Dad passed away last year. The house is held tenants-in-common. The solicitor has suggested putting dad's half of the house into a trust, this would mean dad's half of the house would be exempt from the means assessment for mum by social services, should she go into a care home.
Firstly, I would prefer for mum to have all of the assets. It would be simpler and as some have pointed out on other threads it is her house.
Secondly, I don't know whether a trust is expensive to maintain....I hate paying solicitor fees.
Thirdly, dad's Will did go into setting up a trust (it was created in the period when trusts were all the rage) but mum was to have access to the funds in the trust (I forget the wording)....at the discretion of the trustees. So I guess he didn't want her to go short. So going by the spirit of the will it would be OK to transfer everything over to mum BUT if I was to 'play' the system and protect some of the estate for us children would that be so awfully wrong.
I have been advised to consult the family....but when money is concerned things can turn nasty. I'm a little confused....but thinking to NOT go for the trust and NOT tell the family in general (what they don't know doesn't hurt them).
Note: The only asset in the trust would be the half share in the property...no cash or shares. Which would apparently make the trust simpler to maintain.
Any feedback accepted...no matter what your views.
Firstly, I would prefer for mum to have all of the assets. It would be simpler and as some have pointed out on other threads it is her house.
Secondly, I don't know whether a trust is expensive to maintain....I hate paying solicitor fees.
Thirdly, dad's Will did go into setting up a trust (it was created in the period when trusts were all the rage) but mum was to have access to the funds in the trust (I forget the wording)....at the discretion of the trustees. So I guess he didn't want her to go short. So going by the spirit of the will it would be OK to transfer everything over to mum BUT if I was to 'play' the system and protect some of the estate for us children would that be so awfully wrong.
I have been advised to consult the family....but when money is concerned things can turn nasty. I'm a little confused....but thinking to NOT go for the trust and NOT tell the family in general (what they don't know doesn't hurt them).
Note: The only asset in the trust would be the half share in the property...no cash or shares. Which would apparently make the trust simpler to maintain.
Any feedback accepted...no matter what your views.