Sorting out a widow's affairs

confusED

Thanks for the replies. I have talked with my wife about some of this and she is very upset. I feel sick to my stomach about it all.

The unfairness to me seems that even if she gives them ALL of the savings she is now down by the deceased's pension amount and will have to move out of her home whereas before they could cope. Quite unfair on a widow IMO.

Mojisola

confusED wrote: »

So as I dig into the bank accounts I reveal that what he told the Housing was not his full finances.

confusED wrote: »

The unfairness to me seems that even if she gives them ALL of the savings she is now down by the deceased's pension amount and will have to move out of her home whereas before they could cope. Quite unfair on a widow IMO.

But she wouldn't be in this situation if her husband had fully declared his capital - he's the one who created this situation.

confusED

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

You need to be very careful that you don't get get accused of conspiracy to defraud. The council could claim the arrears from the estate. if it is not a joint tenancy then she will escape other consequences but she needs to declare it ASAP. I assume the council may expect her to move to more modest accommodation.

I'm not condoning what has happened but i just need to say that this is the most pokey one bed flat you could ever see. The price is purely due to location in London and ever rising rents. She has lived there 28yrs and her only friends are there.

confusED

Mojisola wrote: »

But she wouldn't be in this situation if her husband had fully declared his capital - he's the one who created this situation.

Ok you are right of course. But some compassion for a widow who knew nothing about it and is losing her husband of 52yrs and her home of 28yrs must have a place somewhere surely.

Mojisola

confusED wrote: »

Ok you are right of course. But some compassion for a widow who knew nothing about it and is losing her husband of 52yrs and her home of 28yrs must have a place somewhere surely.

There isn't much compassion in the benefits system but do get someone else in to check that she does really owe as much as you think.

Yorkshireman99

confusED wrote: »

Ok you are right of course. But some compassion for a widow who knew nothing about it and is losing her husband of 52yrs and her home of 28yrs must have a place somewhere surely.

Unless she made the claim she has no liability until she became a widow. Whose name are the bank accounts in? Joint or separate? The statute of limitations means only six years back claim be made unless the earlier debts are acknowledged.

konark

It all hinges on whether the claim for HB was in single or joint names, and whether the bank account(s) were in sole or joint names.

Best situation; HB in husband's name only and joint bank account, wife inherits all money in account and it never forms part of husband's estate i.e LA , DWP etc can't grab it .
Worst situation; HB joint, bank account husband sole. All money part of estate, if you declare this on IHT205 DWP will investigate as he was claiming means-tested benefits.

If bank account is joint , it never forms part of husband's estate so who will know he had too much money?
.

theoretica

Were either of them eligible for pension credit guarantee?

I am not clear how much of the problem is the housing benefit issue, and how much the loss of his pension?

missbiggles1

confusED wrote: »

Thanks for the replies. I have talked with my wife about some of this and she is very upset. I feel sick to my stomach about it all.

The unfairness to me seems that even if she gives them ALL of the savings she is now down by the deceased's pension amount and will have to move out of her home whereas before they could cope. Quite unfair on a widow IMO.

If her income is as low as you say, she'll be able to claim pension credit and housing benefit in her own right, so I don't see that she'd need to move.

Keep_pedalling

konark wrote: »

It all hinges on whether the claim for HB was in single or joint names, and whether the bank account(s) were in sole or joint names.

Best situation; HB in husband's name only and joint bank account, wife inherits all money in account and it never forms part of husband's estate i.e LA , DWP etc can't grab it .
Worst situation; HB joint, bank account husband sole. All money part of estate, if you declare this on IHT205 DWP will investigate as he was claiming means-tested benefits.

If bank account is joint , it never forms part of husband's estate so who will know he had too much money?
.

In practice it does not really make much difference. If every thing was done in the husband's name and his accounts were seperate then there is a claim of over paid benefits against his estate, but this is limited to to the length of time the lack of benefits would have reduced his savings to the level that those saving would have been reduced to the level (16,000) that he could have claimed.

If the accounts were all joint ones then there is nothing in the estate to pay anything back, however the OPs MIL will need to be separately assessed for HB which she will not be able to receive until her savings have been reduced to £16,000 which will take around 8 months to do based or current rents.

Which ever way round it is done she will end up with savings of £16,000 and still be getting HB in the long term.