Care Home Fees - Putting house in trust

Tabbytabitha

LeadFarmer wrote: »

Well I understand the Local Authority pay for someone with assets under the threshold (£23.5k??).

But I wouldn't want her going into any old care home, and seeing as she has savings above the threshold she would have to pay for it herself until they ran out. Which kind of makes protecting her house meaningless as when her savings run out she would have to move to a cheaper and maybe undesirable care home, which we wouldn't want.

It seems that Securus Planning use cold call techniques to just bag as many clients as they can.

And where do they get the money from?

Tabbytabitha

Rambosmum wrote: »

No. Unless 7 years have passed between the trust being draw up and the care home being needed. And even then it isn't so clear cut.

The 7 years rule relates to IHT - they can go back as far as they like for deprivation of capital.

Gavin83

LeadFarmer wrote: »

But if someone has put their house in trust, is it excluded from their assets with regards paying for car home fees?

As Red-Squirrel says if you do it to avoid care home fees it'll still be considered. In reality if you do it while they're already ill or within a few years of going into a care home it's a waste of time.

However you can't have your cake and eat it, if you're hiding assets you can't then complain about the choice of care home. If the council are funding the placement your choices will be more limited and the best homes will be unattainable. It's not to say they'll necessarily be bad, they'll just be lacking a bit compared to some of the self funding options. Compare it to the difference between staying in a 3* and 5* hotel while on holiday. I've been to quite a number of care homes in my time, the differences can be huge.

Also, what Tabbytabitha is asking in a roundabout way is why do you think that tax payers should fund your mothers care so you can gain an inheritance you don't deserve?

Red-Squirrel_2

LeadFarmer wrote: »

So I guess if you put your house in trust whilst still very health and not elderly then this might be regarded as ok?

I guess doing so could deprive you of being able to pay for a nice care home if you can't get at the money?

Its about intentions, not time, there is no 'safe' time to do it. If there was no other reason why you would have done it it would still be very suspicious!

LeadFarmer

Gavin83 wrote: »

Also, what Tabbytabitha is asking in a roundabout way is why do you think that tax payers should fund your mothers care so you can gain an inheritance you don't deserve?

I wasn't suggesting they should. My question was whether it was possible.

I wouldn't encourage my mother to put her house in trust, as I would only end up releasing its value to help her remain in her chosen care home, so I don't see the point.

It seems that Securus Planning are making very good money charging the elderly to create these trusts, when may be of little worth.

gettingtheresometime

LeadFarmer wrote: »

I wasn't suggesting they should. My question was whether it was possible.

I wouldn't encourage my mother to put her house in trust, as I would only end up releasing its value to help her remain in her chosen care home, so I don't see the point.

It seems that Securus Planning are making very good money charging the elderly to create these trusts, when may be of little worth.

Or they're making money on the back of people's belief that others should pay for their/their parent's care so that the family can receive an inheritance.

LeadFarmer

gettingtheresometime wrote: »

Or they're making money on the back of people's belief that others should pay for their/their parent's care so that the family can receive an inheritance.

But then the flip side against that is if they have worked and saved hard purposely to financially help their children, which everyone is entitled to do.

gettingtheresometime

LeadFarmer wrote: »

But then the flip side against that is if they have worked and saved hard purposely to financially help their children, which everyone is entitled to do.

That's where you & I differ.

Hubby & I work hard to that I can enjoy life. If along the way we can help our son then we will. But that's not to the detriment of my comfort or my needs.

If at the end of our days then he may be left something, if there's anything left over.


The other way to look at it is that to live, there had to be a cost, whether that be in the form of rent, mortgage and / or house maintenance costs or even nursing home fees.

Keep_pedalling

Do not let these parasites anywhere near your mother. There main aim is to get several thousound pounds out of her to make a trust that will probably nearer be needed, and if it is will probably fail.

They are almost certainly not regulated, and there will never be any comeback on them when it all goes pair shaped.

74jax

LeadFarmer wrote: »

But then the flip side against that is if they have worked and saved hard purposely to financially help their children, which everyone is entitled to do.

It's very hard to even think of what you would do in this situation it's such a dilemma that you never hope to meet.

My dad worked his entire life, saved, very well for retirement. Mum and he had 2 cruises before she had a double stroke. He then became her main carer. He then got cancer and battled very hard each day failing on the day before until he died. The week before he died he was on his hospital bed with his doctor, myself and my brother, writing us both cheques for much more than we were thought he had. As he didn't want it eaten by 'the system'.

It can only be because of his confused state before death as if he knew about care cost he would have been happy to leave it for mum. But he felt he owed his 2 children something. He handed me the cheque and said 'I can't do anymore for you now'....

The care mum now needs is immense, not round the clock, as once the carers put her to bed she's asleep till the morning, but she needs a good 18hrs care. Which comes at different levels of cost. The lower end tends to be unqualified no real experience of dementia and stroke carers, or the higher end which provided detailed care to match individual ailments.

As a mum now I know the care I want. I don't want to be a burden on my daughter so I'm preparing for if I do need to pay for my care. I also help my daughter out now, when she needs it rather than saving it to leave her. Inheritance isn't a right. It's nice if something is left over but not at the detriment of living a decent standard of life yourself.

I never got on with my mum, still don't, see her twice a year and it's probably in a few threads on here how she had treated me in the past and brought me down. I love my dad immensely, I still look back at the exemplary man he was with pride. I honestly believe as the cancer had spread to his brain it altered how he rationaled things. He would never have wanted mum without his money, had he known the care not having it she would recieve.he cared for her until he died. Nearly 60 years after marrying.

I would urge you to look at the care on offer, consider how you will meet payments to the level of care you want - government doe not always pay for all singing all dancing care - and then have a discussion. If parents want to help children then do so now, if it doesn't leave you strapped. But don't put your last year's on earth in jeopardy because you want your children to have something that could play for your care to ease your remaining years. You have earned it.

In the end I took dad's watch and when I look at it, I see dad, feel dad and smell him again. That watch means far more to me than his cheque he wrote. And I know he would be extremely proud of me and my brother and the care arranged for mum. If dad had been in his right mind he would have wanted the best for her and we knew that. I might not be able to spend more than half an hour with her but he could, and did.

I know this is long winded but care is so important, so please look at what is available, the different standards and make your decision on that.