Renting out my MIL's property

G_M

If you plan to use a letting agent for the first year, be very careful about the contract you sign. Do not be afraid to insist on changing it. Many agency contracts specify that if the tenant found by the agent stays, then the agent can continue to claim their fee.

So make sure the contract allows for you to give notice to end the contract (1 month? 2?) and thereafter no fees or penalties apply, whether with the original tenant or a new one.

read:


* Letting agents: how should a landlord select or sack?


* New landlords: advice, information & links

* Tenancies in Eng/Wales: Guides for landlords and tenants

martindow

I've been in a similar situation and I sympathise. However I wonder about your husband's hope to avoid settling any future bill for nursing home care or similar.

Sorry to be blunt, but your MIL has assets and a reasonable income and I don't find it very ethical to try to tie the house in some sort of legal knot to make the LA and ultimately other people foot the bill.

Even if you employ an agent you are still responsible for compliance with legal requirements - gas checks, etc. - if the agent messes up.

I think you should just sell the house and avoid the hassle and stress of letting. If or when MIL requires more expensive care you will be able to choose the care and accommodation without having to worry about monthly income.

jem16

elantan wrote: »

I will look into an EPA and try and take it from there, will need to plan on how and when to have this talk though.

I believe you're in Scotland so no EPA. Guide here for Scottish PoA.

http://www.publicguardian-scotland.gov.uk/power-of-attorney/power-of-attorney/types-of-power-of-attorney

Guest101

OP just be aware that your MIL would be completely responsible for all the legal requirements for the property. (regardless of if you use an agent or not).

This means repairs, gas safety, deposit protection are all down to her (you) and failing to do so has repurcussions (real ones, not slap on the wrist).

So choose a well established agent (not the cheapest) with a good reputation, check which PRS scheme they are with. Read the contract, change it if you want. YOU are paying them, so if you arent happy, dont sign.

Miss_Merlot

I don't disagree with you, martin.

But then on the other hand how ethical is it that people who have worked hard all their lives have their assets ransacked for care, when people who haven't saved a penny get it all for free...?

It's all something of a minefield - ethically, emotionally, logistically, administratively...

I think renting it out for the moment is the right thing, while she is still some way away from needing residential care. She may never need it (she might die of something else), or need it much sooner or later than we anticipate at the moment - there's just no way of knowing.

Most care homes are around £750 a week - with the house rented out, she would be able to cover £3,000 off that herself, and if there's any shortfall (i.e. she were in need of more extensive / expensive nursing care) she could for a year or so make up the shortfall with her savings.

OH's plan is, when she is nearing her savings running out, to approach SS then, refusing to sell the house (as half of it is his in trust, so I don't think they could force it - especially if it's tenanted out at the time) and having them pay any shortfall. The vast majority would still be paid by MIL from her combined pension / rental income.

It's certainly not all about money. OH and I bend over backwards and have done for five years now to look after MIL, at the expense of our own time, emotional energy, and even sanity! We are very hands-on in terms of daily visits and micro-managing all her affairs - it can feel all-consuming and has demanded a lot of sacrifice on our side over the years just to keep her "treading water". Ultimately her welfare will of course win out over the house, if it comes down to it - we love her and want the best for her, just like anyone does for their mums.

But if OH can achieve the same end while protecting her assets at the same time, well, that's what he's determined to do.

martindow wrote: »

I've been in a similar situation and I sympathise. However I wonder about your husband's hope to avoid settling any future bill for nursing home care or similar.

Sorry to be blunt, but your MIL has assets and a reasonable income and I don't find it very ethical to try to tie the house in some sort of legal knot to make the LA and ultimately other people foot the bill.

Even if you employ an agent you are still responsible for compliance with legal requirements - gas checks, etc. - if the agent messes up.

I think you should just sell the house and avoid the hassle and stress of letting. If or when MIL requires more expensive care you will be able to choose the care and accommodation without having to worry about monthly income.

Miss_Merlot

Yes, this is why I am a bit paranoid about getting it all right first time!

Guest101 wrote: »

OP just be aware that your MIL would be completely responsible for all the legal requirements for the property. (regardless of if you use an agent or not).

This means repairs, gas safety, deposit protection are all down to her (you) and failing to do so has repurcussions (real ones, not slap on the wrist).

So choose a well established agent (not the cheapest) with a good reputation, check which PRS scheme they are with. Read the contract, change it if you want. YOU are paying them, so if you arent happy, dont sign.

G_M

jem16 wrote: »

I believe you're in Scotland so no EPA. Guide here for Scottish PoA.

http://www.publicguardian-scotland.gov.uk/power-of-attorney/power-of-attorney/types-of-power-of-attorney

If this is indeed Scotland, be aware my links above relate to English/welsh law of property.

booksurr

Miss_Merlot wrote: »

OH's plan is, when she is nearing her savings running out, to approach SS then, refusing to sell the house (as half of it is his in trust, so I don't think they could force it - especially if it's tenanted out at the time) and having them pay any shortfall. The vast majority would still be paid by MIL from her combined pension / rental income.

the property will not be your MIL main residence and patently neither will it be yopurs. As such there is no impediment to the council forcing a sale, be it tenanted or not, in trust or not. You will get your 50%, they will get their 50% - obviously after any tenants have been legally evicted!

Miss_Merlot

I know there is a rule that a forced sale cannot happen while a family member or co-owner is living in the house, which wouldn't apply here as you say booksurr.

But I also understood that while OH is half owner, they can't force a sale, as the value of half a house is nothing...?

Mojisola

Miss_Merlot wrote: »

But I also understood that while OH is half owner, they can't force a sale, as the value of half a house is nothing...?

They won't bother trying to force a sale - they will put a charge on the house, defer the MIL's payments and be given the money to clear the debt when the house is eventually sold.