how to get rid of your savings so you can get council tax benifits

le_loup

le_loup wrote: »

about poor people being !!!!less.

Wonderful software that means you can't use perfectly normal English words in case there's an Irishman listening.
F E C K L E S S

morganedge

I guess people are better off not saving and living for the moment and spending money.
If you dont save, you'll get everything paid for you anyway, lol.

How much over the threshold is she? Will a few nice expensive trips abroad take her under? Nothing wrong with that. That's not 'deprivation of capital'....that's just living. D.O.C. mainly applies when you are litereally writing cheques left-right and centre to family members in order to decrease your savings.
Think creatively.

margaretclare

morganedge wrote: »

I guess people are better off not saving and living for the moment and spending money.
If you don't save, you'll get everything paid for you anyway, lol.

This is just the kind of ridiculous assumption that has been challenged by the previous 2 or 3 posters. 'You'll get everything paid for you anyway'. What 'everything'? Just what will you 'get paid for you anyway?'

One thing that having savings does for you is give you some choice, some freedom in terms of how you live your life. I don't necessarily mean going on a cruise, although if that's what grabs you then do it. If you want or need something, you can pay for it. I like that. I don't like - have never liked - the idea of going cap-in-hand to some official for a means-tested hand-out. You can have some enjoyment.

I was taught to save long ago by people who knew darned well that they did not 'get everything paid for them anyway. This was, of course, people who lived without any Welfare State. Maybe it's just that old habits die hard, or that I realise how much better off I could have been if I'd saved from earnings, or that I'm fascinated now by seeing what I can do with it now I have more than I need just to live on. But I'll never be convinced that having savings is a bad thing or that, having the profits from a house sale, it should be 'got rid of' just to claim means-tested benefits.

How much over the threshold is she? Will a few nice expensive trips abroad take her under? Nothing wrong with that. That's not 'deprivation of capital'....that's just living. D.O.C. mainly applies when you are literally writing cheques left-right and centre to family members in order to decrease your savings.
Think creatively.

Yes, I do think creatively, and I have no possible objection to the idea of this lady taking expensive trips abroad if that's what she'd like to do. There are many places in the world that I'd like to see - maybe she feels the same. But that has never been mentioned by the OP.

I agree with jamesd - now, his response really was creative thinking. The proceeds of a house sale will be not inconsiderable, not just a few thousand over the allowed amount to claiming means-tested benefits. She could live in comfort for the rest of her days, and still have money to leave to her descendants.

mgarl10024

brasso wrote: »

one of the failures of a welfare state and a culture of dependence is that those who do 'the right thing' end up feeling aggrieved.
<snip>
But people who pay a large part of their salary in tax, and who see neighbours on benefits who seem barely less financially disadvantaged, get so hacked off that they start to ask questions like this.

Well said.

duchy

The thing is that ten years ago this question would never have got asked on a large public forum -it would hve been considered a shameful question but the whole mentality has changed and seemingly decent and respectable people are now asking openly (not saying they wouldn't have asked before but they'd be asking in a shadier enviroment).

The welfare state needs a complete overhaul but we need to get rid of the ConDems FIRST- IMO- as it would need to be replanned with socialist principles to the forefront not the banker's buddy mentality.

margaretclare

duchy wrote: »

The welfare state needs a complete overhaul but we need to get rid of the ConDems FIRST- IMO- as it would need to be replanned with socialist principles to the forefront not the banker's buddy mentality.

Heaven forbid. Socialist principles? They've been tried in various countries throughout the world and AFAIK have not succeeded.

I am not a ConDem supporter either, but I believe in free enterprise and I am fascinated to see what can be done with savings if you really take an interest in it.

MRSTITTLEMOUSE

Is'nt there the seven year rule though that providing assets were disposed of at least a full seven years before a claim they cannot be assessed as depriving themselves of assets.
I hope I'll never have to claim anything but I know some friends who have disposed of property in this way just in case.
I'd be interested to now if this is actually true though,anyone.

noh

MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »

Is'nt there the seven year rule though that providing assets were disposed of at least a full seven years before a claim they cannot be assessed as depriving themselves of assets.
I hope I'll never have to claim anything but I know some friends who have disposed of property in this way just in case.
I'd be interested to now if this is actually true though,anyone.

No it is not true there is no time limit.

duchy

What principles do you think the NHS and benefits system were built on in the first place ?
Dave and his buddies would like to demolish it -Britain's version of socialism would be considered rampently Tory sixty years ago-now it leans to the left but is still right of centre so yes I stand by what I said The benefits system needs a complete overhaul-it needs to support those who cannot support themselves genuinely and needs to stop pandering to those who don't want to make any effort for themselves. It should be seen as a top up for those in real need and a short term solution for those in difficulties not a lifestyle. That needs a socialist view not in the style of fifties or sxities socialism but the socialism we have today. (which back then admittedly would have being considered right wing )

I'm shutting up now before I get this thread moved to DT-sorry

bobthedambuilder

MRSTITTLEMOUSE wrote: »

Is'nt there the seven year rule though that providing assets were disposed of at least a full seven years before a claim they cannot be assessed as depriving themselves of assets.

I think you're getting confused with Inheritance Tax.