Council House Purchase

konark

I think you are looking at this the wrong way round.


The council's aim is avoid paying care costs for your mother and so are raking up old financial dealings from the last century in a desperate fishing expedition to discover if she has any assets.


Your mother is not the owner of her house and hasn't been for at least 30 years.Other than a possible claim to have a secure tenancy in the property, she has no beneficial interest in it as an asset, and the council will just have to accept that fact.


Maybe she bought the house from the council and subsequently sold it to your brother, who has generously let her live there rent-free for 30 years. For this he now seems to be cast as the villain of the piece. The council can have no claim on any money from a house sale over 30 years ago which is probably long-gone.



Any sale would have been scrutinised by solicitors on both sides and the council would only sell a council house to someone who they had satisfied themselves was, absolutely and without doubt, eligible for the Right to Buy scheme. In any case, it's way too late for any doubts to be investigated 30 years after a fait accomplis when nothing can be proved, disproved. or probably even remembered. The fact that the council are checking with the Land Registry and not with their own internal records shows how much they know.



You'd be better of ensuring the council give the right care and financial support to your mother than trying to rake up trouble for your brother, because by clouding the waters you have only given the council an excuse to investigate her affairs and withhold payments for her care.

elsien

It sounds like the council were already investigating and OP is just trying to give them the correct information.

Delilah1916

Thank you elsien.
Where does konark get....You'd be better of ensuring the council give the right care and financial support to your mother than trying to rake up trouble for your brother, because by clouding the waters you have only given the council an excuse to investigate her affairs and withhold payments for her care.

Who is raking up trouble or clouding the waters? It was the Council asking questions about the house that has brought it to light. Nobody else was aware of it. Our mother is our only concern and we wanted some assurances of where she stood.

G_M

konark wrote: »

.....
Maybe she bought the house from the council and subsequently sold it to your brother, who has generously let her live there rent-free for 30 years. .......

In which case there was either

* a market value payment which mum has since spent, though it does not sound like it from what the OP says, or

* there was a gift with reservation ie mum gave the property to the brother whilst remaining in occupation rent free

Wanderingpomm

You just sound bitter because he has the house and you don’t. He bought it and paid for it for 30 years. I assume he also paid all the maintainance.
Your mum wasn’t claiming housing benefit and so there could be an arguement that he has saved or at least broken even with the council.

Why should you not contribute to your mothers care? She’s the mother of all 3 of you so you should all help.

xylophone

that they do not think that my mum is also liable although she did think that the house was still hers?

You mean that your brother gave your mother the impression that he had bought it for her but in reality he told the council that he was the tenant with the RTB and bought it on that basis?

Or is it possible that the house was originally purchased and registered in her name and she has forgotten that she gave the house to your brother at some later date?

xylophone

Why should you not contribute to your mothers care? She’s the mother of all 3 of you so you should all help.

If she gave away a major asset to one child (albeit with reservation of benefit), then the moral obligation is on that child to contribute to the care?

Wanderingpomm

xylophone wrote: »

If she gave away a major asset to one child (albeit with reservation of benefit), then the moral obligation is on that child to contribute to the care?

It doesn’t sound like she did give it away. She stopped paying rent so would have been in a better position than she was before. OP hasn’t said whether her mum would have been able to buy the house herself 30 years ago. Also the house prices then vs now were very different.

Honeylife

No there is no back rent to pay. Have you had sight of the paperwork or just seen the Land Registry? Your brother would have had to sign something to confirm his residency, and would have had to prove his residency at the property, thus would have had to be present (unless your mother forged his signature!)

Your brother has provided your mother with a rent free home for 30 years. The investment in the RTB was a shrewd business move and in my book is to be commended. I would imagine the property is mortgage free now. Your brother has "cared" for her for 30 years with rent free accommodation (he has paid the mortgage).

The council would be making enquiries to ascertain how much of her care costs she will be able to meet from her assets. So will look for those assets and may investigate the finer details of ownership of the property for this reason and this reason only.

After 30 years ownership of the property I would be surprised if the Council tried to seek recovery of the property. The court costs would be tremendous and do you want to go there? I am sure there is ample case law on this but I am not going to look it up.

Perhaps you should talk to your brother.

babyblade41

Your mother would have been 60 at the time and as she appears to only be going into care at the grand age of 90 I'm sure she would have been in sound mind and understood what she was doing.

If he bought the house the LR would have the details of when and for what price so easily sorted.

IMO there could be some kind of penance as to what he did pay for the house in comparison to what others sold at the same time but if he stated he lived there and your Mum was the name on the tenancy there must have been some collaboration.

I remember my ex FIL and BIL did similar but legally and many forms were filled in. and the occupants of the house would have been recorded

The council would have hopefully done due diligence as this would have been quite an elaborate corroboration.

I would say the easiest explanation was that your Mum legitimately bought it but then after a certain time registered it in her sons name maybe for money.