We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Parents signing over house
Comments
-
The NHS? The NHS don't fund social care though? Are you sure?
http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/will-the-nhs-pay-for-my-long-term-care.aspx0 -
chelseablue wrote: »Thank you all.
My parents are in their 50's, still working, in good health so for example if they signed it over tomorrow it could be 30 years before they need any care.
Never ever presume.
My brother was diagnosed with Dementia at 49/50 years of age, it was aggresive and he was in a home for the ress to his life but was dead by the time he was 52, leaving a wife and 3 young daughters.make the most of it, we are only here for the weekend.
and we will never, ever return.0 -
Bluebirdman_of_Alcathays wrote: »They are perfectly entitled to give away their assets.
Absolutely. It's just that they then can't expect the taxpayer to fund everything.0 -
POPPYOSCAR wrote: »
Interesting, I wasn't aware of some of those. Thanks.0 -
Never ever presume.
My brother was diagnosed with Dementia at 49/50 years of age, it was aggresive and he was in a home for the ress to his life but was dead by the time he was 52, leaving a wife and 3 young daughters.
There is the possibility that one of the children needs care before the parents (early onset dementia or brain injury)0 -
john_white wrote: »The taxpayer should. Why should some get paid for and not others.
Hopefully the Conservatives will put an end to this stupid rule that you have to pay for your own care simply because you choose to work.
Dream on, can you really see a Tory government implementing the massive tax hikes that would require.0 -
To protect everyones interest it would need much more complicated vehicles than just giving it away which is usually one of the worst options.
There are a other options that can get round some of the issues but even then not that straight forward and introduce their own complications that need expert advice.
often it is best to just let things progress as normal and hope everyone can afford a nice life and the best care possible should they need it.
Focus on the tax that is something you can do and will in many cases trump any deprivation issues if done soon enough.
You could buy the house at full market value(no deprivation of assets) and they could retain a life interest, no rent/landlord issues but others that need research.
Discretionary trusts can be a vehicle to protect assets need more research especially on the taxation.0 -
Leaving aside the deprivation of capital matter you also need to think about all of the other potential issues.
I know a couple who did this. Their son was killed in an accident which meant their daughter-in-law inherited the house. All was well for a while because it was acknowledged by all that the house 'belonged' to their young grandson. However, when the DIL was made redundant the benefits people didn't see it like that and she pretty much had no option but to sell it. They haven't spoken for a number of years now and are now in their mid 60's and playing the private let roulette game.0 -
GobbledyGook wrote: »Leaving aside the deprivation of capital matter you also need to think about all of the other potential issues.
I know a couple who did this. Their son was killed in an accident which meant their daughter-in-law inherited the house. All was well for a while because it was acknowledged by all that the house 'belonged' to their young grandson. However, when the DIL was made redundant the benefits people didn't see it like that and she pretty much had no option but to sell it. They haven't spoken for a number of years now and are now in their mid 60's and playing the private let roulette game.
This can all be taken care of with the correct legal planning.0 -
Worst case. What would happen if you and your brother died before your mum? Would the people who inherited the house from you continue to let her live there or would they want to move her out? This is really a bad idea for your mum to do this.
Plenty of cases just as bad - divorce and bankruptcy are just two of them.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
