I suspect that there will be few replies. The angle that is no considered is the , in my view, the fundamental and acknowledged reason by experts for the continuing confusion that pervades all understanding of Trusts for decades.
Disposing of any property has separate and distinct Rules depending on how the owner wishes to make that disposal. He can dispose of it by way of contract, exchange, sell it, by will, by gift, and by trust, to name a few. If he chooses to dispose by trust then he must comply with the Certainty of Intention and transfer his ownership to the Trust. Whether or not trustees are appointed at this time is immaterial. Without all the certainties in place, a trust cannot exist. The actual transfer, is essential.
I concur that a trust therefore cannot exist if any of the certainties are missing and the property remains in his name. It remains part of his estate and will be disposed of as and when he pleases or by intestacy.
The disposal by trust is not a future intention to be fulfilled but a absolute legal requirement at the time the Deed is made. For completion, the deed can state that the instrument is revocable or irrevocable but the property nevertheless must be transferred to the trust for a trust to legally exist.
I recognize that this is not the widely held view of the industry but a great number of longstanding acknowledged contradictions would be resolved if a trust was viewed not as some mystifying and unresolvable legal puzzle but as a disposition option amongst many methods of disposal available to all owners wishing to transferring their property.