What's this scheme called please

www.gov.uk/guidance/register-a-trust-as-a-trustee

There are no exemptions for Wills , Trusts etc. Any care package that’s owing after the last person dies will be taken out of the property at Probate

I'm long term divorced and thinking about jointly buying a house to share with soon to be divorced adult child. I will need to upsize to accomodate both my child and 50% of the time young grandchildren. I've always intended leaving my home to my child and grandkids. It hadn't occurred to me that this could be seen as possibly hiding assets. It's only something I'm thinking of as a solution to a housing problem, not to hide anything. Does anyone know if this is OK?

Grandnagrotbags, yes you are part right. If you are tenants in common with someone the money will only be taken out of your 50% share.

And be aware that Local Authorities are legally powerful and are protecting the cost to their council tax payers.

People who can pay should.

People become tenants in common for many reasons or a combination of reasons so stop judging.

If anyone is seeking advice about house ownership, protecting assets, paying for care from us motley crew, you are going to get a soup of probably unreliable answers and a few nuggets of facts - and a headache separating the two. Professional advice - and research on the web - is the only way - may be a bit more expensive or research resource intensive…

We are tenants in common to protect my half of our house . My DH has Alzheimer’s and will most likely need care. If all our house was taken into account then what would happen if I need care later ( Dementia rife in my family) , where would some funds to help me come from. My mother is in care , and my sister and I are willingly spending her flat sale money on her care, but she is a widow. It’s very different trying to do the best to safeguard enough fund for a couple.

Germanshepherdsmum

Apologies for the number of children Barmey but your post was difficult to understand there.

MPs don’t have huge salaries, far less than I earned, and they need a home in their constituency as well as a place convenient for Westminster so I don’t object to the reasonable (and we all know some take the p*ss there) costs of having to buy, equip and maintain a second home being paid by the taxpayer. If that didn’t happen there would be a great many more absentee and/or extremely wealthy MPs. I would be pleased to see the end of heavily subsidised meals though.

I’m sorry your children earn low wages (their choice of career), but it doesn’t mean that anyone else should pay for your care, so that they could buy houses, should you ever find that you can’t carry out your plan (as you will have seen, mine simply involves different drugs).

I have read all the posts here until I read that Germansheperdsmum ( love that name because it shows a love of dogs) I was curious because GSM said she earned more than an MP! As I worked in public sector jobs all my working life I never earned more than that and in fact if you add their allowances, cheap meals and being able to sell their homes that we paid for at a handsome profit then you must have earned a goodly sum GSM. It really is none of my business to ask but what job did you do? The only benefit husband and I ever received was attendance allowance for 3 weeks before he died. The helpful lady at the GP’s office wrote to me about it as I never knew about it. So be a sport and tell us about your work GSM as I am truly curious. All the other stuff in the thread is just a matter of opinion.

A friend said to me “ Better to give with a warm hand than one which is cold” I was talking about helping my 3 children while I am alive rather than wait until after death. I do not have the problem of going into a care home thankfully.

Nanna58

We are tenants in common to protect my half of our house . My DH has Alzheimer’s and will most likely need care. If all our house was taken into account then what would happen if I need care later ( Dementia rife in my family) , where would some funds to help me come from. My mother is in care , and my sister and I are willingly spending her flat sale money on her care, but she is a widow. It’s very different trying to do the best to safeguard enough fund for a couple.

If you were joint tenants none of the value of the house would be taken into account, as long as you continued to live there.

I posted the rules from the Government website upthread.

My interpretation is if you are tenants in common care fees can only be taken up to the percentage agreed on the tenancy. If you are joint tenants then ALL the fees come due after the 2nd death because you both own all of the house. No money needs to be repaid until the 2nd death. The house cannot be sold with a ‘sitting’ tenant. This is ideal for 2nd or 3rd or more marriages.

Bucks

My interpretation is if you are tenants in common care fees can only be taken up to the percentage agreed on the tenancy. If you are joint tenants then ALL the fees come due after the 2nd death because you both own all of the house. No money needs to be repaid until the 2nd death. The house cannot be sold with a ‘sitting’ tenant. This is ideal for 2nd or 3rd or more marriages.

No! You’re totally wrong. Please read the.actual regulations on the Government website.

Why don’t people look for facts

Lathyrus

Germanshepherdsmum

If you make a will leaving your house to someone else on condition that your spouse can continue to live there, the will only comes into operation when you die and therefore no longer require care. In the meantime you continue to own it. If before you die you need care, the house will be included in your assets for the purpose of assessing care fees. The terms of the will are irrelevant. The spouse won’t be turned out but the local authority will place a charge on the house to recover unpaid fees (plus interest) when the spouse leaves. The person to whom the house was left in the will won’t get it unless they can pay off the care fees debt.

The LA won’t place a charge on the house while the spouse or legal partner still lives there

From the Government website.

Deferred Payments Section 2:4

“Providing your partner lives in your home as their main or only residence the local authority should exclude the value of your home when it assess your finances.
This means that you should not face having to sell your home to pay for care and *will not need a deferred payment agreement.” (my bold)

So there’s no charge on the house while one partner is still living there, not even as a debt to be paid later.

Not arguing with you GSM, but I think it’s important to get it from the horses mouth as it were

I’ll just repost it.

And then I think I’ll give up?

Not what we were told by our solicitor or Age UK Lathyrus.....

The point being that if house is jointly owned the whole amount is considered to be used for self funding , down to the threshold, which I believe is currently £23,000

GSM was a lawyer I believe Annie1.

The whole point is ‘jointly owned’ not tenants in common which also would be the case if two unrelated people lived together and not married.

I don’t think so Kate, it is worrying, particularly in these difficult times. I think if you can’t afford to maintain a home you have to sell up or take out equity to fund yourselves, if you own your own home.

Bucks

The whole point is ‘jointly owned’ not tenants in common which also would be the case if two unrelated people lived together and not married.

No you can be joint tenants or tenants in common whether you are married or not. It’s just the name of the legal agreement you draw up.

Personally Nanna 58. I think the Government regulations are the ones that will be applied by law. It is there in black and white. It’s not an opinion.

When doing a financial assessment for my daughter who was living in social housing and needed care I was asked to sign a document saying I would make up any shortfall or pay if she didn’t. I refused. My friend was also asked to do the same for her mum who was in a home and she signed, at first she could afford it but charges went up and she couldn’t is this fair>

Barney old at,

No it is not fair at all.

Sorry my right hand is not working well. I meant to write
Barmeyoldbat.

Just come across this thread - I’ve been away. Over the years, DH and I paid for all sorts for our DDs and I still try to pay for bits and bobs, as little gifts. However, if I have to go into Care and self fund, they and I are fine about it and if at ‘the end of the day’ they’re left £23K or whatever it is between them, that’s still a tidy sum. I don’t think one’s children should ‘expect’ inheritances.

Someone earlier mentioned how the Germans managed this problem, below is how the French handle care in old age.

Anyone with elderly parents or grandparents living in France can be subject to demands from French care homes to pay for their upkeep. It relates to the obligation alimentaire laws, under which people are responsible for their descendants or forebears if they are in need.
Just as parents are responsible for the care of their children, adult children are responsible for helping their parents and grandparents
Article 205 of the Code Civil says: “Children owe sustenance to their father and mother, or to other forebears who are in need.”
If these funds are not provided voluntarily then care homes may seek to require a child to pay. If they do not do so, a family affairs judge will be asked to rule on the issue, taking into account the extent of the parent’s need and the ability of the child to provide the funds.
If a parent has been irresponsible with money or failed to work through idleness, the court might not require children to pay, as their need must be “involuntary”.

It also must be said that French people cannot, without a lot of problems, disinherit their children. Moreover your inheritance is yours and does not get put into the marital pot.

I can only advise from my own experience my dad owned his home. I took out a deferred arrangement with the local authority which meant I could choose his care home but also meant that I benefited from the local authority rates rather than the self funding rates. I did have to contribute a top up. I have to be honest I begrudged the fact my parents had worked and saved for their home and it was spent on care but a civilised society is judged on how it treats the poorest so I should have a word with myself.