care for an elderly relative

kidmugsy

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

e old person?
Is she left to die in the street? I suspect not. So the LA will end up paying pointless legal costs and then still have to fund some kind of care.

Why do you think them pointless? It doesn't matter if the younger crooks say they've spent the money: maybe they own a house that could be confiscated. Anyway, they've got to be pursued pour encourager.

margaretclare

How old was your grandmother when she did this?

Was she completely compos mentis i.e. was she fully aware of all the implications of her action?

Did she take advice from anybody at the time?

What sort of sum of money are we talking i.e. the sale price of her house and her net gain from it?

Very ill-advised, I would have thought, to divest yourself of all your assets at a time in your life when you simply don't know what you may need in the future. Just the absolute reverse of what I would do.

mystic_trev

There have been a number of threads on 'deprivation of assets' and most want to make me spit!

The Grandchildren will be liable to repay the money. If they've 'spunked it' they'll have to live with the fact that 'nans' money would have been better spent looking after her, and not have her remaining time spent in the cheapest care home the Local authority could find.

My Mother went into a care home in March, which I initially funded until I could sell her home. I paid over £1,000 a week for a lovely room with a separate sitting room and en suite facilities. I could have saved a lot of money by putting her in a cheaper cramped room without en suite facilities.

My Mother (and deceased) Father worked bloody hard bringing up a family and paying a mortgage. The least I can do is help her to have some comfort and dignity in her old age.

AlanP_2

Can I suggest we all calm down, get of our moral high horses and help answer the question asked by the OP?

From what I can see they are not trying to avoid paying for their Nan's care, they are asking for advice and guidance as to what the reality of the situation is and where they can look for further information and guidance.

It may have been an "ill advised" decision and not one that the MSE experts on here would have taken but it is what it is, nobody can go back 6 - 12 months and change that decision.

For the OP my thoughts are that yes the grandchildren probably will have to return the money (or fund the care themselves maybe) and I would suggest speaking to the local council, Age Concern and the Citizens Advice Bureau to understand the details of how all of this works in your area.

atush

that is what I said, no high horse needed.

They got their answer.

They could of course, use this money to adapt one of their houses so a ground floor room/bathroom are available and to hire extra home care. So that expensive care is not required.

missbiggles1

AlanP wrote: »

Can I suggest we all calm down, get of our moral high horses and help answer the question asked by the OP?

From what I can see they are not trying to avoid paying for their Nan's care, they are asking for advice and guidance as to what the reality of the situation is and where they can look for further information and guidance.

It may have been an "ill advised" decision and not one that the MSE experts on here would have taken but it is what it is, nobody can go back 6 - 12 months and change that decision.

For the OP my thoughts are that yes the grandchildren probably will have to return the money (or fund the care themselves maybe) and I would suggest speaking to the local council, Age Concern and the Citizens Advice Bureau to understand the details of how all of this works in your area.

The OP doesn't need anybody's opinion when the question was accurately answered (with reference quote) in post#3.

AlanP_2

missbiggles1 wrote: »

The OP doesn't need anybody's opinion when the question was accurately answered (with reference quote) in post#3.

I don't have to agree with your opinion nor you with mine but I would say if the OP didn't want peoples opinions they wouldn't have asked the question on a FORUM which is where information and opinions are shared.

There is 1 link to relevant information and to regulations that are relevant and useful I agree, however the key phrase their is:

Where the person has transferred the asset to a third party to avoid the charge prior to the means test

We don't know why the transfer was made from what I can see in Post 1. So my suggestion that the OP talks to Age UK (amongst others) seems reasonable to me.

The quotation was also followed by:

"What do you think? Or perhaps you consider that it is the responsibility of anybody but the grandchildren, preferably other tax payers?

I'm speechless!"

and other comments include:

"There have been a number of threads on 'deprivation of assets' and most want to make me spit!"

The OP hasn't asked "How do I avoid using the money my Nan gave me to fund her care" and in my opinion they are judgemental comments that do not help the OP (who is a relatively inexperienced poster based on 20 posts) and was seeking help not admonishment.

AlanP_2

atush wrote: »

that is what I said, no high horse needed.

They got their answer.

To the second question I agree, but not to the first which was links to information / websites that could offer more specific information and advice.

These types of questions seem to attract negative comments (not that yours was in anyway Atush) and the useful and relevant can easily get lost in a sea of "noise" unfortunately.

System

kidmugsy wrote: »

Why do you think them pointless?.

Pointless as in pursuing a legal case against someone who might have no money or may simply become bankrupt.

The question has still not been answered - if the LA for whatever reason cannot recover the money, what happens to the old person?

xylophone

If the elderly lady in question had had very substantial means so that a case could be made for a gift in anticipation of a PET, then the acceptance by the grandchildren of such a gift might have been acceptable.

This would appear not to have been the case since they seem to be anticipating that her assets will soon fall below the threshold for LA help.

Therefore they have allowed their grandmother ( possibly very elderly and almost certainly already somewhat infirm) to give them the sale proceeds of her property instead of advising her that she should save it for her use just in case and leave it wherever she wished in her will.

I find it very difficult to credit that nobody anticipated that there might at some stage be a need for care.

And I'm afraid that asking whether the grandchildren might be "liable" smacks to me of 'can we be legally forced to pay up or can we palm off the liability on other taxpayers....."

I try to avoid climbing on a high horse ( it's so easy to fall off) and I apologise to the OP if what was done was in entire innocence or ignorance - but it seems to me that the LA is likely to take an equally robust view of the circumstances?