Mum, 88, moving in, how much rent to charge?

GobbledyGook

Mojisola wrote: »

I wouldn't want to live with one of my children without at least covering all the extras costs involved with me being there.

I would also want to give a bit extra as compensation for all the things lostinrates describes in the edit.

It's about getting the balance right for both sides. One daughter I know had her mother to stay for free - her presence had quite a big impact on the family's life but they didn't take any money off her. When she died, she had amassed quite a lot of money (no bills apart from personal spending) which was shared between all the children equally even though the others hardly made any effort to see her "because X was looking after her".

In another family, the son ran a care home so he took Mum in to live in his house (on the same site as the care home). When she died, his siblings found that he had been charging her the rate the care home residents paid even though she had been left alone most of the time in his house and certainly hadn't been receiving all the services.

That was how my Nana felt as well.

It is about finding the right balance. There are a lot of people, especially of my grandparents generation and the one after, who wouldn't feel comfortable living with their children and not paying anything. In some respects if they have a decent income (my Nana used to joke that with her pension she was better off than she'd ever been!) then why shouldn't they chip in.

It's all about that balance. My Nana paid a small amount because she didn't want to 'cost' us anything. Some people might think that is wrong, but it also ignores the things that she gained from it that didn't cost.

I don't think an adult with an income should 'cost' the people they are living with. So if that means an adult child with a job or a parent or a lodger - they should contribute. I won't charge my children a fortune when they are older - my house is my house, council tax is what it is, but if they want Heinz ketchup when I'm happy with Asda's own, if they use 55 toilet rolls a month because despite my constant moaning/yelling/ranting/pleading they use loo roll as cloths or if they spend hours in the shower using a tonne of water then yes, they will be expected to contribute to that. Much in the same way the two (related) lodgers/long term house guests I have currently do. What they pay me wouldn't cover bills elsewhere, but it means it doesn't cost me to keep them.

I think the issue comes when it seems/feels like a profit is being made from a relative.

silvercar

Amongst close family it should be each according to their means.

xxdeebeexx

GobbledyGook wrote: »

I think the issue comes when it seems/feels like a profit is being made from a relative.

I think that this is my concern.
My sister's husband is very driven by money and 'having' things.

They will readily take vegetables/fruit from mums garden leaving her without even though they could afford to buy their own.

They have taken tools from my dads shed meaning that my husband has had to get some more when mum needed jobs done.

After staying the night with mum once, my BIL got up early and took a number of fishing rods - one had belonged to me as a small child. Even though it broke my heart to loose the rod he refused to return it because apparently my dad had promised it to him. (It was/is worthless just a little rod with my name written on in childish hand writing- could have got one at the carboot for £3)

They took 2 oil paintings to be' valued' - returned after many months of fussing.

They took 2 water coloured paintings to be valued - yet to be returned.

My BIL has been interested in my great Uncles war medals and letters home. We agreed as a family that they need to stay at mums house. I have just returned from there and they have now gone. I expect they were put in the boot of the car shortly after mum was bundled in the back.



I don't really trust them

dx

lostinrates

xxdeebeexx wrote: »

Thank you for putting the other side. Somewhere, in the back of my mind, I know that it's very tricky to let someone else into your home.


Our house is too small. I have 2 teenage boys at home in a 3 bedroom house - we simply don't have room.
I do, however, live just 300m away from her.


At my sisters house she would have her own bedroom and her own sitting room. Sounds much better, but, my sister isn't always kind. Mum cries a lot when she visits as my sister has a sharp tongue and is pushy. Mum misses her garden, but enjoys the company. She also likes having her meals cooked.


All I can offer is keep on helping mum to be 'independent' in her own home.
I visit every day sometimes twice. I help with the house work and my husband keeps the garden looking fantastic. She potters about the garden dead heading the plants and doing a bit of weeding. There are a lot of hospital appointments that I take her to. She cooks her own meals.


dx

Your mother needs to state her decision clearly , without feeling she'll be letting you ( or preferably your sister, but you cannot control that) down. Can a neutral third party talk the decision through with her?

Your bil sounds like an oaf, regardless of income. Personally, I think oafish people would be oafs whatever they earned or didn't, and I wouldn't let their circumstances make you bitter or cloud your judgement too much, though they do sound very privileged and rather avaricious from your description.

xxdeebeexx

lostinrates wrote: »

Your mother needs to state her decision clearly , without feeling she'll be letting you ( or preferably your sister, but you cannot control that) down. Can a neutral third party talk the decision through with her?

Your bil sounds like an oaf, regardless of income. Personally, I think oafish people would be oafs whatever they earned or didn't, and I wouldn't let their circumstances make you bitter or cloud your judgement too much, though they do sound very privileged and rather avaricious from your description.

Yes, you're right. Mum needs to decide and do what she wants. She can sometimes be swayed by pressure from my sister.


Seeing these comments written down I'm now wondering about their 'income' ...... maybe it's different to what they want me to believe. Who knows...


dx

lostinrates

xxdeebeexx wrote: »

Yes, you're right. Mum needs to decide and do what she wants. She can sometimes be swayed by pressure from my sister.


Seeing these comments written down I'm now wondering about their 'income' ...... maybe it's different to what they want me to believe. Who knows...


dx

Exactly, who knows and frankly, it doesn't matter. What they earn is no bearing on whether its the right place for your mother.

If they are able to offer your mother somewhere she will be happy and safe fine, perfect. If not, then its not fine. That's the first basis on which the decision should be made.

Be aware she might be saying something different to each of you, with no bad intent, just trying to please each daughter.

You made the decisions you made which is the measure of you as a person. But you made them freely, and presumably with no aim of return on them. Your sister made different choices which might have afforded her the opportunity to have space to offer your mother should she want it. My guess is for all the money in the world you wouldn't swap places and have, for example, her spouse!?;)

The important thing is that your mother make a wise choice for her. This might not be the choice you would make, it might be a choice not currently being considered.

Peter333

Gavin83 wrote: »

I was going to make this point. Why is it acceptable to charge your children rent but not your parents?

Because in many cases - like this one - the parents will not be working, and will probably have little surplus income. I agree with the posters earlier that said she could contribute towards food and buy takeaways and pay for petrol now and again, maybe buy odd little things, but the idea of charging my very elderly mother rent doesn't seem right. (Even if she did have surplus income.) And I certainly wouldn't be charging her if me and my wife earned £350K a year. (I question that salary tbh.)

I believe young adult children should be charged; not a lot but certainly a token amount, to learn that they cannot free-load, and to teach them responsibility, that things do not come for free, and if you are earning, you must pay your way. I would expect money towards petrol for running them about as well. If they didn't live at home, they'd have to bus it everywhere, and would have to pay for that, and it would be a lot more hassle than getting taken from door to door.

I do find it most odd when people don't have any contribution from their 'working' adult children. A colleague of mine has 2: aged 20 and 22, both sons, and they work full time, bringing some £500 a week in between them, and do not contribute a penny to the household.

The couple in question aren't rich by any means, so it seems strange. Someone asked my colleague why she doesn't charge them (as she complains about it from time to time, because she never has any spare cash!) and she said 'Steven and John have ENOUGH outgoings!' (Meaning running their cars, buying a new outfit every week, clubbing and pubbing 4 nights a week, buying macbooks, going abroad 6 weeks a year, buying new tvs, ipods, iphones and so on and so on and so on... Meanwhile mum and dad work full time and struggle to make ends meet.

Words fail me. It makes no sense.

Marshmallow82

Gavin83 wrote: »

I was going to make this point. Why is it acceptable to charge your children rent but not your parents?

Surely the threads about that mean adult offspring, 18+ who didn't fly the nest.

To charge an elderly parent rent would be more comparable to charging a 5 year old rent, not a fit and healthy 20 year old with a salary.

Person_one

Marshmallow82 wrote: »

Surely the threads about that mean adult offspring, 18+ who didn't fly the nest.

To charge an elderly parent rent would be more comparable to charging a 5 year old rent, not a fit and healthy 20 year old with a salary.

I know a great many elderly people who would be seriously offended at you comparing them to a 5 year old child!

lostinrates

Peter333 wrote: »

Because in many cases - like this one - the parents will not be working, and will probably have little surplus income. .

Not necessarily. Older generations might have far more wealth behind them than younger ones. For example, in op's case its very possible her son's might find it harder to get on the property ladder that her parents or she did.