Elderly relative care - need to sell house!!
Discussion
I wonder whether any PH’ers have been in a similar position and can offer some advice.
I will try and keep this as brief as possible. My elderly grandmother (paternal side) has been in hospital for about 10 weeks now. It is looking increasingly likely that she will not be well enough to return home and as a result will require full time care. The family will have to pay for this care (c. £500 / week) which we cannot afford. The only alternative is that my Grandmother funds from her savings / assets and only when these have been exhausted will the NHS foot the bill.
Now, in terms of ready cash she has very modest savings of a few grand tops and owns a small terraced house probably valued at £90k in the present climate. She has no other assets to speak of (no car for example). The family (in particular my old man) are devastated that the family home since the early 1950's will have to be sold to fund her care. This, and I must stress isn’t because we will collectively miss out on some massive inheritance but more from a matter of principle. Both my grandmother and late grandfather worked very hard all their lives, never relied on handouts and allthey ever wanted to do was provide a home they could leave for the next generation.
Is there anything we can legally do to reduce the value of her assets e.g sell the house and gift to relatives etc?? Or, buy the house for some nominal figure say £20k and rent it back to her??
Any advice greatly appreciated.
I will try and keep this as brief as possible. My elderly grandmother (paternal side) has been in hospital for about 10 weeks now. It is looking increasingly likely that she will not be well enough to return home and as a result will require full time care. The family will have to pay for this care (c. £500 / week) which we cannot afford. The only alternative is that my Grandmother funds from her savings / assets and only when these have been exhausted will the NHS foot the bill.
Now, in terms of ready cash she has very modest savings of a few grand tops and owns a small terraced house probably valued at £90k in the present climate. She has no other assets to speak of (no car for example). The family (in particular my old man) are devastated that the family home since the early 1950's will have to be sold to fund her care. This, and I must stress isn’t because we will collectively miss out on some massive inheritance but more from a matter of principle. Both my grandmother and late grandfather worked very hard all their lives, never relied on handouts and allthey ever wanted to do was provide a home they could leave for the next generation.
Is there anything we can legally do to reduce the value of her assets e.g sell the house and gift to relatives etc?? Or, buy the house for some nominal figure say £20k and rent it back to her??
Any advice greatly appreciated.
I think the answer is there's not a lot you can do. I've got an elderly aunt and grandma both in same position. Basically you're allowed about up to £16-22k range in savings (all assets incl house) before the state pays. If you've got more than 20k you have to pay or it yourself.
You either want shedloads of money or none - no point being in the middle or you get shafted
You either want shedloads of money or none - no point being in the middle or you get shafted
If you gran only sold half/all her house to one of your parents i think it cannot be used to fund her care.
When my gran went into a home she had the chance to give me dad ownership of her small house. She didn't and it had to be sold to cover her bills.
Best bet is no doubt to see a solicitor of some kind.
I could be wrong though.....
When my gran went into a home she had the chance to give me dad ownership of her small house. She didn't and it had to be sold to cover her bills.
Best bet is no doubt to see a solicitor of some kind.
I could be wrong though.....
Edited by Malx on Saturday 30th August 16:23
Skodaku said:
Ah, the joys of the welfare state. B****y disgusting. Where are the incentives to work hard and save ?
I think your best course is to ask for legal advice. Maybe start with Citizens Advice Bureau - they're free.
Why is this the fault of the welfare state? A best you can argue that without the welfare state taxes would be lower so there would be more cash within the family so support elderly relatives.I think your best course is to ask for legal advice. Maybe start with Citizens Advice Bureau - they're free.
GreenV8S said:
I'm not a lawyer, but I have the idea that if you have multiple occupants who are established as tenants in common then they are protected from being forced to sell.
That's interesting. The other reason why we don't want to lose the house was to help our young cousin get on the property ladder when the inevitable happens. She lives with her parents 2 doors down. Worth her moving in as a Tenant??MoonMonkey said:
allthey ever wanted to do was provide a home they could leave for the next generation.
Really? How very bizzare.I don't see what the issue is here - the house has served its purpose for her and now it's not needed, so can be sold to contribute towards her care.
Of course, the real problem (despite what you say) is that everyone is pissed that they're not going to get their inheritence - particularly pathetic when you think what £90K shared out would yield.
The house only doesn't count if the person is:
1. The husband, wife or partner of the person in care
2. A relative who received disability benefits
3. A relative over 60
4. A child under 16 that you are liable to maintain.
Otherwise the house is counted as an asset and if the assets are more than 22,500 you pay for all of the care. Giving the house or money away won't work, that's called 'deprivation' and they will get the money back.
There is no choice but to pay, this has been around long enough for the loopholes to be closed.
1. The husband, wife or partner of the person in care
2. A relative who received disability benefits
3. A relative over 60
4. A child under 16 that you are liable to maintain.
Otherwise the house is counted as an asset and if the assets are more than 22,500 you pay for all of the care. Giving the house or money away won't work, that's called 'deprivation' and they will get the money back.
There is no choice but to pay, this has been around long enough for the loopholes to be closed.
Deva Link said:
MoonMonkey said:
allthey ever wanted to do was provide a home they could leave for the next generation.
Really? How very bizzare.I don't see what the issue is here - the house has served its purpose for her and now it's not needed, so can be sold to contribute towards her care.
Of course, the real problem (despite what you say) is that everyone is pissed that they're not going to get their inheritence - particularly pathetic when you think what £90K shared out would yield.
I'm not going to be drawn into a heated debate about it but you really are a million miles away if you think that inheritance has anything to do with it. Not everyone in this world is motivated by a few quid!!
MoonMonkey said:
I'm not going to be drawn into a heated debate about it but you really are a million miles away if you think that inheritance has anything to do with it. Not everyone in this world is motivated by a few quid!!
So why not sell the house so she can have the best possible care in her old age?The advice you are asking for is how can you avoid tax and get the state to pay for a relatives long term care and accommodation. That is clearly a financial question.
siscar said:
The house only doesn't count if the person is:
1. The husband, wife or partner of the person in care
2. A relative who received disability benefits
3. A relative over 60
4. A child under 16 that you are liable to maintain.
Otherwise the house is counted as an asset and if the assets are more than 22,500 you pay for all of the care. Giving the house or money away won't work, that's called 'deprivation' and they will get the money back.
There is no choice but to pay, this has been around long enough for the loopholes to be closed.
Well, the house could have been put into Trust, but it's too late for that now.1. The husband, wife or partner of the person in care
2. A relative who received disability benefits
3. A relative over 60
4. A child under 16 that you are liable to maintain.
Otherwise the house is counted as an asset and if the assets are more than 22,500 you pay for all of the care. Giving the house or money away won't work, that's called 'deprivation' and they will get the money back.
There is no choice but to pay, this has been around long enough for the loopholes to be closed.
my gran died a few months back, getting some money soon, had a fair bit stashed away in savings, a lot more than we all thought she had, could have used some of it to make life easier, but when you are gone, not much use for you
think the house could be sold, but if the husband is still living there, then where would he live ?
think the house could be sold, but if the husband is still living there, then where would he live ?
http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/Documents/...
"It is common to want to pass on savings or other capital to children or others. However transferring assets can affect your eligibility for both local authority assistance with care fees and Pension Credit. This factsheet explains how your eligibility for assistance may be affected if you have previously transferred assets out of your name.
The term ‘resident’ is used in this factsheet to mean a person who enters, or needs to enter a care home and ‘care home’ to mean any registered care home which provides personal and/or nursing care.
Deliberate deprivation of capital
Transferring an asset out of your name does not necessarily mean that it will not be taken into account in a means-test. Both the local authority and the Pension Service can, when assessing a resident’s eligibility for assistance, look for evidence of deliberate, or intentional, deprivation of
capital such as a property. Deliberate deprivation occurs when a resident transfers an asset out of his or her possession in order to put him or herself in a better position to obtain assistance. Where a disposal of assets is treated as deliberate deprivation, the local authority will
include ‘notional capital’ to the value of those assets in its assessment of your means.
What is deprivation?
The term deprivation covers a broad range of ways in which the owner of an asset might transfer it out of his or her possession. The Department of Health’s Charging for Residential Accommodation Guide (CRAG) gives the following examples of deprivation:
Where do they live Scotland has different rules to England (it might actually be worth moving to Scotland)?
"It is common to want to pass on savings or other capital to children or others. However transferring assets can affect your eligibility for both local authority assistance with care fees and Pension Credit. This factsheet explains how your eligibility for assistance may be affected if you have previously transferred assets out of your name.
The term ‘resident’ is used in this factsheet to mean a person who enters, or needs to enter a care home and ‘care home’ to mean any registered care home which provides personal and/or nursing care.
Deliberate deprivation of capital
Transferring an asset out of your name does not necessarily mean that it will not be taken into account in a means-test. Both the local authority and the Pension Service can, when assessing a resident’s eligibility for assistance, look for evidence of deliberate, or intentional, deprivation of
capital such as a property. Deliberate deprivation occurs when a resident transfers an asset out of his or her possession in order to put him or herself in a better position to obtain assistance. Where a disposal of assets is treated as deliberate deprivation, the local authority will
include ‘notional capital’ to the value of those assets in its assessment of your means.
What is deprivation?
The term deprivation covers a broad range of ways in which the owner of an asset might transfer it out of his or her possession. The Department of Health’s Charging for Residential Accommodation Guide (CRAG) gives the following examples of deprivation:
- a lump sum payment such as a gift or to pay off a debt;
- transferring the title deeds of a property to someone else;
- putting money into a trust that cannot be revoked;
- converting money into another form that has to be disregarded from the means test, eg, personal possessions, investment bonds with life insurance;
- reducing capital through substantial expenditure on items such as expensive holidays or by extravagant living.
Where do they live Scotland has different rules to England (it might actually be worth moving to Scotland)?
I thought the law had changed recently, but evidently not.
I can sympathise with the OP, my grandad's house was sold to fund his nursing care costs, which at the time were about £400 per month. The 'authorities' left him with £8k, which I believe was the limit at the time (2001 maybe)
My grandad was a quiet bloke and never said much, but what annoyed me the most, was the bloke in the next bed, who never worked, never contributed, got *exactly* the same care for free...
It's a highly debateable topic, but I do sympathise with your position.
See pro advise, there's no a great deal you can do, but you should be able to offset some of the value.
I can sympathise with the OP, my grandad's house was sold to fund his nursing care costs, which at the time were about £400 per month. The 'authorities' left him with £8k, which I believe was the limit at the time (2001 maybe)
My grandad was a quiet bloke and never said much, but what annoyed me the most, was the bloke in the next bed, who never worked, never contributed, got *exactly* the same care for free...
It's a highly debateable topic, but I do sympathise with your position.
See pro advise, there's no a great deal you can do, but you should be able to offset some of the value.
Kuroblack350 said:
I thought the law had changed recently, but evidently not.
I can sympathise with the OP, my grandad's house was sold to fund his nursing care costs, which at the time were about £400 per month. The 'authorities' left him with £8k, which I believe was the limit at the time (2001 maybe)
My grandad was a quiet bloke and never said much, but what annoyed me the most, was the bloke in the next bed, who never worked, never contributed, got *exactly* the same care for free...
It's a highly debateable topic, but I do sympathise with your position.
See pro advise, there's no a great deal you can do, but you should be able to offset some of the value.
It's the apparent unfairness of it that galls most people I think....you can have 2 guys who have worked side by side all their lives..one has been responsible and bought a house and saved..the other has blown all his cash and rents..at times like the OP has stated who's the better off.....and El Gordo wants us all to save yeah,there's lots of encouragement for it isn't there?I can sympathise with the OP, my grandad's house was sold to fund his nursing care costs, which at the time were about £400 per month. The 'authorities' left him with £8k, which I believe was the limit at the time (2001 maybe)
My grandad was a quiet bloke and never said much, but what annoyed me the most, was the bloke in the next bed, who never worked, never contributed, got *exactly* the same care for free...
It's a highly debateable topic, but I do sympathise with your position.
See pro advise, there's no a great deal you can do, but you should be able to offset some of the value.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff