If a testator would like someone to control the distribution of his or her assets who does not fall into one of these categories, then he or she could use a living trust. The requirement that someone fall into one of these categories, however, is not much of a burden in most situations. Moreover, probate provides certain benefits that are unavailable with living trusts. The probate process allows supervision of estate administration by the probate court and provides notices to beneficiaries who are given an opportunity to object. In contrast, a beneficiary of a living trust may have to sue a trustee in order to challenge his or her actions.
Some states also allow unsupervised probate.
These options reduce the cost and administrative burdens that often are associated with probate. Living trusts do have certain advantages. For example, if the grantor owns real estate in more than one state, a trust may allow the grantor to avoid ancillary probate in jurisdictions other than his or her state of residence. Furthermore, if a testator anticipates that his or her will may be contested, then it may be more prudent to establish a living trust, because the latter may be more difficult to challenge on theories such as incompetence or undue influence. Nevertheless, these are not often the primary concerns of a person's estate planning.