Putting home into family trust to avoid nursing home fees

Savvy_Sue

OK, for clarity, my use of the word 'scroungers' was taken from someone else's post, and with hindsight I should have put it in quotes rather than just 'lifted' it.

Because there are indeed many reasons why people do not have savings / a house / assets which take them over the limit IF it's deemed that they need residential care. In some cases one might feel that unwise choices have been made, in others it was probably Hobson's choice.

so it's fortunate that far fewer of us will face this decision than we often believe ... although giving some thought to it before it looks as if it will be necessary probably gets better results!

seven-day-weekend

Dunroamin wrote: »

Sorry MC, I don't agree with you on this.

As I've posted before, my mother paid the married woman's stamp and I can remember her telling it meant she wouldn't get a pension in her own right. She wasn't an educated woman or even well informed so, if she knew this fact, it must have been common knowledge. Like all the women who did this, she chose to have more money in her pocket and rely on my dad's pension.

I knew it too (started work in 1966 though, married in 1971, so a different generation to your mother). I paid full stamp and have full State Pension in my own right.

However my friend who is only a few years older than me thought she 'had' to pay married womens' stamp. She didn't realise there was a choice. She did know though that it would not qualify her for a pension.

Another lady I know, my age, never worked (married and started a family at 16, was a homemaker), never paid any form of stamp, but thought she was hard done to when my friend and myself who had always paid full NI got our pensions at 60 and she got nothing (had to wait for her husband to become of retirement age).

So it appears that even amongst we relatively young pensioners, there are some who don't understand how the system works.

Dunroamin

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I knew it too (started work in 1966 though, married in 1971, so a different generation to your mother). I paid full stamp and have full State Pension in my own right.

However my friend who is only a few years older than me thought she 'had' to pay married womens' stamp. She didn't realise there was a choice. She did know though that it would not qualify her for a pension.

Another lady I know, my age, never worked (married and started a family at 16, was a homemaker), never paid any form of stamp, but thought she was hard done to when my friend and myself who had always paid full NI got our pensions at 60 and she got nothing (had to wait for her husband to become of retirement age).

So it appears that even amongst we relatively young pensioners, there are some who don't understand how the system works.

I'm sure you're right but some people are wilfully ignorant, however much information you give them!

margaretclare

I don't think I was ever told the details about the so-called 'small stamp, just that it was 'what you did when you got married'. I remember going into an office and making the change. Nowadays you'd be given leaflets (even in several languages!!!) to make sure you knew all the implications. No one did then. As a young bride I hadn't thought as far ahead as getting a pension through my new husband. I only discovered the full implications a few weeks on, when that marriage broke down and I needed to claim unemployment benefit. My former colleagues, and friends, explained it all in words of one syllable and I changed back again PDQ. When we got back together a couple of years later I didn't make the change again.

People have different ideas of this. I met a woman at CAB when I was training as a volunteer adviser, she was our trainer. She said her mother had always paid full stamp but died in her 60s before she'd had chance to enjoy it, so that was why she thought it wasn't worth it. My mum also paid it so that she could retire at 60, died before her 65th birthday, but I thought the opposite to that lady. I thought it WAS worth it!

A woman in the village where I grew up, when I was a kid, used to buy the stamps and stick them on her card - she didn't work (outside the home) but she didn't want to 'have to get money from him when she was old'. She always thought it was worthwhile a woman having her own money, a thought which experience has caused to bite deep into my psyche too. I remember my mum - who never married, although she always thought Prince Charming was just round the corner - buying those stamps, sticking them on her card and carefully writing the date across each stamp. She was better off post-60 than she'd ever been in her life, doing menial jobs for employers who basically 'used' her.

I've met a lot of people who, as 7DWE says, thought you 'had to'. It was just a common and widespread assumption. There were no leaflets, there was no publicity, not like there has been over recent years e.g. pension credit 'Pick it up, it's yours'. It was just word of mouth AFAIK. I've also heard of married women in a job where there was a wages clerk or finance department who just made the change for her without even asking her say-so.

I still think it was the biggest con in the world perpetrated against working women.

dzug1

margaretclare wrote: »

I still think it was the biggest con in the world perpetrated against working women.

I don't think it was a 'con' as such - not a deliberate one anyway. Just the received wisdom of an earlier generation turning out to be inappropriate for a future one.

Dunroamin

dzug1 wrote: »

I don't think it was a 'con' as such - not a deliberate one anyway. Just the received wisdom of an earlier generation turning out to be inappropriate for a future one.

And I think that there are many women pleading ignorance of the conditions, having had the extra money in their pockets at the time and then wanting the same pension rights as those who did actually cough up!

seven-day-weekend

Dunroamin wrote: »

And I think that there are many women pleading ignorance of the conditions, having had the extra money in their pockets at the time and then wanting the same pension rights as those who did actually cough up!

Yes, i think that too.

The woman I mentioned above, who had never paid any NI, felt it was really unfair that my friend and I, who had both paid full stamp for the required number of years and beyond, should get our pensions and she didn't, although we were all the same age, She actually talked about 'discrimination :eek:!

As to those who paid the small stamp, if they knowingly made that choice, then I think it is more than 'fair' that they get 60% based on their husband's contribution. After all, that's what they signed up for.

margaretclare

As to those who paid the small stamp, if they knowingly made that choice, then I think it is more than 'fair' that they get 60% based on their husband's contribution. After all, that's what they signed up for.

Yes, I agree with this. By the 60s maybe people were a bit better-informed. My perception, my memory, was of the 50s, when it was just accepted as 'what you did'. If you knowingly make a choice, in full knowledge of all the facts and the likely consequences, that is one thing. My perception is that many women just went along with what they thought was appropriate at the time.

There was a 'minority report' written in response to Beveridge's original report published in 1942 in which 2 feminists, women academics, challenged his belief that married women had no need for pension provision in their own right because 'she has other duties' i.e 'replenish the race'. Although women had done a lot of valuable work in both world wars, doing jobs often that they'd never have been thought capable of, it was assumed they wouldn't go to work in the post-war world, however. Women did, though! Even if it was part-time, even if they thought of it as 'pin money', the idea of the full-time housewife was on its way out. The changes in April 1978 meant that a woman who'd stayed at home to bring up children could be credited with those years - Home Responsibilities Protection. Also when SERPS came in, now S2P. These on their own were 2 very good reasons why more women should have been offered the chance to pay full NI. Val75 would have earned a better pension through SERPS. I get extra for the years I wasn't 'contracted-out' into an employer's scheme, and DH gets most of his pension through SERPS. Both SERPS and HRP were very good ideas, but closed to those paying the 'small stamp'.

jmt

I have sat this afternoon reading through this very interesting thread and although the original OP never returned, I would like to comment on his posting.

I am mid 40's (so why am I reading an over 50's money saving ) but my DH is 10 years older and 6.5 years away from retirement :j

I totally disagree with original OP as I think that fees should be paid from assets or family should take over the care and then inherit.

My MIL was widowed 2 years ago and she recently asked us if we wanted to inherit her property. Her idea was that we could sell our home and have our money and move in with her (she would convert large garage into granny flat). This would mean that she would not need to go into a care home and she would leave us 100% of the property, cutting her eldest son out totally (or leaving a few £1000 so he could not to contest her will) as she is adamant that it is the people who look after her who should benefit.

For me it took no time at all to come to a decision. I am not prepared to give up the early years of mine and DH retirement (should we make it) to look after someone. You may think I am heartless, but I cannot be bought and I want to spend MY life doing what I want to do. My MIL has savings and her home to cover what is required and when it is gone, the state will take over.

I look at life....I came in with nothing, I have worked for everything I have achieved and own, nobody has ever given me anything and I will go out with nothing.

lessonlearned

This is a really interesting thread.

My husband was diagnosed with a rare and serious neurological condition in 2006. I was his carer for 6 years. He moved into a residential home three months ago. It was an agonising decision for me to have to make but it is for the best. He is 54 and I am 61.

I would like to share a couple of things with you if it helps.

1. Our doctor gave me a piece of very good advice. We knew that residential care would become the only viable option for us eventually. My doctor advised me about 18 months ago to start looking at homes. His exact words were "Start looking and planning now, don't wait until you have a crisis and are forced to accept what you are offered. Shop around and let your husband try a few out first".

Wise words. I looked at 12 homes and OH tried out 3 (respite care).

The home he lives in is a specialist unit for residents with neurological conditions, not all residents are elderly although some are, especially those with dementia. Young or old they are all treated with courtesy, respect and kindness.

It is not the "poshest" of homes, the furniture is shabby, the carpets are threadbare and yes it is a little "whiffy" at times - after all many of the residents are incontinent.

However, none of that matters, because the staff are wonderful and the residents are treated with the utmost tender loving care and accorded the respect they deserve.

Within reason the residents can do what they want when they want because the staff are adamant that for each resident it is their home, it is not a facility run for the convenience of the staff.

2. I gave up my career to look after my OH and I'm still reaping the financial repercussions - my old age is not going to be as financially easy as we had planned. I am not sure I would do it again. I have paid a high price. I have damaged my own health and ruined my finances.

3. Working your way through the benefits system, funding packages for care home fees is a nightmare, extremely time-consuming and stressful beyond belief. Get expert help and advice.

4. As a society we need to start thinking about other ways of caring for the elderly/sick/vulnerable.

5. I have worked as a manager in a Sheltered Housing complex run by a charity. I was very impressed with how well sheltered housing can work. The residents paid their rent and maintenance charges. Residents have full autonomy, living in their own small apartments, have the facilities of gardens, laundry rooms, communal sitting rooms if so desired. We had residents from the age of 55 plus - my eldest lady was 98.

Sheltered housing offers independent living in a safe and secure environment. Residents can socialise or not. I think they offer a really good "half way house" and can often avoid the need for residential care.

I think the idea of communal living is a very good one and I think that when my circumstances demand it I shall be looking at retirement villages, housing co-operatives or sheltered accommodation.

I would be more than happy to live in the complex where I once worked.

6. I agree with other posters, money might not make you happy or healthy - but it can help buy you a more comfortable old age.

7. I am not going to get into the debate about who should or shouldn't pay for care. I have read your post Seven Day Weekend - I am very impressed with what you have done to help your son.

Your actions have been thoughtful, considered, legal and morally right. I am hoping to do something similar to help my boys. I will downsize and buy something smaller, passing some of the equity to them to use as a deposit.

They will be on the first rung of the property ladder, I will have a home to live in and an asset to fund my nursing home fees if that is necessary - let's hope not for another 20 years or so at least. My parents are 86 & 87, still going strong and still living in their own home, so hopefully I have inherited good genes.