Mum gives me her house, how to deal with care costs later on

Mum gives me her house, how to deal with care costs later on

Author
Discussion

Jockman

17,917 posts

160 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
Sarnie said:
desolate said:
Have I missed the point?

Where will mum live if she gives her house to her kids?
In the house?
yes

Patrick1964

Original Poster:

696 posts

231 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
Sarnie said:
In the house?
This. For as long as possible.

anonymous-user

54 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
Patrick1964 said:
Sarnie said:
In the house?
This. For as long as possible.
OK - theoretically the local authority can go back and reverse a transaction that is seen as a "deliberate deprivation of assets"
They are tight as a gnat's chuff over stuff like this but I suppose it depends how competent they are when carrying out the checks. They will have seen it all before and most people have a habit of telling the truth when things get a bit tetchy over these sorts of matters.

If the reason she is giving you the house is to avoid paying care home fees than that is the reason, and they will be able to undo the transfer.


It's stressful enough as it is when that time of life is reached so, personally I would give it a miss.

If there isn't other significant assets I wouldn't go down the trust route either as they will end up costing too much.

edited to add: just checked and there is no limit to how far they go can go back. So if they find out that your mum used to own the house they will ask why she gave it away.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 18th May 22:51

silentbrown

8,827 posts

116 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
Read this.

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/Documents/EN-GB/Factsheets...

In particular.

"The local authority must show that you knew that you would need care and support and that you have reduced your assets in order to reduce the contribution you are asked to make towards the cost."

If this was just weeks before your mum was due to enter a home, it would be "deliberate". But if there's no medical indications at present, I'd think you'd be in the clear.

HarryW

15,150 posts

269 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
Also this one from Which which is a bit more helpful. http://www.which.co.uk/elderly-care/financing-care...

Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

246 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
Just remember, if you or your brother get into financial difficulties - your Mum loses her house.

Also, if you or your brother die before your mother, 40% of the value of her house will be taken as inheritance tax because the house is in your estate and it's not protected by any of the new "main residence" exemptions. Worse still, if the house has to be sold to pay that tax your mother will be evicted. Then she has no house and no money.

And then again, if you or your brother divorce the house will be among assets to be split on divorce.


anonymous-user

54 months

Wednesday 18th May 2016
quotequote all
if the time frame is long it would be pretty difficult for them to recover if you hold firm.

However there is a whole host of other reasons why such a transfer is a poor idea - stuff happens in the most solid of families.

rsbmw

3,464 posts

105 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
God forbid anyone would have to pay for themselves from their own assets/money, rather than hiding it and having Joe Taxpayer foot the bill.

PHuzzy

2,747 posts

172 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
Ozzie Osmond said:
Also, if you or your brother die before your mother, 40% of the value of her house will be taken as inheritance tax because the house is in your estate and it's not protected by any of the new "main residence" exemptions. Worse still, if the house has to be sold to pay that tax your mother will be evicted. Then she has no house and no money.
rolleyes Quite a few assumptions you've made there. What if his/his brothers estate is under the IHT threshold? If it's over then he'll have enough to pay it from his non 'inherited' portion as it has already been pointed out that his mums estate is under the threshold.

DSLiverpool

14,741 posts

202 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
rsbmw said:
God forbid anyone would have to pay for themselves from their own assets/money, rather than hiding it and having Joe Taxpayer foot the bill.
To reiterate - the person who is going into care should have a choice of a decent quality placement of choice rather than anything the council can get them rather than paying for a holiday, car, extension etc for close family.

Moving property and cash around to garner a crappy council place for a loved one makes me shudder.

AyBee

10,533 posts

202 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
So the rest of us should pay for your mum's care when she's old because you want a house? Nope, doesn't sound selfish to me...

Jockman

17,917 posts

160 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
rsbmw said:
God forbid anyone would have to pay for themselves from their own assets/money, rather than hiding it and having Joe Taxpayer foot the bill.
The tax payer pays for the majority anyway.The system penalises those that have saved all their life and benefits those that have not, or indeed not been in a position to save.

In reality many families take the council contribution and add their own contribution to it.

rsbmw

3,464 posts

105 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
Jockman said:
The tax payer pays for the majority anyway.The system penalises those that have saved all their life and benefits those that have not, or indeed not been in a position to save.

In reality many families take the council contribution and add their own contribution to it.
Whilst I don't disagree with that, it's quite the over simplification. Majority of those receiving "free" care have never owned a house or been able to save, simply struggling to make ends meet their whole lives. I don't begrudge them, given the age they wouldn't have had the state support that the current generation enjoy for sitting on their arse. This is not a comment on those vulnerable individuals who genuinely need and deserve state support.

walm

10,609 posts

202 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
rsbmw said:
God forbid anyone would have to pay for themselves from their own assets/money, rather than hiding it and having Joe Taxpayer foot the bill.
I don't believe there is a moral responsibility to pay more than you have to though - isn't that taking it too far?
Just stick to the rules. That's why they are there.

otolith

56,091 posts

204 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
Jockman said:
In reality many families take the council contribution and add their own contribution to it.
So the actual effect of this could be that his mum gets an uplift on the quality of her accommodation to the tune of the monthly rental profits from the property?

Sheepshanks

32,752 posts

119 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
It depends what county you live in; some are more aggressive than others, and I believe that they CAN go back more than 6-7 years to look for disposal of assets if they feel like it.
Certainly when you apply for help in paying care home fees you are asked if you've EVER owned property and to account for what's happened to it.

However my mother is in a place on the outskirts of Liverpool and, of 25 residents, only her and one other are paying their own fees. The other residents have all spirited away their property and cash assets to family members and nothing seems to be done about it. My Sister-in-Laws are so furious about it they'll barely speak to my mother.

She is very right wing in her views and always thought it outrageous that people should seek to avoid paying. Now she's hosing £3000/mth into the place she has a somewhat different opinion. I think her biggest problem is that she has delusions of grandeur and isn't happy that she doesn't get special treatment because she's paying the bill herself.

Jockman

17,917 posts

160 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
otolith said:
Jockman said:
In reality many families take the council contribution and add their own contribution to it.
So the actual effect of this could be that his mum gets an uplift on the quality of her accommodation to the tune of the monthly rental profits from the property?
No idea what structure OP is setting up regarding rent, but it is common practice for families who can afford it to take parents round a variety of homes and let them choose.

There are many elderly people who have made losses on property a few years ago and who do not have the years left in them to get that equity back.

Jockman

17,917 posts

160 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
Ozzie Osmond said:
And then again, if you or your brother divorce the house will be among assets to be split on divorce.
Yup OP should proceed with eyes wide open.

Ozzie Osmond

21,189 posts

246 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
PHuzzy said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
Also, if you or your brother die before your mother, 40% of the value of her house will be taken as inheritance tax because the house is in your estate and it's not protected by any of the new "main residence" exemptions. Worse still, if the house has to be sold to pay that tax your mother will be evicted. Then she has no house and no money.
rolleyes Quite a few assumptions you've made there. What if his/his brothers estate is under the IHT threshold? If it's over then he'll have enough to pay it from his non 'inherited' portion as it has already been pointed out that his mums estate is under the threshold.
In the scenario you have painted the whole plan is EVEN HIGHER risk for the mother. Namely, giving her house to a couple of children who don't have money of their own and leaving herself even more exposed to their financial difficulties, divorces or any other unpleasant surprises that life may have in store. Some might - I wouldn't.

And thanks for the rolleyes...

walm

10,609 posts

202 months

Thursday 19th May 2016
quotequote all
Ozzie Osmond said:
And thanks for the rolleyes...
In fairness the OP had explicitly stated the estate had no IHT worries!

Agree with the riskiness though.