Advice on parents money?

monkeyspanner

p00hsticks wrote: »

It's never really 'free' though is it ? Someone, somewhere has to pay, and if it's not the person receiving the care, then it's someone else, usually the tax payer.

To take an extreme example, would you really be happy to see ex-RBS boss Sir Fred Goodwin living in a care home for free for the rest of his life with costs met by you and I as taxpayers whilst he continues to rake in his £650,000 a year pension ?

No I wouldn't, but I think it is highly unlikely that he would want to be in the type of care home that Local Authorities are prepared to fund. Besides anything else he might have to sit and talk to some of his ex-customers or shareholders and I think the state has actually funded lifetime care for him already as it was substantially state funds which allowed his pension fund to be made up.

Care homes have never been free under the state welfare system and are never likely to be. I think also if the Scottish system is examined it doesn't actually turn out to be what it seems.

Errata

p00hsticks wrote: »

It's never really 'free' though is it ? Someone, somewhere has to pay, and if it's not the person receiving the care, then it's someone else, usually the tax payer.

To take an extreme example, would you really be happy to see ex-RBS boss Sir Fred Goodwin living in a care home for free for the rest of his life with costs met by you and I as taxpayers whilst he continues to rake in his £650,000 a year pension ?

If you want to open a discussion on how care of older people should be funded you can start a thread in Discussion Time, which would be more appropriate than using this thread. A thread already exists on DT to discuss the finances of Fred Goodwin.

EdInvestor

Errata wrote: »

It looks like there is a shortfall of at least £1k a month. Is the Local Authority meetng the shortfall and has it put a charge on the house?

In the event of a charge having been put on the house, is it still possible to switch from ownership via joint tenancy to tenants in common?

Errata

EdInvestor wrote: »

In the event of a charge having been put on the house, is it still possible to switch from ownership via joint tenancy to tenants in common?

I honestly don't know. Logic tells me it wouldn't be possible as Tenants in Common specifies the share each Tenant holds making it possible for the split to be as low as 95/5 , and 5% could easily be far less than any charge.
Wouldn't a charge on a property be done through the Land Registry?

Robert_Sterling_3

Errata wrote: »

Wouldn't a charge on a property be done through the Land Registry?

Yes that is exactly what it means.

Mojisola

I don't think that they can put a charge on the house if the spouse still lives there.

Errata

Mojisola wrote: »

I don't think that they can put a charge on the house if the spouse still lives there.

They certainly can, that's the whole point. If the spouse, or another specific dependent, wasn't living there the property would be sold and the money used to pay for the care.

moonrakerz

chesky369 wrote: »

Do you mean your mother's house or your aunt's house passed to you?

My Aunt's house was left to my mother, but my mother "varied" the Will (after her sister's death) so that it came direct to me. Legally, my mother never owned the house.

Biggles

Mojisola wrote: »

I don't think that they can put a charge on the house if the spouse still lives there.

Yes, that's correct, the value of the home is totally disregarded if your spouse or partner lives there.

Errata

Biggles wrote: »

Yes, that's correct, the value of the home is totally disregarded if your spouse or partner lives there.

Full and accurate information on Age Concern factsheet here http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/Documents/FS38Treatment_of_the_former_home_as_capital.pdf