Deprivation of assets vs just spending as you go along

Kirkmain

400ixl said:

Kirkmain said:

Brie said:

And no people cannot gift their children chunks of money to get on the property ladder. That's DoA.

No it's not, it's called supporting your children, which is the essence of why anyone gets up in the morning to go to work.

Where do you draw the line? Is buying them nice clothes instead of Asda George DoA, is sending your kid to private school or paying for private tuition DoA. Or a parent who pays for a cleaner and a car valet instead of doing it it themselves so they can spend more time with their kids, is that DoA?

You are comparing something you do when they are an adult vs something when they are a child.

Timing is also important, gifting money to your child as a house deposit when you are in your 40/50's in good health is one thing, doing it in your late 50/60's or even 70's especially if your health is suspect would be a whole different matter.

Some people have children in later life. If I have a child in my late 40s (not uncommon in this day and age), they won't be looking into getting on the property ladder until I'm in my 70s.

Most people have children late because they busy working and building a career. Again illustrating how the rules are set up to penalise the frugal or fiscally responsible. How is our society meant to prosper when it's clear to everyone its the feckless who get rewarded by the state.

Brie

Kirkman - you'll have to live with the fact that life isn't fair.  You pay taxes which support people who can't support themselves for whatever reason.  You pay taxes to put kids through school even if you don't have any.  You pay taxes to build roads even is you never own a car.  That's life.

Spendless

Brie said:

amanda1024 said:

I’m worried by Brie’s story because (like most my generation) my parents gifted me some money to help buy a house. Or was the issue specifically that MiL sold her own home and the money came from that? I agree with Kirkmain! I suppose one thing would be to buy experiences - holidays etc - rather than gifting cash?

Kirkman seems to be missing the point on purpose about little gifts and flagrantly giving away large amounts so LA has to step in.  Yes in our circumstances some of it was that specifically MiL sold her house to give us money to buy ours. My arguement with the LA is that it meant she got 5 years of care with her family looking after her daily rather than the LA having to provide multiple carers daily to keep her living in her own flat which she could not get out of. 

If parents have lots of money, are healthy, say 50ish, and give their kids £20k each as a down payment it's unlikely to be an issue if they go into care 30 years later and 10 years after that need assistance.  If they were selling up to downsize due to health and gave you £100k then it might be looked at differently.  

And every council is different in their approach.  You'll get sensible people who look at the whole situation and others who will be simply officious.

What happened next? Did you have to sell the house/raise the money after MIL died? Or is MIL still here and it's an issue for the future?

maman

Brie said:

Kirkman - you'll have to live with the fact that life isn't fair.  You pay taxes which support people who can't support themselves for whatever reason.  You pay taxes to put kids through school even if you don't have any.  You pay taxes to build roads even is you never own a car.  That's life.

I think one of @Kirkmain's points is that the 'whatever reason' is that some people can't support themselves is because they have been financially irresponsible in earlier life.

Sadly, this leaves the rest of us to pick up the tab. ☹️

Floss

badmemory said:

Well one thing I have seen is that if you are NOT self funding it appears to be harder to be placed in a care home.  Harder too to go into rehabilitation after a serious ailment when living on your own.

Again, it depends upon LA / local need - I'm aware of a friend's parent who lives alone and has spent several weeks in funded rehab.

Floss

Kirkmain said:

Some people have children in later life. If I have a child in my late 40s (not uncommon in this day and age), they won't be looking into getting on the property ladder until I'm in my 70s.

Most people have children late because they busy working and building a career. Again illustrating how the rules are set up to penalise the frugal or fiscally responsible. How is our society meant to prosper when it's clear to everyone its the feckless who get rewarded by the state.

Not always true - I had my children in my twenties, as was common for my peer group and generation. My sons both bought their first property in their late twenties, with only limited support for legal fees from me (one was loaned £3k, the other was loaned £10k)

lr1277

The people setting up their finances such that LA's will pay their care home fees n later life seem to be forgetting goverments and associated rules might change, thereby pulling the rug out from under your collective feet.

Whether the rules change in such a way as to help those that need help or change in such a way they penalise those that need help, I have no idea how that decision will go.

In my view you are better off in charge of your own destiny than relying on the generosity of others, and this includes the generosity of governments and the taxpayers who fund government spending.

Clowance

Does the same DOA rule apply if you spend all your money on yourself in your declining years and then rent a property so that you have no assets when requiring care?

elsien

There is no definitive answer to any of these questions, because it will always be up to whoever is looking at it at the time the question arises. Alongside all the various factors already discussed such as health, timing, intention, et cetera.

Yes I could go out and blow all my money now, take out all my pensions, live the good life. But having seen elder relatives who didn’t need care struggling and pennypinching at the end of their lives, I’m not holding out a lot of hope for the state pension being what it is in future years, and I don’t want to be that person living hand to mouth. For me, it’s about balance, reasonable quality of life, now reasonable quality of life in the future. 

And I’m not basing that on any inheritance that I may or may not get from parents because I’m an adult and that is down to me not them. 

HillsideRetired

lr1277 said:

The people setting up their finances such that LA's will pay their care home fees n later life seem to be forgetting goverments and associated rules might change, thereby pulling the rug out from under your collective feet.

Whether the rules change in such a way as to help those that need help or change in such a way they penalise those that need help, I have no idea how that decision will go.

In my view you are better off in charge of your own destiny than relying on the generosity of others, and this includes the generosity of governments and the taxpayers who fund government spending.

they might not change ... spend spend spend whilst you can so you can enjoy sitting next to the person in the nursing home lounge  who has , with no regret