£25,000 in cash - what to do?

Nine_Lives

atush wrote: »

Not really. More we take a stand against benefit fraud more like. Benefits are there for people who need them, not those who want them and don't need them and fon't qualify ;-)

That's why i said personal opinion - not everyone will agree & tbh, i'm not too bothered if nobody agrees, it's just my own opinion.

I don't post a great deal in the tax forums, but i do read them.

Often i see people enquiring about benefits & rather than have their questions answered, members are trying to vet them to see if OP is worthy of an answer.
There was one the other day. Just because OP earned a nice wage & was enquiring about benefits - someone decided to ignore their question totally & rant about how they shouldn't be entitled to benefits due to their wage.

OP was only asking if they would be entitled in their situation - a yes/no question & answer. Quite simple, or so you'd think.

Now i agreed with this moaner, that on 60k, the OP really shouldn't be entitled to any benefit, BUT, that wasn't the question. IF (and that's an IF) they are entitled, then they're entitled, whether we agree or not. IF they're not entitled then they're not .... so it comes back to yes ... or no.

But people prefer to moan about others enquiring about or getting benefits instead, rather than just sticking to the questions & answering them.


As i say, it's personal opinion that this is how many threads seem to go.

cheviot

I have a Prudential pension taken out in the 80's I opted out of serps.I never put anymore money in after the early 80's I kept contacting prudential when was the best time to opt back in.When I was about 58 tI was told opted back in.I think it will effect my old age pension.I have got 16 months to go before retirement.I have also paid into a company pension for the last three years.Just the minimum ammount.

atush

K_P83 wrote: »

That's why i said personal opinion - not everyone will agree & tbh, i'm not too bothered if nobody agrees, it's just my own opinion.

I don't post a great deal in the tax forums, but i do read them.

Often i see people enquiring about benefits & rather than have their questions answered, members are trying to vet them to see if OP is worthy of an answer.
There was one the other day. Just because OP earned a nice wage & was enquiring about benefits - someone decided to ignore their question totally & rant about how they shouldn't be entitled to benefits due to their wage.

OP was only asking if they would be entitled in their situation - a yes/no question & answer. Quite simple, or so you'd think.

Now i agreed with this moaner, that on 60k, the OP really shouldn't be entitled to any benefit, BUT, that wasn't the question. IF (and that's an IF) they are entitled, then they're entitled, whether we agree or not. IF they're not entitled then they're not .... so it comes back to yes ... or no.

But people prefer to moan about others enquiring about or getting benefits instead, rather than just sticking to the questions & answering them.


As i say, it's personal opinion that this is how many threads seem to go.

I don't go to that forum, but here we have a guy saying pay all his money into a pension and live on benefits with his kids. Not a good way to raise kids or have a life. But if legal?????????? I guess it is OK.

More importantly, if someone on 60K can get benefits there is something wrong with means testing? Need to tackle that first I think.

anyway, that rant doesn't really further this discussion does it?

atush

cheviot wrote: »

I have a Prudential pension taken out in the 80's I opted out of serps.I never put anymore money in after the early 80's I kept contacting prudential when was the best time to opt back in.When I was about 58 tI was told opted back in.I think it will effect my old age pension.I have got 16 months to go before retirement.I have also paid into a company pension for the last three years.Just the minimum ammount.

you might be better off posting your own thread?

Jake'sGran

K_P83 wrote: »

If the money is in a joint account then it's basically half-&-half.

Put £26k in a joint account & that £26k no longer belongs to one person - each person now has £13k each.

So for the means tested benefits, the one on benefits will now only have £13k, not £26k. I think this means their benefits wont get effected as harshly.

If i understand rightly that is.


You'll have to be careful about what you say on here regarding benefits & what road you wish to go down. Some members don't seem to like people getting benefits, even if they're entitled to them (personal opinion).

The benefit I get is not taxable. It was my other half who
started the ball rolling. He said "I should get a carer's allowance" I knew nothing about benefits but discovered that I was entitled to one. My OH was told he was not entitled
because he gets a state pension. I though it was funny. I have nothing to hide from any of the govt agencies.

Re Joint Accounts: We have not had one since early in the marriage when I realised he hadn't got a clue about finances, and still hasn't but he is a brilliant carer.

peleus

My advise here, is to put it in a back with a lock in period of 5 years to gain huge interest. If not done properly, those money will be gone in just months.

innovate

This is an ancient thread you dug up for no good reason, and your advice is worth nothing at all to anyone - other than yourself since you seem to be on a mission to build up your post count. Don't even dream of being able to post links to your website to scam us out of money. Long time MSE users are smarter than you are.

innovate

GarryPBaker reported