We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
House in childrens name to avoid care home fees in future?
Comments
-
pollypenny wrote: »
No. she's out out screw others pensioners, like me, who still pay tax. The 'government' is us. I don't mind helping someone in need, but not someone, who has been devious.
Someone in need? You mean someone who's squandered whatever money they had, or just not bothered to work for any. I'd say they were the devious ones!0 -
Well, there are some people who have had a hard life and been unable to save. I am happy to contribute to a welfare state to help those - not people who can well afford to pay their way, but give their assets to their kids.Member #14 of SKI-ers club
Words, words, they're all we have to go by!.
(Pity they are mangled by this autocorrect!)0 -
pollypenny wrote: »Well, there are some people who have had a hard life and been unable to save. I am happy to contribute to a welfare state to help those - not people who can well afford to pay their way, but give their assets to their kids.
Same here, and it's worth bearing in mind that any house owned by someone retired or close to retirment may have only cost them a few thousand when they bought it. It may have substantially increased in value since then, but they didn't have to do anything to promote that increase..................
....I'm smiling because I have no idea what's going on ...:)0 -
It doesn't mention it in the opening post, but is your Mum aware of your proposal?0
-
OP could, of course, look after his mum in his own house.Member #14 of SKI-ers club
Words, words, they're all we have to go by!.
(Pity they are mangled by this autocorrect!)0 -
I know these are points that have already been made but I have quite a lot of experience in this area.
Firstly it is inevitable that the systems of paying for care is going to change over this Parliament. A commission is due to report on this next year and then, another Parliament might change things in different ways etc etc. One thing that is absolutely certain is that the situation is not going to stay the same as it is now so betting about what might happen in a couple of decades (or more/or never) might not be wise.
Secondly, as stated, it might be more favourable to use the money from a house sale to pay for a much nicer residential home than one the council might fund! (there are some wonderful care homes that can be funded but the more you are able to pay, the more likely there is to be a better standard of care - this is a VERY general assumption but still, certainly something I'd want to bear in mind if it were related to a family member of mine).
The last thing to bear in mind is that a tiny minority of older adults actually end up needing residential care.0 -
Liquorice_Twirls wrote: »What happens if you get married, then later divorced and your soon to be ex wants their share of your "property"?
What if you have a run of bad luck or illness and your "asset" means that you don't get the full benefits to which you would otherwise be entitled?
It's a nice idea in theory but it's not a risk free strategy doing it the way you suggest.
I know someone in a similar position who jointly 'owns' her parents home with 2 siblings, on the basis that they get to live there as long as possible. This lady's marriage can be a bit rocky at times and may not last and, whilst I do not think he would, does this mean her husband could try to make her sell her share if they were to split? She only owns 1/3 of the home so how could he force a sale? Likewise I believe there is something in writing which prevents the sale whilst mum/dad are there,
Could make a massive difference in a settlement as her share would probably be worth £60-£70K0 -
I know someone in a similar position who jointly 'owns' her parents home with 2 siblings, on the basis that they get to live there as long as possible. This lady's marriage can be a bit rocky at times and may not last and, whilst I do not think he would, does this mean her husband could try to make her sell her share if they were to split? She only owns 1/3 of the home so how could he force a sale? Likewise I believe there is something in writing which prevents the sale whilst mum/dad are there,
Could make a massive difference in a settlement as her share would probably be worth £60-£70K
He couldn't force a sale but the value of her share of the house would be taken into account.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards