it for the real property and for businesses, but we can't go to your banks and change your bank account information. And so a big

9:16 Part of what we do is making sure you have instructions, that you have letters to give the bank, packets to give the bank, that we're explaining what to say to the bank, that we're always available to be looped in on conversations with your bankers or anyone else you need, and then to send reminders on that side as well.

9:30 Now, you do get involved though on the most important part of the funding, which is on the real estate, both the preparation of documents, the notarization of documents, and the filing of the documents. There was a time that was very rare. I've been in this business you know for 40 years but in probate focus six years that wasn't common I don't think pre-COVID I think COVID created more comfort with e-signing more comfort with more e filing of documents for attorneys talk a bit about your particular firm's approach to funding the estate as it relates to real estate

10:05 We've always wanted to do as much as we can for clients I think if we did not do the funding of the real estate for clients a tiny percentage of them would actually get around to doing it themselves. And then

10:16 So true, you know, then we're just kind of we they similar to what you're saying about the online systems, they've paid us a bunch of money for not that much protection. and so funding of the trust to the extent we can do it is we think critical on our end. and so it's always been an important part of our process. We I do agree that e-filing that became much more common after COVID has been a game changer. being able to get recorded documents back within a few hours or a day or even at its busiest, you know, a couple weeks rather than back and forth and getting lost in the mail and everything has made that process smoother. But it is absolutely something we think is an important part of what we do and also a really important differentiator between working with a law firm and an attorney and working with an online system because an online system is not going to take all of those steps for you. so I think the biggest issue with those online systems is that false sense of security. You know, you pat yourself on the back. You think, "I did it. I filled out all the things. I signed them. I maybe even notarized them." And not realizing that without that funding part, without that retitling part, it's not it's not protecting you in the way you think it is.

11:25 It's the legal equivalent of spiking the ball on the five yard line and the other team recovers the ball. It's exactly what I You know, I've been I've been through that. I think any realtor who's been in business a while has had the experience. You're sitting in the living room and you say to the customer, "Okay, I see you hold title your name personally." Oh, no, we have a trust. And you go, "That's funny. I just looked online on the profile. Did this happen?" Oh, no. We did it years ago. Are you sure? And I realized after this happened two or three times, I said, "Oh my gosh, I know what's going to happen." And they go back and they go into some vault, you know, some vault somewhere or their library. They pull out this beautiful notebook, beautiful Naugahyde or leather stuff with all kinds of pages. And they open the first page says, "Please make sure you do this right away. get this notarized and recorded. [laughter] And I'm like, but you didn't do that.

12:09 Yes. At least when they're talking to you in that situation, for the most part, I'm guessing they still have time. They can still do it. But when that when that happens after death, it is so much more complicated and sometimes unfixable.

12:21 So, I'm starting to feel a little guilty in that I've been doing this now for six years. I really press people to say if you own a house in California, you probably should have a an estate plan and it should probably include a trust. I'm not giving legal advice. I'm giving bit business advice, but I feel comfortable as a real estate agent saying that's just good. The money you would spend even for a cheap bad plan is better than not having anything. I've said this so many times, but I'm a member of the I'm an affiliate member of the LA County Bar and I look at the I don't know if you know the list serve, you know, where the attorneys ask questions and I've seen more often now than I ever have the classic, well, the property was deed in the trust, but we can't find a copy of the trust. And I'm thinking that's not because the trust is around these days with online services and copies and like the attorney keeps a copy and you know if you saw the trust and you would know to call the attorney. It's because they did the trust in the name I mean I'm sorry they took the property name of the trust but never finished the trust. They never ex you know executed the trust agreements. They didn't get the whatever had to get done recorded and so they or you know notarized. So now they have something that's not signed, notarized in the right spot. It's really, you know, now that's a whole different legal angle. What So let's talk about that for a second. You don't know if the trust is lost, which I guess is the best case, or never was really done. They got the name of the trust and no title. What do you do as an estate at that point?

13:46 Yeah, this happens surprisingly frequently. And I actually hadn't thought of the idea that maybe they just never signed it. I've always assumed it was that it just kind of got lost in the shuffle over the years. I know my people. No, I know my own people. Sorry. [gasps] I know one of my clients did that. I just know it. I just know it.

14:04 Oh, absolutely. I think both are true for sure. and it's it's really complicated, right? The purpose of the trust is that you title assets in the name of the trust and then the document directs what you do with those assets during the grantor. That's the name for the person who created the trust during the grantor's lifetime and then also after the grantor passes away. And without that document, we don't know what to do. And so we are pretty much always going to court in that situation. Sometimes we can get away if we have some evidence of intent with asking the court for just instructions of what we do in this situation or in my experience more frequently. We're ending up at some point in the process doing a full probate. So there are some kind of shorter probate processes we can try out. there's something called a Heggstad petition where we have assigned trust but assets weren't properly titled into it. There's a petition for instructions if we have some evidence of intent but maybe some formalities were missed. But if we really don't have a copy of a trust, then we're most likely getting into, you know, a protracted probate process of not a full normal probate with all the fees and public filings and everything. I think the if it's a standard, you know, simple probate, let's say one heir, nobody's really objecting. It's just we don't we don't know where the trust is. It's recording the name of the trust. Nobody knows where a copy is.

15:29 They end up doing a petition to declare the trust invalid and make it as though they never had one, which is think about that for a second. You're filing with the court. Please invalidate the work we did because we just didn't sign paperwork.

15:40 Yeah. And if there's paperwork, if there's no trust, right? If that if you're successful, right? If you're asking the court, please invalidate this work that was done that someone for at some point and you're successful, which is the goal, now we're back to square one and going through probate.

15:54 Yeah. Yeah. That's that's that's the winning prize is you get to go to probate court and prize. Okay. So, you have that case where they are don't the trust is not completed. It's telling the trust and you go for without it. The other case is that you have a trust but there are times when people argue over it and I would say there's a there's a number I mean meaning the biggest misconception I think people have is if I have an estate plan including a trust I will not have to go to probate court and I will not get sued and the answer is no you reduce the likelihood of being sued and you also increase the odds of you getting your way if you write it properly. What are one or two of the most common challenges to trust that you see that are successful because of lack of proper planning or proper understanding of the process?

16:50 So people can sue each other. They just can, right? So a lot of times people come to me and say, I want to, you know, my kids don't get along with each other and I want to draft this in a way so that they can't possibly sue each other over this. And I say that we can't do that. That's not a thing we can do, right? We can't stop them from being able to sue. We can just make we can decrease the incentive to sue. we can make it a less attractive proposition to sue. and so I think I would say the two main things that we see that come up that prior planning could have kind of better avoided is that situation, right? kids or whoever the beneficiaries are where we know whether it's, you know, their relationship or just some of their personalities that people are going to fight in that situation. any ambiguity is going to be exploited. And so proper planning does not just mean having a trust. It means wording the trust in such a way to remove as much ambiguity as possible. And again, that's not about preventing somebody from suing. That is about decreasing the likelihood they'll ever win anything such that it is not there's no incentive there to spend their money on an attorney to then sue about it. And so really clearly designated language can help in that situation. Other things that can help in that situation are using a professional trustee. So if your two kids don't get along, naming them as co-trustees is not a good idea.

18:18 It is not going to be the situation that solves a lifetime of anger between them and hurt. I've seen it go off the rails many

18:27 Who would think that would ever work. They fight the whole lives. Now, let's just give a puff of money. You know, the kids who fought over cutting the cake into two pieces, which was bigger. Now, you're g to give them a state to organize together and run together.

18:39 Exactly. So, and so then someone can say, "That's fine. I'll I'll name one and then the other." And now there's, you know, animosity that the one who wasn't named.

18:47 How could that go wrong? Exactly. So, I know people don't like naming professionals. Professionals do charge for their time, but you know who else charges for their time? Attorneys who are representing siblings who are fighting with each other. And so where there is the risk of a fight there, I think using a professional is actually the cheaper option a lot of the time.

19:04 So that's when the family's fighting, I think having clear language, potentially naming a professional and including a contest provision. Contest provisions are not the kind of solve the go silver bullet panacea to all the problems people think, oh, if I include a contest provision that solves everything. A contest provision for contest context is just saying if a beneficiary under this trust tries to argue that the trust is invalid for whatever reason and they lose that argument, they lose their share. So it's trying to provide a financial disincentive to fighting. it's still good to have, right? It's good to have a contest clause. It does pro provide some kind of a disincentive. It is not always perfectly successful. It's not always perfectly upheld. It is not I this is a soap box I will gladly get on. It is not the solution to it. Is not don't pair that with leaving somebody $5 in the hopes that then they won't fight about it, right? but you should have it. You should have a contest provision. You should talk about using a professional. You should make sure everything's really clear. So that's on the family fighting side. The other side's a little more nuanced, but we see it more often than you might expect, and that is including a caretaker as a beneficiary. there is a default under the law, a presumption under the law that gifts to a caretaker, and I don't mean like your kid helps take care of you, I mean a professional caretaker, are invalid.

20:27 They are presumed invalid because there has historically been a lot of abuse in that area. sometimes there is a genuine reason why someone wants to leave money to the person who is their caretaker, but there are added steps that should be taken to combat that presumption of it being invalid. So getting a second attorney discussion involved. It's called a certificate of independent review. Making sure to get doctor's notes to clarify that the person had capacity at the time. If there is a valid reason that you would want to gift to a caretaker, there are added steps that should be taken to make sure that that is not just, you know, by default presumed invalid.

21:04 You know, I've seen both sides of that on the same case where we talk to the kids and oh my gosh, my father's abused, blah. Oh, that's terrible. Oh yeah, we're being ripped off. That's terrible. And then you meet the father and you realize and he tells you well yeah my kids have never been to my house never come to see me she's only person in my life she started off as a caregiver we got attached emotionally you know she's gave so much of herself to me over the years I want to give her something so I see so you know it's interesting when one side of course she's the devil incarnate on the other side maybe she makes more of it than she should you know again there's there's arguments on both sides but I think your point is depending what your argument is document it and take the right procedures so that you can protect what your interest is. And I think that's you have the opportunity while you're living to do that. Once you're gone, you kind of lose opportunity.

21:52 Absolutely. And those situations are awful. They're so hard because I'm not a perfect arbiter of truth, you know, like it's it's and it ends up being on the attorney a little bit to try to make sure we're protecting people and protecting the grantors, the client's wishes. And it's hard to know when you're getting the exactly like she's the devil incarnate. the kids hate you're terrible the both sides of it. It's a really hard situation. but you know you'll talk to somebody and they'll clearly know what they're talking about. They can talk to you ad nauseam about you know their whole life and the current events and the news and they you know and they want to make a gift. Then you got to make sure you're doing it right.

22:32 Yeah. This those are tough those are tough challenges. I think I think it's also a changing dynamic in our country where people are living longer and I think families are less close less interconnected and so all these are just kind of witches brew of problem potential more money you talk about you know bigger assets all these are things that cause potentials for problems

22:53 Okay so we talked about the biggest challenges for when it's internal family and we talked about missed opportunities while writing the documents I think the thing that the other area you want to touch on is when you're administering it. where you're the attorney or the administr executor doing it yourself or your administrator of an estate trustee of an estate. seems a couple basic mistakes people make that kind of add fire or add fuel to a fire that might be there already. One areas I find is disclosing the trust and the trust documents. And I've seen I've interview attorneys have made you know the exact opposite argument in both. I'm just curious how you play this. Of course, I'm sure it's situational when the granter passes. I guess the trustee of the trust, successor trustee now is in charge of it and supposed to notify people. There's there's minimum notification requirements and then there's giving a copy of the entire trust. And I've had attorneys say I just give them the minimum, make them request the whole trust. others I would say no, just give them everything right up front. Just transparency is best and we'll we'll fight out from there. How do you kind of lay out on that that option? You know, what's your best advice to successor trustees who are trying to navigate and avoid confrontation when not necessary?

24:10 It's going to be my favorite lawyer answer. It depends, but that is a real discussion we have to have every single time. So in probate there are a if you end up in probate you don't have a trust or for whatever reason there are very clear statutory notice requirements to a large kind of potentially large group of people depending on how they were related to the decedent or if they were named etc. In a trust we don't have that public process. So we are relying on kind of the legal requirements around trust. And one of the most important legal requirements around trust is something called 16061.7 notice. And that is the probate code reference for the notice that says you have to notify this subset of people named in the trust, people who would have inherited if there were no trust. you have to provide them with this very specific notice that says the trust is now irrevocable because this person died. Here's who's the in charge of it now. Here's where you can ask questions to. And then they have an opportunity, they have a period of time during which they can object to the trust. And that period of time is, and I might get it wrong. I think it's 120 days from when they received the notice and or 60 days from when they received a copy of the trust, whatever is later. And so one of the conversations we have with trustees is if you send them notice, if you send them a full copy of the trust at the time that you send this notice, they will flat out have 120 days during which to contest. And if they don't contest by the time that 120 days tolls, then you are good. You know, they cannot come back and contest. You can move on with the administration and start taking steps to close it up. If you don't send a copy of the trust, then they can wait until day 119, I guess, and demand a copy of a trust the trust and then gain an extra 60 days during which to contest it. So, you are potentially delaying the administration an extra couple of months. and so this is a conversation we have. My default position if it were up to me, and this

26:14 Is true with planning, this is actually almost more true with planning, but also on the administration and the and the probate side, is to disclose as much as possible as often as possible. I think people get more angry and more likely to fight and more combative based on what they imagine is happening versus what is actually happening.

26:34 Yes. and so I tell clients if they, for example, this is on the planning side, if they want to maybe make uneven distributions between their kids, if they are comfortable doing so, let's talk to their kids about it now and about why. And they might be a little angry now, but at least by the time it happens, they'll have known it was coming and they won't add that element of surprise to their anger and that element of grief to their anger. When you put them all together, it's a perfect recipe for suing your sibling, right? And so that's on the planning side. On the administration side, I have so many times had a beneficiary call me and say, "My sibling is doing all these things wrong and they're hiding all this stuff from me." And I know what the sibling's doing. I represent the sibling and the sibling isn't doing any of that stuff. But

27:18 Correct, the beneficiary who's not the trustee doesn't know that. So, they're imagining the worst. And so, I tend my default will be disclose as much as possible as often as possible. And then you get ahead of it. You know, if someone's going to fight you, they fight you immediately. you don't have to wonder what they're going to do. That being said, it's the client's decision at the end of the day within the confines of the law. And there are times where a client says, "I do not want to send a copy of the trust, and I understand they have a right to demand it, and if they do, we will give it to them at the time, but I don't want to send it now." And we talk about it, and we talk about the risks of that, and if that works for them, then that's fine with me. so it's always a conversation with the client, and I've had situations where I agreed it was right not to send it. But if it were up to me, which it's not, right? I'm playing with house money. would erupt to me, I would disclose as much as possible, as often as possible.

28:03 I think you're so right. You know, as you're saying this, I was reflecting that while there's always two sides to the story and there's, you know, and sometimes there's not. Sometimes it's a person who's right or wrong. What's true is the other party is never as bad as the one party thinks they are. It's never the case. It's always ex exaggerated, you know, and as a real estate agent, this I'll imagine, you know, he did this, he did that to the house, he did, and the rally is, well, it's not really that big a deal. But in their mind, it's like life-threatening intensity of emotions. And I think you're right. The if you actually disclose what is actually true, then you're you have a better chance at least. Now, of course, some people just won't they won't read the documents. They're going to read it with their own bias and you can't change that, but you can try to diminish against. That's interesting. I think this is just to kind of bring things to a wrap here. The thing that I find interesting about the business as my father was an attorney. I kind of went to college with the idea of being an attorney. I decided not to. and then here I kind of backed into this world a few years ago, six years ago to you know work with attorneys almost every day. The thing I find fascinating is that your job is surprisingly an almost equal blend of or your job your business is almost an equal blend of you the hard technical legal skills. You have to have good documents, good procedures, good staff, know the law with the soft social skills of communicating, listening. Man, listening is just so important to be to success in your situation because sometimes just letting them vent.

29:33 They're just like exhausted. Go, okay, fine, whatever. Just do it. And I see that in my business. I don't imagine most people that go to law school imagine how much of the business really is that kind of that soft people skill.

29:46 Absolutely. And I know I know a lot of attorneys in my industry and I know a lot of amazing attorneys in my industry and there are definitely if I threw them onto a spectrum some that are top-notch on the legal technical side of things but their bedside manner is not great and some that are the most warm, sweet, compassionate, amazing, patient people who you know when it gets into the nitty-gritty are not as kind of knowledgeable about the nuances. And then of course you know it's a bell curve. Most people are somewhere in the middle. but it's a huge part of why we did this. My partner and I both came from big law backgrounds. she was on the M&A side. I was a litigator and we were representing huge companies and you know, we were never talking about any to anybody who had any real personal stake in anything we were doing. And if we were, we were probably on the bad the wrong side, right? We were representing the company that was getting sued by the people. and a huge part of wanting to transition into this area of law was to be able to blend those things, to be able to be smart people who do really good work and who work in an area of law that I think people assume is a lot simpler than it is and actually has really interesting nuance.

30:55 And especially on the tax side and kind of academically, a lot more academic nuance I think people realize, but then also get to work with people on something that actually matters to them. so I think it's a beautiful part of what we do. It's one of my favorite things about what we do.

31:08 Yeah. I mean, same for me too. I feel like I didn't know this was an area of law when I decided not to go to law school. I think if I had known about it, I might have got into probate law or trust law or something like that, but now I kind of back into it, I think on my side. Well, look, Jenn, it's always a pleasure to chat with you. I really appreciate your education, your insights, and giving us good information. if you want more information, Jenna Glassock is an attorney here in Southern California. It's you know, why did I not hit the button? Make this a little easier. There you go. it is Laurel and let me get the banner up too. You know I'm not a very good producer of this. [laughter] LTL now they did that I can't read the thing. ltlfirm.com is the name of the is the website if you want more information and Jenna Glassock you can reach her at [phone number shown on screen] or you can reach her at the website [email address shown on screen]. Thank you so much for joining us today and sharing with us, I think, kind of the human side of this business and as well the business side and the technical side. I really appreciate that.

32:08 It was a pleasure. Thanks, Bill. We'll see you again soon. And for the rest of you, this is Probate Weekly where we get together every week with a another episode, usually with attorneys, in this case, estate planning attorneys, sometimes probate attorneys, sometimes litigators to talk about how we can be more effective in serving our customers. if I hope you like this, let me know. Give me your feedback, thumbs up, comments, questions. If I can help in any way, reach out at Bill Gross Probate on social media. And as always, make today your best day ever. Thanks so much. Oops.