Loan From Your Kids?

angelicmary85

steadynerve wrote: »

So if toys and clothers are ok, i presum food and even rent are probably ok as well? As when older children give housekeeping this money presumably covers food and housing costs as well.

Oh my dear lord did I read that right? Are you still considering charging your 7 year old daughter rent? Would you have considered doing that if she was given a few hundred quid that maybe you cwould left alone or can you not resist the temptation of a new 42inc t.v and blu ray player?

Could someone please explain to me how anyone could possibly justify charging a 7 year old digs?

jennihen

[Could someone please explain to me how anyone could possibly justify charging a 7 year old digs?]


Just making up the bill for my 3 now . . .:rotfl:

jackieb

jennihen wrote: »

[Could someone please explain to me how anyone could possibly justify charging a 7 year old digs?]


Just making up the bill for my 3 now . . .:rotfl:

:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXFBYrRIeNw

jennihen

Love it!!:rotfl::rotfl:

angelicmary85

heating-eng wrote: »

this sounds very fair to me ..but i think we can all see they will not do this ..they are looking for ways to steal the money from the 7year old ..not make her have a share in a house where she could make more money ..

I agree that it sounds fair in theory but should the child not decide what she wants to do with her own money when she's old enough to? It would be like being left a house, you have the choice to do whatever you want with a house so surely this girl should be given the option as to what she does with her money?

lifesuckssometimes

steadynerve wrote: »

Thanks for the replies.
Yes as bitter and twisted indicated - a six year (she is now 7) old cannot give consent. So the option of a legal document loaning the money cannot work. This is why i think the only legal option is legally taking the money for expenses.

Once a gift is made it becones the childs money so i dont think its possible for the donor to change there mind later and say oh its for the parent. Unless there really was a nistake to start wtih ehich thre is't.

I'm bewginning to think its legally ok to taje the money as long as it is spent on the chid. As when people are given birthday money for a child they dont have to save it for ever they can spend it toys or shoes etc as some posters have mentioned.

So if toys and clothers are ok, i presum food and even rent are probably ok as well? As when older children give housekeeping this money presumably covers food and housing costs as well.

Do us all a favour and stop trolling its getting old now.

sunshinetours

Bottom line is that this is either a troll watching all the debate going on whilst chipping in occassionally with more ridiculous comments or (sadly) it is genuinely someone who believes they are right in what they are doing and are trying to find some way of "legalising" it in their own mind. Bottom line we could all use someone elses money to reduce our debt servicing costs, doesn't make it right!

Not sure any of the further comments now will impact either way if the person is genuine - they have been told several times to seek legal advice if they wish to pursue this as it is not something (quite clearly I would have thought) that can be dealt with by an internet forum.

*Louise*

steadynerve wrote: »

H
Our 6 year old girl has acquired £10,000

.At the monent we use it for her expenses.

For example could we take a loan from our daughter and pay it back at a commercial but reasonable interest rate?

Could we charge her a rent?

Shocking. Just shocking

I don't give a monkey's how you could benefit, leave the poor kids money alone. She will have nothing left when she is 18 by the time you finish charging her 'expenses' and 'rent' !!!!!!

I can just imagine the ££££ signs in your eyes when you discovered she had been left the money.:mad:

Imagine what you would have done if she didn't get that inheritance...AND DO THAT NOW.

guymark

I know the post if growing old but I was curious as to what finally happened / transpired.

Not even sure if this was genuine, troll or a little of both - semi serious initial question which then was ridden for a laugh.

Although I admit like most, I felt more than a little uneasy at the "charge a 6/7 year old rent and food", I could also appreciate that the OP was making clear that this was a "device" to comply with a legal requirement.

It did get me thinking though, that *IF* somoene on that position and *IF* again you took as read for a moment that all intentions had reasonable intent (albeit possibly misguided), WOULD there be some way in which something like this could be done AND also to hit several specific points:-

1. Remain within the law
2. Protect childs funds
3. Benefit the child.
4. If by happy circumstance the above can occur AND benefit the parent, then possibly a way forward could be found.

As an example, a parent in charge of a trust fund might not be deemed to have acted with bad intent if he invested the money in stocks / shares - especially if he had reasonable knowledge of the market. After all once inflation is taken into account, most banks allow money to downvalue.

So.

1. The house is independently valued by five agents, the highest and lowest are disregarded a valuation of the average of the middle three is taken and accepted as being a reasonable figure.

2. The amount of money the child puts in, is expressed as percentage of the value of the property. For example and to use round figures. the house is valued at £150,000, the child pays £ 50,000. The figure of 33.33r %

3. An exit point / end position is established - 5 years time, 10 years time, when daughter is 18 etc. Let us say that the end game is when daughter is 21. At this point the daughter is entitled to her funds back with interest. If she is now 8, then this gives 13 years. It would be the first time in history if a property was worth less in 12-13 years time than it was in the present day (ignoring collapse / compulsory purchase etc).

4. The downsizing date is set to occur in 12 years time which should give a clear year for a sale to be made. It should be established that to ensure a quick sale, five valuations are taken, the top and bottom ifnored, the average of three middle ones taken and a sale price found. If however a sale does not occur in six months, the property to be downvalued 5% per 4 months until it does. Of course if the daughter - now of 20-21 years chooses to permit an extension to this time period, then she is free to do so. If however she wants her money, HER interest comes first. One the house is sold, the daughter retains 33.33r% of the gross sale - which ought to benefit her quite nicely.

5. In the meantime, attempt to find deals on LONG term investment to find what rates are around. Then, find what happens to £50,00 if invested at this rate achieve in 13 years when compounded yearly - and add to the £50,000. For a simple example, say a rate of 4% per annum was found, then this compounded over 13 years would give just under £85,000.

6. NOW attach a lien to the house for £85,000 with the daughter as the beneficiary. This part would have to be carried out by a solicitor - and ideally two, one representing the parent(s) and one the child. The lien would also state that the mortgage must continue to be paid in the same manner (not converted to interest only etc), nor could any further liens / second mortgages be attached to the property.

Providing this is done with some integrity (and the solicitors are not likely to want to end their careers over a lopsided arrangement), then I cannot see how the daughters inheritance is at risk. It is secured on a house which is somewhat more stable it would seem than even World banks.

6. I don't advocate this, I just think that *IF* the OP's intentions were entirely honourable, then there might very well be a way forward which benefits all in a manner which is legal and ethical - and most importantly, heavily protects the interest of the child under pretty much all circumstances.

> to the OP - ad interim, if you haven't done it already, you may choose to discuss with your financial advisor the merits of switching to an interest-only mortgage.


Bue skies

Mark

*Louise*

The poor kid is now 8 years old and probably the youngest child in the UK paying 'rent'

'Expenses' for a child - so ludicrous it has to be a troll post.