Transfer of Equity?

thorsoak

mumps wrote: »

Did I accuse you of being a Tory voter? I don't think so. What on earth has "innit" got to do with it? I have no idea what you are talking about, who mentioned "innit"?

Margaretclare was not referring to your post (unless you and Toddy Senior are one and the same) see post #47) ..............

pollypenny

Toddy_Senior wrote: »

Sorry to disappoint you Polly (surname: Wally-Doodah?) but, having read posts subsequent to yours, I've come to understand that some of you can't read simple English because "Toddy Senior" doesn't look a bit like "Mr Toad"!
I originally posted what I thought was a simple question, principally because I wanted to gauge the depth of feeling about how much my wife and I could expect to leave to our son and I'd heard rumours that the £23,000 figure might be going up. It must be obvious to even you lot that successive governments have treated the issue of paying for care home fees as a political "hot potato" and now have no interest in it at all, as they now try to buy our votes in other ways. Replies to my original post have ranged from "go to Dignitas" (over my dead body, sunshine!) to "your house value is not due to your hard work, it's due to rising house prices". If such is the case, how about this for an idea? Allow each UK house owner to pass on £75,000 as an inheritance (to a maximum of two children) and then combine the remaining UK house equity to fund all our care home needs? I guess you lot in the South of England will be more than happy to do this - after all you've benefited much more than we have in the North because of rising house prices - and not hard work! You all seem abundantly happy with the "Eton Mess" we have on the government's front benches and you're also well versed in the art of patronising new posters such as myself. I asked my "precious" son (and you'll never know just how precious he is to us!) to read your replies to my original post and he couldn't believe the angst displayed. I also can't believe that I've been lectured to by an Essex gel (innit?) and spoken down to by Harry's Dad (surname: Gently-Patronising?) However, should I ever need to recommend an on-line glee club for Tory wrinklies, I now know where to direct my friends. As we live in the North of England - check your compasses folks, we're north of Watford and south of Scotland! - I'm happy to say that we like to have a laugh up here. Perhaps you lot should try it sometime? I won't be posting again, I obviously don't have enough GCE's to warrant inclusion in such esteemed company! Bye bye..xxxxxx:rotfl:

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Best laugh I've had on the forum!

I'd like the Tory crew on DT to see me called a 'Tory wrinkly'. . Just shows how perceptive Mr Toddy is!

I think he started the patronising bit, by telling me 'to put the kettle one', now I'm 'Polly Wally doodle'. Well, he know about talking Wally doodle.

As for geography, he could look at my avatar. It might give a clue as to where I live.

He must think we don't care about helping our own kids. Pity he still can't see that we won't do on the back of the rest of 'hardworking families' or anyone else who pays tax.


Edit to add: can't resist, bit spiteful I am aware, but I bet he has called his son after him. What Stephen a Fry calls ' an egotist with limited imagination.'

lostinrates

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Which is exactly what I'm saying. To transfer assets across to say your partner or your children is perfectly legal. It's more complicated than say in the case of a divorce etc, but there are ways and means.

What the OP needs to do is to see a solicitor who can give him the best advice, and they can explain the ins and outs, and explain the pit falls of it. None of us on here can really advise fully.

you seemed to be saying that to seek to deprive oneself of assets as seemingly described is legal. The two are different.

margaretclare

mumps wrote: »

Did I accuse you of being a Tory voter? I don't think so. What on earth has "innit" got to do with it? I have no idea what you are talking about, who mentioned "innit"?

No, you did not. The OP did in his latest offering. Actually he accused several of us of being Tory voters and I believe it was I whom he had in mind when he referred to being lectured by an Essex girl, and he added 'innit'. He talked about a 'glee club for Tory wrinklies'. I never thought it was you - apologies if I gave that impression.

seven-day-weekend

The 'seven years' is the amount of time you must survive after giving away a financial gift for it to be exempt from Inheritance Tax.

Nothing to do with Care Home Funding.

We gave our son the deposit for his flat two years ago. Job done, he's set up, we don't have to worry. If there is anything left when we shuffle off this mortal coil, he can have it, but if we have to fund our own care, then we will.

mumps

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

The 'seven years' is the amount of time you must survive after giving away a financial gift for it to be exempt from Inheritance Tax.

Nothing to do with Care Home Funding.

We gave our son the deposit for his flat two years ago. Job done, he's set up, we don't have to worry. If there is anything left when we shuffle off this mortal coil, he can have it, but if we have to fund our own care, then we will.

But you were lucky that you had the money to help your son, some people only have their house. You don't have to worry job done as you say, can't you understand that the OP would like to feel that as well? It might not be legal to do it but he might like to feel like you do. I don't think he is terrible for feeling like that. I am not talking from my own perspective, as I said in an earlier post when one of us die our children will inherit two houses between them, if the rest gets spent they will be OK and I am glad about that, I don't begrudge other people wanting to do the same for their children. Obviously they need to do it within the law. From what I have read if it is done before there is any question of the parent needing any care it becomes difficult to recover but I think councils are getting more stringent.

lostinrates

mumps wrote: »

But you were lucky that you had the money to help your son, some people only have their house. You don't have to worry job done as you say, can't you understand that the OP would like to feel that as well? It might not be legal to do it but he might like to feel like you do. I don't think he is terrible for feeling like that. I am not talking from my own perspective, as I said in an earlier post when one of us die our children will inherit two houses between them, if the rest gets spent they will be OK and I am glad about that, I don't begrudge other people wanting to do the same for their children. Obviously they need to do it within the law. From what I have read if it is done before there is any question of the parent needing any care it becomes difficult to recover but I think councils are getting more stringent.

Many people start with nothing but a good upbringing. Some do even better for it. I'd rather by far my parents spend it all on themselves. Most people would rather have living parents longer, happier, with more choice than an inheritance. I simply cannot see why people would expect other people to pay the created shortfall created by this action, when what most loving children want is their parents well cared for with the resource they did after all work for themselves. As parents you have done your job. If more can be done, its icing on the cake.....an inheritance, generosity beyond what would take from self providence.

If the next generation would accept money under circumstance where someone has deprived themselves of assets and acting in such a way then frankly, I think parenting and the understanding of what is important in life and society has failed. All the inheritance or transfer of assets in the world cannot replace that.

Person_one

mumps wrote: »

But you were lucky that you had the money to help your son, some people only have their house. You don't have to worry job done as you say, can't you understand that the OP would like to feel that as well? It might not be legal to do it but he might like to feel like you do. I don't think he is terrible for feeling like that. I am not talking from my own perspective, as I said in an earlier post when one of us die our children will inherit two houses between them, if the rest gets spent they will be OK and I am glad about that, I don't begrudge other people wanting to do the same for their children. Obviously they need to do it within the law. From what I have read if it is done before there is any question of the parent needing any care it becomes difficult to recover but I think councils are getting more stringent.

Inheritance isn't what it used to be, we're living a lot longer and people don't generally leave behind young adults who are just starting out in the world.

If my grandparents in their eighties were to die tomorrow, they'd be leaving behind children in their fifties and sixties, grandchildren in their twenties and thirties and a few great grandchildren.

Their middle aged children don't need their 'inheritance' to get a good start, or to provide them with a home. Like most people who inherit these days, it would be a bonus lump sum, probably spent on holidays, work on the house or a new car.

It madness for elderly people to be trying to fiddle the system and depriving themselves of luxuries and the best possible care they cab find (should they need it) in order to provide a nice little windfall for somebody who has most likely been financially independent for decades anyway.

My grands are off on another long haul foreign holiday next week, I hope they go on many more!

Georgiegirl256

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

The 'seven years' is the amount of time you must survive after giving away a financial gift for it to be exempt from Inheritence Taxl.

Thanks for that, I knew there was something to do with 7 years.

I'm sure there is something similar in relation to the topic at hand as well though? I could be wrong, but like Mumps says, as long as it's done before there is any question of the parent needing care, then it's not seen as depreciation of assets.

Georgiegirl256

Person_one wrote: »

My grands are off on another long haul foreign holiday next week, I hope they go on many more!

Good for them! :T I hope they get to go on many more too.