Deprivation of assets etc

elsien

In the OP is a second suggestion which I was referring to.

“Or, if mum kept my 'share' of her proceeds and then needed it for care, what would then happen to the 50/50 aspect on her death? Again, I wouldn't want my sister to have to sell up or owe me anything.“

if your sister only needs a comparatively small amount to get a bigger property, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for her to remortgage if she needs to. After all, she will have a bigger house and garden at the end of it.

lisyloo

elsien said:

In the OP is a second suggestion which I was referring to.
L
“Or, if mum kept my 'share' of her proceeds and then needed it for care, what would then happen to the 50/50 aspect on her death? Again, I wouldn't want my sister to have to sell up or owe me anything.“

if your sister only needs a comparatively small amount to get a bigger property, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for her to remortgage if she needs to. After all, she will have a bigger house and garden at the end of it.

There’s an assumption here that they can remortgage at that point.
they are already in their 50s and may be unable to.

it seems reasonable that this lady can do what she wants with her own money, if that means she makes a loan that the local authority cannot immediately liquidate because it’s tied up in a shared property or the OP cannot get their share on her death because it’s tied up then that all seems reasonable if this arrangement is very much in HER best interests.

my only concern/question would be whether the local authority can get an order to sell the property.
I would imagine they would do a DPA - deferred payment agreement where they make a loan on her share of the property, but if I was the sister I’d want confirmation of the position as clearly the sister may not want to sell merely to liquidate that loan.

Keep_pedalling

lisyloo said:

elsien said:

In the OP is a second suggestion which I was referring to.
L
“Or, if mum kept my 'share' of her proceeds and then needed it for care, what would then happen to the 50/50 aspect on her death? Again, I wouldn't want my sister to have to sell up or owe me anything.“

if your sister only needs a comparatively small amount to get a bigger property, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for her to remortgage if she needs to. After all, she will have a bigger house and garden at the end of it.

There’s an assumption here that they can remortgage at that point.
they are already in their 50s and may be unable to.

it seems reasonable that this lady can do what she wants with her own money, if that means she makes a loan that the local authority cannot immediately liquidate because it’s tied up in a shared property or the OP cannot get their share on her death because it’s tied up then that all seems reasonable if this arrangement is very much in HER best interests.

my only concern/question would be whether the local authority can get an order to sell the property.
I would imagine they would do a DPA - deferred payment agreement where they make a loan on her share of the property, but if I was the sister I’d want confirmation of the position as clearly the sister may not want to sell merely to liquidate that loan.

You place that risk against the fact that living with family reduces the chances that someone would have to go into care, and even if they did they would likely go in later.

The loan would not need to be touched as long as she has plenty of liquid assets. That could be substantial if the current house is worth £400k plus but not much if only worth £100k.

lisyloo

Keep_pedalling said:

lisyloo said:

elsien said:

In the OP is a second suggestion which I was referring to.
L
“Or, if mum kept my 'share' of her proceeds and then needed it for care, what would then happen to the 50/50 aspect on her death? Again, I wouldn't want my sister to have to sell up or owe me anything.“

if your sister only needs a comparatively small amount to get a bigger property, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for her to remortgage if she needs to. After all, she will have a bigger house and garden at the end of it.

There’s an assumption here that they can remortgage at that point.
they are already in their 50s and may be unable to.

it seems reasonable that this lady can do what she wants with her own money, if that means she makes a loan that the local authority cannot immediately liquidate because it’s tied up in a shared property or the OP cannot get their share on her death because it’s tied up then that all seems reasonable if this arrangement is very much in HER best interests.

my only concern/question would be whether the local authority can get an order to sell the property.
I would imagine they would do a DPA - deferred payment agreement where they make a loan on her share of the property, but if I was the sister I’d want confirmation of the position as clearly the sister may not want to sell merely to liquidate that loan.

You place that risk against the fact that living with family reduces the chances that someone would have to go into care, and even if they did they would likely go in later.

The loan would not need to be touched as long as she has plenty of liquid assets. That could be substantial if the current house is worth £400k plus but not much if only worth £100k.

I agree with all of that but if I was the sister I would want to know if the house (my home) could be touched to liquidate the loan as there may be other solutions e.g. 2 adjoining properties.

Linton

lisyloo said:

elsien said:

In the OP is a second suggestion which I was referring to.
L
“Or, if mum kept my 'share' of her proceeds and then needed it for care, what would then happen to the 50/50 aspect on her death? Again, I wouldn't want my sister to have to sell up or owe me anything.“

if your sister only needs a comparatively small amount to get a bigger property, it doesn’t seem unreasonable for her to remortgage if she needs to. After all, she will have a bigger house and garden at the end of it.

There’s an assumption here that they can remortgage at that point.
they are already in their 50s and may be unable to.

it seems reasonable that this lady can do what she wants with her own money, if that means she makes a loan that the local authority cannot immediately liquidate because it’s tied up in a shared property or the OP cannot get their share on her death because it’s tied up then that all seems reasonable if this arrangement is very much in HER best interests.

my only concern/question would be whether the local authority can get an order to sell the property.
I would imagine they would do a DPA - deferred payment agreement where they make a loan on her share of the property, but if I was the sister I’d want confirmation of the position as clearly the sister may not want to sell merely to liquidate that loan.

AIUI.....
the local authority could simply refuse to pay for Mum's care.  This would leave the daughters in a very difficult position with a situation that would not be in anyone's best interests. A deferred payment agreement is something the council has the option not to agree to rather than something they may wish to do.  It's for the benefit of the person needing care, not an imposition by the council.

As others have said, proper legal advice is essential.

Sarahspangles

Gorffennaf said:

We assume we'd also be liable to Inheritance Tax.

If you share the headline figures someone can confirm whether or not IHT is an issue.

What would you do if your mother needs progressively more care and this becomes a burden on your sister?