Council selling child's house to pay for care.

cosmic4z

Hello,

I'm relatively new here (haven't made many posts), so I hope this is in the correct area of MSE forums. Please feel free to move, if not.

If an elderly parent, signs over ownership of her home to a child; will that parent be eligible for financial assistance for care home fees? (presumably, it's the local council who pays).

I was told, if the transfer of the property, was as recent as 7 (or someone else says 9) years, the council will force sale of the property, even though it's not owned by the person who needs care. Is that correct?

Hope someone can clarify.

Thanks!

BrassicWoman

is the child old enough to legally own property would be the first question - or do you mean an adult child?

google "deprivation of capital/assets"

elsien

Read up on deprivation of assets.

Mojisola

cosmic4z wrote: »

I was told, if the transfer of the property, was as recent as 7 (or someone else says 9) years, the council will force sale of the property, even though it's not owned by the person who needs care. Is that correct?

Seven years only applies to inheritance tax issues.

There is no time limit on deprivation of assets.

Crabapple

If the Local Authority think it was deprivation of assets (and there is no timeframe, they can go back as many years as they like) they are not likely to force a sale, no.

Instead they assess as though the parent still owned the property so they will have to pay for their care on the basis of them having a chunk of money they don't still have.

Yorkshireman99

The decision has to be based on the facts of the case not a number of years. If the person was in good health when they disposed of the house then it does not count as deprivation. However, councils can be very handed in applying this and need to be challenged, in court if need be.

Keep_pedalling

The LA may very well do that regardless of the time that has passes, and I think it right that they do so if, as is likely, the only reason the house has been transfered on is to pass the costs of care on to their fellow council tax payers.

Person_one

Yorkshireman99 wrote: »

The decision has to be based on the facts of the case not a number of years. If the person was in good health when they disposed of the house then it does not count as deprivation. However, councils can be very handed in applying this and need to be challenged, in court if need be.

I thought it was intention that made the difference, not health. If the house was given away with the sole intention being to avoid future care costs, that's deprivation of assets however well the person was at the time.

elsien

I know I keep repeating myself, but anyone considering this as an option may want to have a look at some of the care homes at the cheaper end of the market which is what you'll get if you give all your assets away.
Some are ok. Many are not. Money gives you choices.

Keep_pedalling

Person_one wrote: »

I thought it was intention that made the difference, not health. If the house was given away with the sole intention being to avoid future care costs, that's deprivation of assets however well the person was at the time.

If the person gifting the house continues to live there and has few other assets, I can't think of a single other reason such an action would have been taken and I think the LA would think the same.

Yorkshireman99

Person_one wrote: »

I thought it was intention that made the difference, not health. If the house was given away with the sole intention being to avoid future care costs, that's deprivation of assets however well the person was at the time.

It is a question of proof. It might well be done for IHT planning purposes.