What would you do in my shoes.

goodytwoshoes_3

busymumof3 wrote:

I agree lynzpower but we are all looking at things from a moral point of view and what is morally right I'm afraid is not always legally the case. After all the mother would have been the recipient of the benefits

This is true but he has either spent it already or more than lightly still has it and it was him that claimed the benefits knowing she wasn't entitled why should the money be paid back from our shares of the estate ?

busymumof3

I know goodytwoshoes I think your brother's behaviour stinks. If he had involved you at the outset this whole scenario could have been avoided. If he is made aware the the cost of the care package may have to be repaid would this influence him to work together do you think?

Fran

goodytwoshoes wrote:

This is true but he has either spent it already or more than lightly still has it and it was him that claimed the benefits knowing she wasn't entitled why should the money be paid back from our shares of the estate ?

It won't be paid back from the estate, they will chase your brother for it.

Looking at it another way though, if she should have been living on this money, then it wouldn't have been part of the estate anyway. She would have spent the equivalent of Income Support/Council Tax Benefit or any means tested benefit as living expenses so it never would have been yours. The amount that would have been part of the estate is the difference between the amount paid out by DWP that shouldn't have been and the total sum involved. If what he was doing at the time was legal, ie he had power of attorney and therefore could transfer her money (not that I know whether this is legal in this situation), then there's nothing you can do about it.

taxi97w

i'm not sure if the money that went out of your mother's account 2 years ago (legally or illegally) would be classified as part of her estate 2 years later.

Also, don't think DWP can investigate your brother's financial situation if he wasn't in receipt of benefits or registered with them (even though he was POA for your mum) They could look at your mother's finances though as this in their duristiction.

busymumof3

taxi97w wrote:

i'm not sure if the money that went out of your mother's account 2 years ago (legally or illegally) would be classified as part of her estate 2 years later.

Also, don't think DWP can investigate your brother's financial situation if he wasn't in receipt of benefits or registered with them (even though he was POA for your mum) They could look at your mother's finances though as this in their duristiction.

I'm afraid that's how I understand things too taxi97w. It really stinks from goodytwoshoes point of view. I would be suspicious that this is why her brother is keeping such a low profile. Hope he feels very bad about things. If it does come to it and the local authority and/or DWP demand repayment can only hope that he would do the decent thing and pay it from the "gift" he received. From what goodytwoshoes is led to understand the DWP benefits repayable would probably be dwarfed by the cost of the care package her mum received. I know from current experience that these costs can be astronomical. Local authorities can investigate but they need to show that there was a "deliberate deprivation of assets".

goodytwoshoes_3

busymumof3 wrote:

I know goodytwoshoes I think your brother's behaviour stinks. If he had involved you at the outset this whole scenario could have been avoided. If he is made aware the the cost of the care package may have to be repaid would this influence him to work together do you think?

I doubt it as I think he blames me for all this.

goodytwoshoes_3

Fran wrote:

It won't be paid back from the estate, they will chase your brother for it.

Looking at it another way though, if she should have been living on this money, then it wouldn't have been part of the estate anyway. She would have spent the equivalent of Income Support/Council Tax Benefit or any means tested benefit as living expenses so it never would have been yours. The amount that would have been part of the estate is the difference between the amount paid out by DWP that shouldn't have been and the total sum involved. If what he was doing at the time was legal, ie he had power of attorney and therefore could transfer her money (not that I know whether this is legal in this situation), then there's nothing you can do about it.

Yes I know what you mean, but I doubt she would have spent all £80,000 in a couple of years, so there would have been a fair bit left. Also she should have be able to cover her day today costs by her state pension.

goodytwoshoes_3

taxi97w wrote:

i'm not sure if the money that went out of your mother's account 2 years ago (legally or illegally) would be classified as part of her estate 2 years later.

Also, don't think DWP can investigate your brother's financial situation if he wasn't in receipt of benefits or registered with them (even though he was POA for your mum) They could look at your mother's finances though as this in their duristiction.

If there is evidence that he has commited fraud then surely they can look into his finances as part of their investigation. The solicitor has said that they will look at the last 7 years and if money/assets were transferred in that time it would be seen as disposing of assets.Also don't forget when he signed the forms on her behalf he would have signed a declaration saying everything was true.

busymumof3

goodytwoshoes, have a look on this site POA At a quick glance it seems to be saying that there are very strict rules on using a POA to your own advantage.

At the end of the day I am sure you only want to be treated equally and that is what your mum's will makes clear that she wanted too. Don't really know what to suggest except arming yourself with as much info as possible and deciding what to do from there.

taxi97w

goodytwoshoes wrote:

If there is evidence that he has commited fraud then surely they can look into his finances as part of their investigation.

I think they would have to ask the police on their behalf. And then the police have to be willing to pursue the matter based on available evidence.