What can i spend my mum's money on?

PennyForThem_2

I bought a house in SE21 for 10K in 1972 and sold it for 125k in 1982.

For us 10K was an enormous amt of money and the mortgage was a struggle, so we did not go out and deferred holidays.

We made a choice.

Might I point out that coucil tennants are within their rights to pass on their tenancy to named receipients - how does this differ from someone who owns their house except that their tenancy isn't taken into consideration when involving funding social care.

There are legal ways to ensure that your assets are protected - go see a solicitor to make a will to do this.

monkeyspanner

Errata wrote: »

That's a fair point. It's also worth remembering that people in their late '60s onwards could well have bought their house for just a few thousand quid and watched it increase in value beyond their wildest dreams or expectations.
For example: a house in West London in 1967 for £4k now worth £200k. It belongs to my relative.

I thought that was the purpose of Inheritance tax. Many of us can also remember petrol at the equivalent of around 5p a litre and beer at less than 6p a pint in 1967.

Seems to me that care home fees are a tax on the IHT nil rate band between £23250 and £325000. If we assume the average house price is £165000 and a care home costing £600 a week and the average care home resident spending 18 months in that home that is a tax rate of about 33%.

ariba10

Errata wrote: »

That's a fair point. It's also worth remembering that people in their late '60s onwards could well have bought their house for just a few thousand quid and watched it increase in value beyond their wildest dreams or expectations.
For example: a house in West London in 1967 for £4k now worth £200k. It belongs to my relative.

We bought our house for a few thousand quid.

My wages were below £8.00 a week and we were called fools for "Putting a rope around our necks"

You pays your money and take your chances.

imsi

Just to clarify.
My use of the term legal (ish) was because I assumed that there would be some grey areas in terms of amounts spent or borderline uses of her money. Yes I am seeking ways to reduce her assets but with guidance as to what is or probably is legal.
I see this as no more morally wrong than claiming all of my income tax allowances and arranging my finances to minimise my tax bill.
I'm guessing if my mother smoked £50 worth of fags a week that she wouldn't be expected to find that spent money when she needed funding. If I buy an expensive wheelchair for her days out, or bring the hairdresser in weekly instead of monthly, my mums quality of life improves but probably in a rather costly way.
The insurance premium for her care was more than double what her house is worth, which suggests to me that she is expected to live rather longer than her and my funds can support her.
Since then I have received a letter this week that her home is upping charges from £650 per week to £725 per week and I guess that this will be happening every year.
I have missed out on the 6 week disregard through lack of information. Do I get extra credit from those of you on the moral high ground for sparing the council the cost? If I'd been clever enough to transfer assets years ago as many do would I have been wrong.
I am trying to find out is the maximum that my mother is entitled to and, yes, whether there may be any loopholes to exploit. More akin to tax avoidance than tax evasion.
I would still welcome helpful advice.

mary-op

When my mother sold her house and moved into a care home following a stroke she took out a pre-paid funeral plan -not so much to get rid of some money but to make things simpler for me and my brother when the time came. She also bought a headstone for Dad's grave and had her name on it with his so all that needed adding on later were her dates.
She did give a lump sum to my brother and me to cover our travelling costs she said (he lived abroad and I lived several hundred miles away). She felt she should do this for us and wanted to.
Other than that she made purchased for her little flat at the home -new recliner chair, curtains etc. and other bits and pieces that made it feel more like home for her.
But none of this was to reduce her capital......it was purely and simply because she wanted to.

monkeyspanner

Lets hope your mum does live as long as the insurers thought she might. If the expediture is for your mum's benefit and there is a need for it e.g. the wheelchair I can't see anyone would object.

pollypenny

McKneff wrote: »

You are asking the very people who would be funding her care for help as to how defraud them selves.

Very succinctly put! I am fed up with people coming n and asking how their parent can stay in a home on our money, so they can pass on their 'hard earned' assets.

My assets were very hard earned, as was my pension and, while I am happy to help those in need, those to can afford to pay must pay.

Errata

pollypenny wrote: »

Very succinctly put! I am fed up with people coming n and asking how their parent can stay in a home on our money, so they can pass on their 'hard earned' assets.

My assets were very hard earned, as was my pension and, while I am happy to help those in need, those to can afford to pay must pay.

I couldn't agree more. I'm also fed up with people not understanding they did nothing to earn a house that's now worth many multiples of what they paid for it, except sit in it.

pollypenny

Whilst I agree that our houses are valued beyond our wildest dreams from when we bought them, it was a heck of a struggle to buy our first and third properties. I don't mean we own three!! The 15% mortgage rate nearly ruined us.

Posters talk about their careful parents never having smoked and had holidays. Well, neither did we, like many.

Where we had a real advantage over youngsters was in MIRAS.

monkeyspanner

pollypenny wrote: »

Very succinctly put! I am fed up with people coming n and asking how their parent can stay in a home on our money, so they can pass on their 'hard earned' assets.

My assets were very hard earned, as was my pension and, while I am happy to help those in need, those to can afford to pay must pay.

And they do pay. As self-funding care home residents they will usually pay substantially more for exactly the same services as council supported residents. Thus subsidising the council and hence reducing your council taxes.