How much is 'enough' for a single pensioner?

seven-day-weekend

Errata wrote: »

You've been very fortunate. Don't belittle those who've been less fortunate than you for whatever reason. It does you no credit.

I don't agree Margaret Clare has been fortunate. She has been widowed and had no choice but to stand on her own two feet to pay the bills, not having the choice of squandering hundreds of thousands and then having a fresh injection of capital from another rich husband. And afaik she hasn't wasted someone else's inheritance either.

Sorry if this sounds a bit harsh, I just felt it was so unfair on MC:mad:

Parsimonia

margaretclare wrote: »

That was a really foolish promise to make. None of us can foresee what's round the corner. Just as well you do live in a one-bedroom property!

I made the promise and I'll do my best to keep it if and when the need arises. I've been a nurse my entire working life (firstly in nursing homes and now I'm a sister in a large teaching hospital on a dementia ward) and I have more inkling than most what my promise entailed. She knows I couldn't do it if I'm still working, but given her excellent health and the fact that I'm 7 years from retirement, it's not unfeasible to assume that if and when she's infirm to the extent that she'd require round the clock care this will occur post-retirement rather than pre-retirement. And whilst providing live-in care will be impractical given our respective 1-bedroom properties, it takes literally 3 minutes to cover the distance from our house to hers, and with modern panic alarms and remote monitoring equipment, I could know within seconds if there was a problem, and reach her within minutes if she needed me in the middle of the night etc...

Where there's a will there's a way!

Also, she is fully aware that my promise came with one further very important caveat - my husband's health comes first, and if his health deteriorates to the extent that he needs nursing, then all promises are null and void.

Even so, I'd try to support her to remain in her own home rather than have her go into a nursing home for as long as I could...I was always taught that that's what families are for, to love and care for their weakest members in their hour of greatest need. I don't think that makes me gullible - gullibility implies I'm unaware that she may be undeserving, or unaware that she may be taking advantage of my better nature. I'm not unaware of either of these things...but I married her son for better for worse, and as he and I are the only members of her family who live close enough to take day-to-day responsibility, I don't feel able to shirk that responsibility.

She moved two hundred and sixty miles to be closer to us to give us her support when my husband became seriously ill, sacrificing in the process her close friendships, her proximity to her daughter and her siblings etc. It's meant that she's now somewhat isolated from the rest of her family (who apart from my SIL are all older than her, and not really up to long journeys to visit). She is our responsibility....no getting away from that, I'm afraid!

However, during this thread I've asserted several times that she's kind, but perhaps I should illustrate HOW she's kind, so that it's not just words. She takes in loads of ill, unwanted and abandoned animals - both wild ones and pets - and there are always at least 4 poor creatures that she is nursing back to health or helping to overcome behavioural problems from having been badly treated by their previous owners. She also fosters rescue dogs and cats - all of this in her little one bedroom bungalow. Moreover, she donates loads of her time and money to animal charities (she gallivants during the day with her well heeled friends, but at evenings and weekends when her friends' husbands are home and she's left to her own devices she spends her time knitting blankets for animal rescue, fundraising, doing charity carboot sales, hosting bakesales etc to raise money for her little animal charity).If there's ever a disaster such as seals being washed ashore or horses being mistreated, she's the first there with her wellies on offering her help and assistance - yes, they may be Barbour wellies, and she'll arrive in a cloud of Chanel No 5, but that doesn't stop her rolling up her (expensive, designer) sleeves and getting stuck in.

People are very complex - and she is more complex than most! I've never come across anyone quite like her - someone who wouldn't hesitate for a second to picking up a poor cowering dog that's covered in faeces and cradling it in her lap, not giving a hoot that she's wearing an Armani suit that cost more than I earn in an entire month.

So, you see, someone can do despicable and shameful things but still be kind and generous and caring. I think spending is a form of illness for her - a form of addiction - that makes her do unkind and morally unethical things (to her step sons). But she's still a decent person underneath. We just need - somehow - to break the addiction and 'cure' the illness, and I'm not convinced, yet, that she'd beyond redemption.

This week was the first time EVER that she's admitted she has a problem. She came to us and asked for our help of her own free will, and whilst it's not been easy, she's taken a huge step forward in giving us her credit cards and her cheque book and allowing us to delve into all the murky secrets of her finances. I think that's a really positive step forwards...and whilst I expect lots of steps backwards, and don't for a second think it will be plain sailing, I am optimistic that we can pull things back from the brink.

I know many of you think I'm foolish, gullible and a martyr and you probably think your advice is being ignored. I can assure you I've read every single response and it's given me lots of food for thought. I really do appreciate your input, and I hope I'm not coming across as a totally stubborn fool who's burying my head in the sand!

seven-day-weekend

You sound like a very nice lady and I agree it is right to help your m-i-l if you possibly can.

And I totally agree that nice people can do bad things. I do them all the time.

I wish you well and hope that your m-i-l finally realises how unreasonably she is behaving.

pollypenny

It's because your stepsons are in poor health that they need to be involved?

Whether that is personally or though the invention of a solicitor to prevent her selling this house, is up to them. This foolish woman is spending money that they may well need, not want, in their old age.

itsanne

pollypenny wrote: »

It's because your stepsons are in poor health that they need to be involved?

Whether that is personally or though the invention of a solicitor to prevent her selling this house, is up to them. This foolish woman is spending money that they may well need, not want, in their old age.

Absolutely. That's why i said it's even more important she wreaks no more damage earlier.

I think the stepsons' rights, and their father's intentions, have been terribly neglected in the midst of MIL's spending spree.




I hope all goes well for you. At least handing over the cards is a step in the right direction!


Edited as I'd misread that Parsimonia's husband was a trustee.

Parsimonia

itsanne wrote: »

Absolutely. That's why i said it's even more important she wreaks no more damage earlier.

I think the stepsons' rights, and their father's intentions, have been terribly neglected in the midst of MIL's spending spree.




I hope all goes well for you. At least handing over the cards is a step in the right direction!


Edited as I'd misread that Parsimonia's husband was a trustee.

My hubby isn't a trustee - one of his step brothers is a trustee, and the other is a family friend. I too think the rights of the stepsons and their dad's desires and intentions have been overlooked - but I'm not sure of the legal position, given they consented to the sale of the original property.

Her current bungalow is owned outright in her name...so not sure of the legal position if she were to sell it and spend the money, or indeed if she were to die still owning the house but leave it to (say) the RSPCA. Would the stepsons have any redress? I'm not at all legally savvy so I haven't a clue!

margaretclare

Parsimonia, I didn't say *you* were gullible. I had in mind the 2 older men, boy-friends aged 90 or so, who were in the offing.

itsanne

Parsimonia wrote: »

My hubby isn't a trustee - one of his step brothers is a trustee, and the other is a family friend. I too think the rights of the stepsons and their dad's desires and intentions have been overlooked - but I'm not sure of the legal position, given they consented to the sale of the original property.

Her current bungalow is owned outright in her name...so not sure of the legal position if she were to sell it and spend the money, or indeed if she were to die still owning the house but leave it to (say) the RSPCA. Would the stepsons have any redress? I'm not at all legally savvy so I haven't a clue!

No, I realise your husband isn't a trustee - that's why I deleted a paragraph I'd written thinking he was.

As the house which was sold had been left with only a lifetime interest for your MIL, I'm pretty confident that the new house will be the same - the four who should have inherited the original house didn't just give up everything. I think you (MIL really) need some legal advice to prevent what has the potential to become a real mess. It might be worth posting on the house buying, renting and selling board with just the salient information about the house sale, will and MIL's thoughts of selling the current house for some more knowledgeable advice if you want a quick idea, but you really need some proper advice from Citizens Advice or a solicitor's free first half hour. (More than one solicitor if necessary.)

No matter what you think of your MIL, as far as their inheritance is concerned, her behaviour towards both her stepchildren and her own children has been extremely selfish at best. It's concerning that she appears completely oblivious to anyone else's situation if she's still considering the idea of downsizing again. I really hope you are successful in curbing her spending, not least because it would be a weight off your shoulders, but if you aren't it's time she should face the consequences. She's fortunate because she has the cushion of a comfortable pension. If she builds up debts despite that, please don't help her try to extricate herself at the expense of the rest of the family.

I'm conscious of sounding rather negative. I'm truly not at all negative towards you. I am concerned that things could go badly for you and your family. I wish you very well in every respect.

getmore4less

Parsimonia wrote: »

My hubby isn't a trustee - one of his step brothers is a trustee, and the other is a family friend. I too think the rights of the stepsons and their dad's desires and intentions have been overlooked - but I'm not sure of the legal position, given they consented to the sale of the original property.

Her current bungalow is owned outright in her name...so not sure of the legal position if she were to sell it and spend the money, or indeed if she were to die still owning the house but leave it to (say) the RSPCA. Would the stepsons have any redress? I'm not at all legally savvy so I haven't a clue!

It needs the terms of the trust,

Did all 4 beneficiaries agree to give her the money or just 2 of them?

How has this been documented.

What part did the family friend play in overseeing this they should know there job and the terms of the trust.

[Deleted User]

You keep making reference to her shopping as an addiction, would she accept or at the very least willing to try to accept some help from a professional who specialises in addictions?

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/addiction/Pages/addictionwhatisit.aspx

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/addiction/Pages/treatingaddiction.aspx

She might benefit from CBT, MI, or councelling?

(I imagine she has to recognise a problem first though!)