Planning for your Animal Companion

Animals are often the omitted heirs in many estate plans. Each year, about 500,000 pets are put to death because their owners died and there is no one to care for them. It is important for clients to carefully consider who will take care of their animals in the event of the client's incapacity or death, not only to ensure that the animal is placed in a good home, but to make sure that the animal's needs are financially met if their human is unable to meet them. California Probate Code allows animals to be named as beneficiaries in estate plans. This allows loving humans to provide for the care of their animal companions in their estate plans.

Drafting a will or trust to provide for the care of animal companions first involves designating a "caretaker" for the animals, a human who is willing and able to take over caring for the animal when the human companion becomes incapacitated or dies. The client can leave specific provisions relating to standards of care, and special instructions for the ongoing needs of the animal. 

Another important issue that should be addressed is the financial means of providing for the care of the animals. Without proper planning, the most common method is to not address the issue, and thus to place the burden upon the individual that "inherits" the animal. Practically speaking, this may be an acceptable alternative if the caretaker also receives a portion of the estate and is completely trustworthy. However, if the caretaker is a specific individual or organization who would not otherwise be a beneficiary of the estate, then proper planning should also include providing an additional amount of money for caretaking expenses and/or compensation of the caretaker (referred to herein as the "caretaking funds"). 

In many cases, however, an outright gift or bequest may not be appropriate. What if the designated caretaker is rendered unable or unwilling to take care of that pet? What if the caretaker is a spendthrift? Worse still, what happens if it becomes apparent only after the client's death that the designated caretaker was incompatible with the pet? Even if the client has complete confidence in the caretaker, what if that person is unable to take care of that pet when the time comes? The only legal mechanism that can adequately address these issues is a trust.