Buying more equity in shared appartment - deprivation of assets?

christophermedway

Due to a deterioration in my mental health I was retired early from work, I sold my house ( which I owned ) and purchased an appartment in a retirement village. I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets", and that these sums of money should contribute to care. 

If I do not buy the remaining equity, I will have to continue to pay rent for the remaining 30%, initially out of my own pocket while I have sufficient money, and then out of the taxpayers via housing benefit. Given that this is my primary abode, I am unsure that this is deprivation of assets. As long as this additional equity is stated in the means testing then surely it is all factored in anyway? 

It would be great to get some constructive thoughts from others.

pmlindyloo

christophermedway said:

Due to a deterioration in my mental health I was retired early from work, I sold my house ( which I owned ) and purchased an appartment in a retirement village. I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets", and that these sums of money should contribute to care. 

If I do not buy the remaining equity, I will have to continue to pay rent for the remaining 30%, initially out of my own pocket while I have sufficient money, and then out of the taxpayers via housing benefit. Given that this is my primary abode, I am unsure that this is deprivation of assets. As long as this additional equity is stated in the means testing then surely it is all factored in anyway? 

It would be great to get some constructive thoughts from others.

A few questions...

1.  How old are you?
2.  What benefits are you currently claiming?
3.  Exactly what monies and the amounts are available to you - private/state pension/pension pot/payment protection?

Mojisola

christophermedway said:

I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets"

The only way to be sure is to get it in writing from DWP decision maker but I would think, at least in the short term, it's the opposite of deprivation because you won't be claiming any more help with rent.

pmlindyloo

Mojisola said:

christophermedway said:

I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets"

The only way to be sure is to get it in writing from DWP decision maker but I would think, at least in the short term, it's the opposite of deprivation because you won't be claiming any more help with rent.

This would be  true of some means tested benefits but with Universal Credit and Pension Credit you are allowed to pay off debts.

calcotti

I am not sure OP is asking about DWP benefits. I think they may be concerned about deprivation of assets in respect of paying for care (which I'm not going to comment on as it's not something I know much about).

Mojisola

calcotti said:

I am not sure OP is asking about DWP benefits. I think they may be concerned about deprivation of assets in respect of paying for care (which I'm not going to comment on as it's not something I know much about).

But, if they keep the capital, the help with rent will stop and the capital will be consequently be reduced by the cost of the rent.

christophermedway

pmlindyloo said:

christophermedway said:

Due to a deterioration in my mental health I was retired early from work, I sold my house ( which I owned ) and purchased an appartment in a retirement village. I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets", and that these sums of money should contribute to care. 

If I do not buy the remaining equity, I will have to continue to pay rent for the remaining 30%, initially out of my own pocket while I have sufficient money, and then out of the taxpayers via housing benefit. Given that this is my primary abode, I am unsure that this is deprivation of assets. As long as this additional equity is stated in the means testing then surely it is all factored in anyway? 

It would be great to get some constructive thoughts from others.

A few questions...

1.  How old are you?
2.  What benefits are you currently claiming?
3.  Exactly what monies and the amounts are available to you - private/state pension/pension pot/payment protection?

I am 64, 65 in November. I am currently  receiving PIP and housing benefit. I also have the costs of care covered. I do not currently draw a state or private pension. I did have 10k of savings, which has now increased to 35k due to the 25k lump sum from payment protection I received from my employer when my contract was terminated. My intention was that the 25k would pay off the remaining 30% of the apartment.

poppy12345

christophermedway said:

pmlindyloo said:

christophermedway said:

Due to a deterioration in my mental health I was retired early from work, I sold my house ( which I owned ) and purchased an appartment in a retirement village. I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets", and that these sums of money should contribute to care. 

If I do not buy the remaining equity, I will have to continue to pay rent for the remaining 30%, initially out of my own pocket while I have sufficient money, and then out of the taxpayers via housing benefit. Given that this is my primary abode, I am unsure that this is deprivation of assets. As long as this additional equity is stated in the means testing then surely it is all factored in anyway? 

It would be great to get some constructive thoughts from others.

A few questions...

1.  How old are you?
2.  What benefits are you currently claiming?
3.  Exactly what monies and the amounts are available to you - private/state pension/pension pot/payment protection?

I am 64, 65 in November. I am currently  receiving PIP and housing benefit. I also have the costs of care covered. I do not currently draw a state or private pension. I did have 10k of savings, which has now increased to 35k due to the 25k lump sum from payment protection I received from my employer when my contract was terminated. My intention was that the 25k would pay off the remaining 30% of the apartment.

If you now have £35,000 in savings then i assume you've reported those changes to your local authority because you will no longer be entitled to any housing benefit and council tax reduction, if you claim this. Do you receive any other benefits like ESA? If so is this Contributions based, Income related or a mixture of both?

What ever you decide to do with that money, you must report the changes in the meantime.

elsien

If you’re referring to DDA with regards to care charges, have you seen this fact sheet?
Your primary intention is not to get rid of money so you don’t have to pay for care. 
https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs40_deprivation_of_assets_in_social_care_fcs.pdf

DDA for benefits may work slightly differently. 

christophermedway

poppy12345 said:

christophermedway said:

pmlindyloo said:

christophermedway said:

Due to a deterioration in my mental health I was retired early from work, I sold my house ( which I owned ) and purchased an appartment in a retirement village. I wasn't able to afford the full cost of the appartment, so I own 70% and pay rent to the retirement village, who own the other 30%. For this reason, currently my care and rent are covered by benefits - I don't have savings. 

My intention, which was discussed with the retirement village at the time, was to buy the remaining 30% equity in the appartment when my pension and/or payment protection is available - which it now is. However, the retirement village are now making noises that doing so would be a "deprivation of assets", and that these sums of money should contribute to care. 

If I do not buy the remaining equity, I will have to continue to pay rent for the remaining 30%, initially out of my own pocket while I have sufficient money, and then out of the taxpayers via housing benefit. Given that this is my primary abode, I am unsure that this is deprivation of assets. As long as this additional equity is stated in the means testing then surely it is all factored in anyway? 

It would be great to get some constructive thoughts from others.

A few questions...

1.  How old are you?
2.  What benefits are you currently claiming?
3.  Exactly what monies and the amounts are available to you - private/state pension/pension pot/payment protection?

I am 64, 65 in November. I am currently  receiving PIP and housing benefit. I also have the costs of care covered. I do not currently draw a state or private pension. I did have 10k of savings, which has now increased to 35k due to the 25k lump sum from payment protection I received from my employer when my contract was terminated. My intention was that the 25k would pay off the remaining 30% of the apartment.

If you now have £35,000 in savings then i assume you've reported those changes to your local authority because you will no longer be entitled to any housing benefit and council tax reduction, if you claim this. Do you receive any other benefits like ESA? If so is this Contributions based, Income related or a mixture of both?

What ever you decide to do with that money, you must report the changes in the meantime.

Yes the relevant authorities have been notified.