Can my father give his house to me?

Katykat

It does open debate though doesn't it, that in this country- in the 21st century- there are home owners who are so frightened that they will be forced to sell their home they they turn to any measures to protect it. On the other hand, people who have never saved or earned any assets have no worries, they will be taken care of in their age. Doesn't everyone deserve that? The well worn ( but totally misleading) phase comes to mind- YOU WILL BE CARED FOR FROM THE CRADLE TO THE GRAVE. !!!!!!!!

margaretclare

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Only 'cos you've posted it twice MC;) :rotfl:
I jest, sorry;)

Oooops. Have deleted.

Seriously, I am more concerned about the personal things, the memorabilia, none of it of any value monetarily. Apart from that, the rest is just bricks-and-mortar and forms a resource to be turned into money, if no longer required to live in.

monkeyspanner

Katykat wrote: »

The well worn ( but totally misleading) phase comes to mind- YOU WILL BE CARED FOR FROM THE CRADLE TO THE GRAVE. !!!!!!!!

It is the case if you have complex medical needs the NHS will pick up your care costs under the continuing heathcare funding system irrespective of your financial status.

It has never been the case since the inception of the NHS system that those with funds do not have to pay for their care home fees. What has changed is the number of people who have funds in excess of the savings limit.

Even those without savings have to contribute the majority of their state pension and other income and the council pick up the rest.

It does, however, seem illogical that it is ok to spend all your money thoughout your lifetime end up with very little and have the council fund care home fees but not ok to spend your money just before you go into a care home without the council saying you should not have done that.

EdInvestor

monkeyspanner wrote: »

It does, however, seem illogical that it is ok to spend all your money thoughout your lifetime end up with very little and have the council fund care home fees but not ok to spend your money just before you go into a care home without the council saying you should not have done that.

:T Excellent point.

To my mind the concept of immediate needs annuities should be expanded and possibly given a bit more subsidy on top of the current tax-free arrangement.Most importantly they should be publicised as a cheap way of paying for care, hardly anyone seems to know these products exist.

dupplin

monkeyspanner wrote: »

If a person has to go into a care home and if the council has to assist in funding the cost of the home (if the persons assets including property are £22250 or less). Then the council may look at past financial gifts made by the person going into a care home. They can look back as many years as they like and I believe can recover property from the recipient if the gift has been made in the previous six months. The council would have to demonstrate that the gift was made with the intention to avoid the care home fees. So if the person making the gift is reasonably fit and there is no immediate need or apparent need for a care home and the person is not put in financial distress by the gift, then intent would be difficult to prove. If the council believe there was intent to avoid fees then they can assess the persons assets as though the gift had not been made and refuse to pay fees.

It is more the case that you will have to demonstrate that the gift was not made to avoid paying care home fees. There is plenty of case law on this subject, and the council can infer a reason if no other (such as IHT planning) was recorded.

As for an earlier question, if a charge has been place on a property for care fees, then the this must be redeemed after (I think) 50 days. You will not be able to stay in the property indefinately.

Care fee annuities can be very good. I think the reason more are not widely used is firstly they can only be sold by an IFA (becuase of the complexity of the advice involved) and many will try to do this themselves or just get bank advice, and the FSA expects the IFA to have a specialist exams (which only a few IFA's hold).

There are a number of specialists in this area (google it) but try SAGA or https://www.fundingcare.org.uk can put you in touch with a specialist.

Katykat

You are correct monkeyspanner that the NHs picks up the cost of complex heath needs. The problem is the interpretation of those complex needs. It is right & proper to fund the care of someone who has had a stroke/ heart attack/ cancer etc, but not to fund the care of someone with Alzeimers, which is a very complex disease. Why is their disease different? They havn't caused it themselves - like many other diseases, yet they have to pay for their care.

Oldernotwiser

Katykat wrote: »

It does open debate though doesn't it, that in this country- in the 21st century- there are home owners who are so frightened that they will be forced to sell their home they they turn to any measures to protect it. On the other hand, people who have never saved or earned any assets have no worries, they will be taken care of in their age. Doesn't everyone deserve that? The well worn ( but totally misleading) phase comes to mind- YOU WILL BE CARED FOR FROM THE CRADLE TO THE GRAVE. !!!!!!!!

We all leave this world with nothing, just as we entered it!

monkeyspanner

Katykat wrote: »

You are correct monkeyspanner that the NHs picks up the cost of complex heath needs. The problem is the interpretation of those complex needs. It is right & proper to fund the care of someone who has had a stroke/ heart attack/ cancer etc, but not to fund the care of someone with Alzeimers, which is a very complex disease. Why is their disease different? They havn't caused it themselves - like many other diseases, yet they have to pay for their care.

Agree with you totally there is no reason why alzeimers and dementia should not be counted as the medical problems they are, and funded in the same way.

oldandgrumpy

Transferring a home to ones family removes the responsibility from the elderly relative for all matters concerned in owning a home. The original poster did imply that her relative was fit and well. Mine was, 13 years ago when our transfer was completed. At 89 he is less fit, and increasingly realises that our home is no longer suitable. We have stairlift, wheel chair, raised toilets, zimmer frame...and are getting on ourselves. He is also at risk of falling (officially) and our home is no longer conducive to his well being. At 76 he was still married, as opposed to widowed, and still drove a car, went on holidays. A lot happens in 13 years, but certain planning for the future is necesary and most people of that age do have an eye to possible care costs....but the intracacies of home disposal, as many above have alluded to, probably don't occur to the elderly. Just that someone isn't going to throw them on the streets, or as one authority did, get their bailif todrive them to an ATM machine to pay a fine....whereupon the victim died of a heart attack. Hearing this on the news tends to make an elderly home owner wonder what can happen to them! Thanks to this thread, I now have a clearer understanding of what the ramifications of such atransfer may be....but also that many people will get peace of mind by not having the responsibility in their dotage.

margaretclare

oldandgrumpy wrote: »

Transferring a home to one's family removes the responsibility from the elderly relative for all matters concerned in owning a home. The original poster did imply that her relative was fit and well. Mine was, 13 years ago when our transfer was completed. At 89 he is less fit, and increasingly realises that our home is no longer suitable. We have stairlift, wheel chair, raised toilets, zimmer frame...and are getting on ourselves. He is also at risk of falling (officially) and our home is no longer conducive to his well being. At 76 he was still married, as opposed to widowed, and still drove a car, went on holidays. A lot happens in 13 years, but certain planning for the future is necessary and most people of that age do have an eye to possible care costs....but the intricacies of home disposal, as many above have alluded to, probably don't occur to the elderly. Just that someone isn't going to throw them on the streets, or as one authority did, get their bailif todrive them to an ATM machine to pay a fine....whereupon the victim died of a heart attack. Hearing this on the news tends to make an elderly home owner wonder what can happen to them! Thanks to this thread, I now have a clearer understanding of what the ramifications of such a transfer may be....but also that many people will get peace of mind by not having the responsibility in their dotage.

I have long believed that everyone, while getting older, should think of what may and may not be possible or convenient for them in later years. I've seen so many people still living in huge houses which were obviously too large, too costly to maintain and too inconvenient for them, but the time when they should have moved, when they were able to cope with such an upheaval, had passed 10 or more years ago and often they were stuck.

My first husband and I moved to this 2-bed bungalow in 1990 while we were in our late 50s because we were increasingly concerned that the 3-storey Pennine cottage we lived in then was becoming impossible to us. That was one of the best decisions we ever made, even though he only survived another 18 months to enjoy it. Since that time I, and my now second husband, have spent time, money and effort in making this little place as convenient, easy-care and comfortable as we could. Most recently even, when he was so ill back in October and is still awaiting further knee surgery, I had the bathroom completely re-done with new shower enclosure which has a much lower 'step-in'. We were sent a Zimmer frame and a raised toilet seat with frame, but we sent them back because we don't need them and we shan't need them.

However, it has never occurred to either of us to do this: "Transferring a home to one's family removes the responsibility from the elderly relative for all matters concerned in owning a home." If DH had died in October as he so nearly did, I would not have wanted to, or been capable of, continuing here. The memories would have been too painful, for one thing, to go on living here. I would sell up here and move into sheltered accommodation of some type or other. The last thing that would ever occur to me is to 'give' this place to someone else and allow them to take all the responsiblity for it while allowing me to live here rent-free.