My kids will only ever own a property if their g/parents leave them massive amount

jyonda

Timmne wrote: »

I'm happy for my house to be sold for care when I have to go into a home; I will go to the nicest home around and I'll waste all my money on every luxury around - why worry about giving it to the government? I won't - I'll leave in a plush (if they exist) home miles away from any government run place.

When all the money from the sale of the house is gone, don't they stick you in the government run place?

Timmne

True - I'll have to stay in an average one then! I'll save up my clubcard points!

Bogof_Babe

poppy10 wrote: »

With average mortgage terms approaching 35 years, and the average FTB being 35, you will be paying the mortgage till you are 70.

Then you will need social services care and the govt will sell your home to pay for it.

Yay! It was well worth breaking your back with huge mortgage repayments for all those years! :j :T :beer: :rotfl:

Me on the other hand - I'll keep renting. When I get to 60 and stop working, I'll claim my pension, and get housing benefit to cover the rent for the rest of my life - after all I've paid taxes all my life. And being elderly I'm likely to have downsized to a smaller place which would be easily covered by the housing benefit. I'll hand down all the savings I've accumulated from my landlord subsidising my rent to my children and grandchildren, after I've spent as much of it as I want. Govt don't get a penny.

Housing benefit is means tested, so you probably won't have any savings to give to your children and grandchildren if you are poor enough to qualify for it.

As regards retiring at 60, unless you are already about 57 then you will have to wait a bit longer for your state pension. I am 55 now and won't get mine until I'm two months short of 62. If you are currently younger than about 51, you won't be able to draw it until you are 65.

The poster who asked about care homes for those unable to fund themselves is correct. They will not have much, if any, choice in where they are placed.

It is a very shortsighted view to make no provision for our own future, and I wouldn't be able to sleep at night in those circumstances.

Apologies for my contribution to the original topic meandering a bit, but it has developed into an interesting debate.

peter999

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

The poster who asked about care homes for those unable to fund themselves is correct. They will not have much, if any, choice in where they are placed.

It is a very shortsighted view to make no provision for our own future, and I wouldn't be able to sleep at night in those circumstances.

Apologies for my contribution to the original topic meandering a bit, but it has developed into an interesting debate.

It's a timebomb waiting to happen.

Care for the elderly, poor pension provision, housing costs/shortage, lack of savings.

Much of this is not under people's control.
In 10, 20, 30 years time, likely it will be worse.

peter999

Phirefly

Timmne wrote: »

I'll save up my clubcard points!

Good plan - by the time I'm in a carehome, Tesco will run the government. Oh sorry they already do.

milkydrink

miss_bargainmad wrote: »

I'm not saying at all they should get the lot.

Maybe he would feel very resentful that they got anything left to them specifically as he has no children as they can't have any. I think he resents his brother for that.

All I'm saying if I was in his position I would say fair enough I am actually quite rich, don't need the money, and it would be nice that two kids got a foot on the property ladder. Even £100K each wouldn't really get them that far where I live.

Do people with lots of money not actually think like this? If he had two kids and we had none I don't think I would begrudge his kids the money as they would need it more than we did.

If the grandparents are worth £400,000, then your husband will get his half £200,000. He can then split that between the two children & BINGO they have £100,000 each. Or do you want your husband to get his share & your children to get his brothers share:rolleyes:

[Deleted User]

I love the security that we get from being in our own home. We chose when and where to move. No tenancy agreements and the likes and did what we wanted as and when. Ok yes times were very tough during the first years of the mortgage but we reap the benefits now ie no rent and a property that we can use to downsize and release capital if needed

We have made our wills and everything left will be divided equally between the 3 children when the last one goes. Future grandchildren or not

In the meantime we have turned our noses up at getting one of those trust, inheritance-tax- avoiding wills. It is pretty likely that one of us will go before the other but the surviving spouse will get to decide what to do with the property and money and that comes first, not safeguarding any potential inheritance. We enjoy life now, we don`t go mad but we are very happy knowing that we are not going to be dependent on the state pension and can take holidays and trips.

When it comes to very old age then we want a platinum star home of our choosing and why not? It is our right, we have worked and saved for it a few shillings at a time

regularsaver1

balmaiden wrote: »

A friend of mine and her husband are very wealthy,thanks to her husbands hard work with his own construction business. She has one brother who has one daughter,both of whom do not own their own homes and have little or no money.
The friends parents told her years ago that she and her two sons would be left nothing in their will as she doesnt need anything. Very true, but said freind has confided in me how very hurt she feels for herself and her children as she says "being the eldest i was the one that went without as a child while my parents were buying their house " by the time little brother came along they were more finacialy stable and he didnt suffer the same hardships,as in worn out shoes secondhand clothes which made her the but of school jokes.
Her point being that she feels that she would like it acknowledged that she was and is cosidered equal in her parents eyes as there was a time when by " going without " she helped her parents to be where they are today.She in all probability would give her share to her brother.

Who knows maybe other posters bil was in a similar position, first born did without etc.

my mum can understand how she feels, and she and my dad have had to work hard. whilst my aunty gets help with everything

the thing is my aunty has bcome to used to the help and the buttering - not letting her get on and do her own things, by herself

margaretclare

kittie wrote: »

We have made our wills and everything left will be divided equally between the 3 children when the last one goes. Future grandchildren or not

In the meantime we have turned our noses up at getting one of those trust, inheritance-tax- avoiding wills. It is pretty likely that one of us will go before the other but the surviving spouse will get to decide what to do with the property and money and that comes first, not safeguarding any potential inheritance. We enjoy life now, we don`t go mad but we are very happy knowing that we are not going to be dependent on the state pension and can take holidays and trips.

When it comes to very old age then we want a platinum star home of our choosing and why not? It is our right, we have worked and saved for it a few shillings at a time

I agree, Kittie, and much of what you say applies to us too.

When we got married in 2002 I had the deeds changed to joint tenants, from my name alone, although I'm constantly being told that we should have tenants-in-common. Some people seem to infer that, because it's my second marriage, my DH's family shouldn't get a look-in when it comes to wills. We have skipped a generation to leave whatever residue exists then, to the 5 grandchildren, mine and his equally. The intermediate generation are doing very nicely and don't need a thing.

I also agree about funding the best possible care home, should that ever become necessary! A decade ago, while I was struggling to keep head above water, I did shifts in some of the council-funded homes. Not those run by the council - they were a lot better, but many of them no longer exist. The ones I mean are in the private sector but where local councils send people who have no funding of their own. I was appalled by how people were treated. 2 things stand out - one was a home 40 miles out of London, deep in the Essex countryside with farmland views, peopled mainly by residents whose whole lives had been spent among streets, buses, cinemas, who were far from any relatives who might visit them. The London boroughs sent them out of London because it was cheaper. The other thing is the practice of starting to 'get residents up' from 5 am. I was always asking 'Why?' and was told 'We have to get a certain number of them up and have them ready for breakfast before the day staff come on, they expect us to, and unless we start at 5 am we can't get enough of them up'. This practice may or may not still go on, but from what I hear little has changed. This is what you can look forward to if you take the view that 'the state will look after me'.

In addition, we've spent time, effort, thought and money in making this 2-bedroom bungalow as convenient and easy-care as possible, just so that we could be cared for here at home for as long as possible - no need to worry about stair-lifts etc.

Margaret

mountainofdebt

we received an inheritance from my late FIL last year which meant we were could pay off our mortgage.

When my son asked if I was pleased about not having to pay the mortgage I told him not really as the only way we had been able to do it was because his grand-dad had died.

Compare and contrast.