Hi Google Answers,  My family receives royalties that are held in
trust at a large bank in the state of Kentucky.  Part of the family
has moved to have the trust taken over by another bank.  The
"salesperson" (business developer) of this new bank only sees dollar
signs in his pocket and is negating all the problems that are
associated with acquiring this trust (mostly legal in nature).  Who
would be the person or people at a bank that would be more interested
in the "ramifications" of assuming a trust as opposed to the "money"
to be made from it?  If I contact the resident agent or the bank's
lawyer, it would seem to me that they would okay it from the
standpoint of their own "job security".  My family is so litigious
that they could justify a lawyer's position for many years.  However,
I feel that if I contact a bank president, he'll just pass it off to
one of the lawyers.  Is there anyone in a bank hierarchy that looks
beyond the dollar signs?  Whom would that person or department be? 
The new bank is located in the state of Oklahoma.  Thank you very
much.

---

Request for Question Clarification by pafalafa-ga on 03 Aug 2005 19:25 PDT

Perhaps if you could explain to us what the ramifications to the new
bank would be, we could help to best identify the person at the bank
that would be most responsive to those concerns.

Thanks.

pafalafa-ga

---

Clarification of Question by dailychaos-ga on 03 Aug 2005 23:39 PDT

Hi pafalafa-ga!  Wow - say that name ten times real fast...:)  The
ramifications would be that my family would sue them (they have sued
or threatened to sue *every* trust officer and bank down the pike
thoughout the years).  I have the documentation that supports this but
I'm afraid if I send it to the resident agent or lawyer that they'll
just say, "Hey great - more business for us!"  The original trust
officers that I spoke with don't seem the least bit concerned,
obviously because there's some type of incentive for them, however, I
imagine that there would be someone at the bank who wouldn't want to
even be involved with a potential zillion dollar lawsuit.  I need to
find out who that would be instead of just putting it in the hands of
yet another lawyer.  Does this make any type of sense?  Someone who
would look out for the interests of the bank instead of keeping the
bank's attorneys fed.  Some one like the bank president would be
great, but even I realize a president is so busy that the most logical
thing for him/her to do would be pass it off to an attorney. I'm just
at a loss as to how to proceed.  Thank you so much for your comment,
hope this helps...

---

Clarification of Question by dailychaos-ga on 03 Aug 2005 23:44 PDT

Hi nelson-ga!  Thanks very much for your comment - it may be just the
solution!  I'll find out tomorrow if they have a risk management
department (hopefully not full of attorneys!)  I'll respond back to
you then. Thanks again!

Try the Risk Management (or Risk something) department.