Theoretical Question re selling a house and benefits
Comments
-
A lot of assumptions to be made but....
If she is claiming Income Related benefits and has a property she isn't living in it would be classed as an asset (capital) unless it is up for sale. If it isn't, and her change of circumstance hasn't been reported, she is already commiting benefit fraud.
If she sells the house for less than market value with the intention of being able to continue to claim benefits, it will almost certainly be classed as deprivation of capital and she will lose benefits.
She is still paying all the bills associated with the house whilst living 'temporarily' with her mother.0 -
Sunny_Intervals wrote: »Well, that might explain why she doesn't think she'll get caught. Thinks everything's still done with card files and bits of paper in filing cabinets.
In all seriousness, though, she's making a horrendous financial and legal decision. If this is a result of her mental illness, maybe her daughter should be looking into some kind of apointee/power of attorney type arrangement, rather than supporting this silliness?
I don' think she is aware of how the DSS operate on a daily basis.:D
I don't believe this is a result of her illness, more of her belief that she has to have these benefits because that is the status quo.
It wasn't her idea it was her son in laws....but she sees it as the way forward. Her 83-year-old mother is her appointee. Her mothers' estate is a whole other can of worms just waiting to be opened.0 -
She is free to do whatever she choses with her property.
She really does need independent legal advice before she does this.
By giving away her property and not living in it she gives up all legal rights to ownership, occupation and any subsequent rental income.
If her daughter sells it she will be hit by large bill for capital gains tax (£1 purchase v sale price minus £1).
The mother will be classed as depriving herself of an asset for benefits purpose.
The daughter will be liable for tax on any rental income.
Giving away the property has many complicated legal and tax and benefit implications. She needs specialist legal advice so she goes into this with her eyes wide open.I enjoy flower arranging, kittens, devil worship, the study of serial killers and their methods and road kill jigsaws.0 -
Afraid_of_Kittens wrote: »She is free to do whatever she choses with her property.
She really does need independent legal advice before she does this.
By giving away her property and not living in it she gives up all legal rights to ownership, occupation and any subsequent rental income.
If her daughter sells it she will be hit by large bill for capital gains tax (£1 purchase v sale price minus £1).
The mother will be classed as depriving herself of an asset for benefits purpose.
The daughter will be liable for tax on any rental income.
Giving away the property has many complicated legal and tax and benefit implications. She needs specialist legal advice so she goes into this with her eyes wide open.
Her daughter rents her own house so the house off her mother would be her only property, although she would not live in it personally, as it isn't in a suitable location for her family.
The daughter has said she would give her mum the rental income minus the tax she would be required to pay.0 -
happyandcontented wrote: »I don' think she is aware of how the DSS operate on a daily basis.:D
I don't believe this is a result of her illness, more of her belief that she has to have these benefits because that is the status quo.
It wasn't her idea it was her son in laws....but she sees it as the way forward. Her 83-year-old mother is her appointee. Her mothers' estate is a whole other can of worms just waiting to be opened.
The son in law and daughter must be seeing £££ signs.
They will say and do anything to reassure the poor old Mum that this is a good idea and it could leave the Mum hgh and dry when everything goes pear shaped.
She needs to be sat down in front of someone qualified and away from the tentacles of the son in law to be given the advice (that she probably doesn't want to hear) that this whole scam/scheme really isn't a good idea.I enjoy flower arranging, kittens, devil worship, the study of serial killers and their methods and road kill jigsaws.0 -
Then it's her mother's responsibility to report any changes which can affect the benefits she claims.happyandcontented wrote: ». Her 83-year-old mother is her appointee.
https://www.gov.uk/become-appointee-for-someone-claiming-benefits0 -
Sunny_Intervals wrote: »The fact that she has an appointee would suggest she does have trouble handling money because of her illness.
I agree with AoK, the daughter and son-in-law may be taking advantage and someone needs to step in to protect your friend's interests.
Yes, she did, she had unpaid bills stuffed in drawers several years ago which is when her mother stepped in. However, she sees her benefits as a right almost as she has been on them so long. It is that mindset which is leading her down this road, rather than her illness.0 -
happyandcontented wrote: »Yes, she did, she had unpaid bills stuffed in drawers several years ago which is when her mother stepped in. However, she sees her benefits as a right almost as she has been on them so long. It is that mindset which is leading her down this road, rather than her illness.
She has rights to benefits but also has responsibilities.
Did she ever consider giving away her only asset before her daughter and son in law got their tentacles in and convinced her this is the best course of action?I enjoy flower arranging, kittens, devil worship, the study of serial killers and their methods and road kill jigsaws.0 -
Afraid_of_Kittens wrote: »She has rights to benefits but also has responsibilities.
Did she ever consider giving away her only asset before her daughter and son in law got their tentacles in and convinced her this is the best course of action?
Actually, she did, in that she had told them that she would sell and give the money to her daughters. When I and others, explained that this would be seen as deprivation of capital and that she would still be deemed as having the sale price and thus lose benefits (which was the intent behind the plan) she thought again.
Son in Law then came up with this idea which she has now latched onto.0 -
It's not just cans of worms which are being opened up but whole mountains of the things. Defining a temporary move to live with the mother is difficult. DWP may accept that view or may say they consider it permanent after an extended period. That decision can't be made if her appointee hasn't informed DWP of her current situation.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards