Over 60 resident relative. How to avoid losing the family home to care home fees

MightyWhitey

My Mother is 85, owns her own home and wants to avoid selling the family home to fund her care, to the local council..

Since I am over 60, I am looking to move into her home as my main residence, ahead of any move by her into care to comply with rules I have seen, stating that the property cannot be taken with a dependent in it ( subject to some caveats in the rules ).

So i rang the council assessment team, and asked how long before she goes into care can i be considered to be a resident for exclusion purpose. They said "it depends", "it"s complex", "they cannot tell me the guidelines on that, that they work to".

Does anybody know?

Dorian1958

Is your mother's move into care imminent? How does she intend her care to be paid for?

SonOf

It is more complex because if they feel you have taken an action in an attempt to create deprivation of assets then they can disregard what you have done and treat it as if the asset is still available.

Your mother is 85 and your interest seems to be more about protecting your inheritance than consider her welfare. Do you really want her to be subject to local authority care?

Or on the other hand, seeing as you would be living with her, perhaps she could remain in the home and you provide the care?

MightyWhitey

It's always unpredictable I guess. She had a bad trot over the last year, but appears stable and independent currently. But who know's what's next.

MightyWhitey

Thanks, but keeping this OT, the thread is about the rules and guidelines around over 60 residency rules to comply with the provision described.

Does anyone know?

BoGoF

You were given the answer in post #3

BoGoF

And who would you be claiming the dependant is you refer to in OP - you?

xylophone

Below may be of interest.

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs38_property_and_paying_for_residential_care_fcs.pdf

zagubov

xylophone wrote: »

Below may be of interest.

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs38_property_and_paying_for_residential_care_fcs.pdf

I think that's a dead link.:o

ggmf

Try this one:
https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/large-print-factsheets/fs38-lp-property-and-paying-for-residential-care.pdf

MightyWhitey

Thanks. I found this section :

4.2 Circumstances where it may be unclear

It may be unclear if a qualifying relative occupies your
main or only home if, for example, they partly live
elsewhere for employment as a member of the armed
forces or diplomatic services. Whilst they live
elsewhere to undertake employment, the property
remains their main or only home. The qualifying
relative is therefore occupying the property but is not
physically present out of necessity.
A local authority should take account of the individual
circumstances of each case and be able to give
reasons for its final decision. Statutory guidance has a
list of factors to consider:
 Do they currently occupy another property?
 If they have somewhere else to live, do they own or
rent the property?
 If they are not physically present, is there evidence of
a firm intention to return to or live in the property?
 Where do they pay council tax?
 Where are they registered to vote?
 Where are they registered with a doctor?
 Are their belongings located in the property?
 Is there evidence they have a physical connection with
the property?

Has anyone faced or do they know of how this guideline is administered, so that proper planning can be considered? Is there any resource that can provide a legal basis of consideration to ensure compliance with the guidelines stated here,

For the record, when my father became mentally ill back in the late 90's the local council took steps to seize the family property for his care. My mother was in a state with the prospect of losing her domicile, and eventually ( with the help of a solicitor ) after many months received a written apology from the council.

My fear is council "discretion" which is why i would like a clearer picture of what strongly constitutes residency for a 60yr+ relative.

Anyone experienced this before?