Inheritance and benefits

duchy

It's reasonable spending .......and who do you think she is going to ring ?

Commonsense is needed

A new washing machine - reasonable expense
Large cash gifts to daughters not reasonable expense

iammumtoone

Well I have learnt somethings and it seems OP that the rules are fair.

Your mother will be able to buy things to improve her life and will have some money left to spend on treats for herself.

She will not be able to give any to you or your sister (unless she gives you 3K each out of her own allowed money) but I agree with that rule, if your Nan had wanted you to have any she should have stated this in the will and why should the tax payer have to fund something which was not even you late Nans request.

I am sorry if the above sounds harsh, I am sorry for your loss and realise you must be grieving but no amount of money will make up for that. Your Nan wanted to improve your mothers life and it seems that this money will still go a long way to help with that.

Poppie68

missbiggles1 wrote: »

She can reapply for benefits when the capital goes down to £16k - at that point benefits are reduced on a sliding scale.

Thanks missbiggles I have no idea why that version of my post was posted as I did write another after missing off the same information regarding the £16000....God knows....The joys of medication and posting on my phone.

FBaby

Whichever way you look at it, what you are trying to do is to deprive herself of capital and that is something she can't do under the rules. The bottom line is she can't continue to receive tax payers money whilst spending her full inheritance to luxuries that many can't afford.

She will get huge benefits from it though as she will be able to get to buy things she needs but can't afford to at the moment. Surely that's a nice legacy from her mother to be able to do.

SnooksNJ

iammumtoone wrote: »

Am I the only one who feels for the OPs mother and her late mother?

Whist I agree she should not be able to claim benefit with that amount of money. I do think she should be allowed to keep a percentage of it to spend how she pleases and live off the rest. She will have to use the whole lot to live off and not be able to spend any on herself as a treat what her mother intended.

Her mother left her that money in the hope it would make her life more comfortable. Many who are more 'savvy' would have probably left the money to someone else they trusted who would then spend it on what she wanted, meaning she could keep claiming benefits.

That sounds like what the Grandmother intended. But the question at hand is how to defraud the federal taxpayers by hiding assets.

Stevie_Palimo

SnooksNJ wrote: »

That sounds like what the Grandmother intended. But the question at hand is how to defraud the federal taxpayers by hiding assets.

I'm pretty sure Densol will know how to do this and also leap to the OP's defence here by offering a way round this to keep benefits in full and have the money on top.

NYM

...now, now. I'm sure densol wouldn't do that.

She might advise on possible work-arounds but never something like hiding assets, because that's illegal.

xylophone

Also I have heard of a document called deed of variation?

http://www.dootsons.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Dootsons-Deeds-of-Variation-sr.pdf


" However, if a beneficiary is receiving means tested benefits, a Deed
of Variation cannot be used to redirect his entitlement from the deceased’s
estate to prevent benefits being disallowed because under these
circumstances it will be seen as a gift from the beneficiary."

Mojisola

iammumtoone wrote: »

Your mother will be able to buy things to improve her life and will have some money left to spend on treats for herself.

It's important to keep the receipts of big items so that she can explain where the money has gone if she is asked by the DWP.

BigAunty

The OP could try to find the DWP deprivation of capital guide for decision makers on the internet. This is the staff manual for DWP workers who investigate issues with claims. It's a dull read but gives the OP an idea of what staff look for when a person on benefits comes into capital and then claims benefits again, the type of spending which is seen as dubious.

It's a complex area, and people often overlook the fact that the DWP have to prove intentionality on the part of the claimant, but gifting capital to others when a claimant is aware of capital limits is very clearly disallowed.

I personally feel its a little sad when long-term benefit claimants come into a large sum of money and suddenly having to pay their own rent, council tax and groceries from their nest egg is seen as a nuisance and waste of their money.