My sister in law has been receiving full time care since 2007. She has Vascular Dementia and On set Parkinsons. Her savings are down to having enough for one more year of funding before all gone, and she only has private and state pension + AA for funding.
My husband has actually cashed in a ISA to help top up her funds, and cover the mess the social services caused (thats another story). We have receipts for these payments.
The only asset my sister in law has is her house. It was on the market for nearly 2 years, with no interest shown, even after two price drops to tempt buyers. My husband and I decided that we would pay rent to my sister in law and at least take over the costs of council tax and insurance, to save deducting more from her savings to cover these costs.
The fact is now her house will have to go on the market, and no doubt at a much reduced price, but doubt there will be takers. My hubby and I would be prepare to buy the house, which was the family home but left to his sister as she never married and remained with parents.
Taking into account he would be classed as one of her creditors on the sale of any property, he would be prepared to deduct that amount from the purchase of the house, plus we would then come in with a cash payment. With both these amounts combined we could only purchase the house at 50% of its market value, but it would be a quick cash injection to her account which would certainly be there for the remainder of her days. What I really want to know does this seem legal and above board. I would just like to add, that in her Will my husband is left a share of the house between him and his children, and they would be willing to sell their below market value shares to us. Would it not be better Sister in Law benefits now, then to do without.
Please any helpful sources here would be appreciated.
Finally, my husband and I between us are not only paying the appropriate rent as advized by a agent, but also covering additional expenses of spendy money (£400 a year) and clothes purchases as required to save the depleting of savings too fast.
My husband has actually cashed in a ISA to help top up her funds, and cover the mess the social services caused (thats another story). We have receipts for these payments.
The only asset my sister in law has is her house. It was on the market for nearly 2 years, with no interest shown, even after two price drops to tempt buyers. My husband and I decided that we would pay rent to my sister in law and at least take over the costs of council tax and insurance, to save deducting more from her savings to cover these costs.
The fact is now her house will have to go on the market, and no doubt at a much reduced price, but doubt there will be takers. My hubby and I would be prepare to buy the house, which was the family home but left to his sister as she never married and remained with parents.
Taking into account he would be classed as one of her creditors on the sale of any property, he would be prepared to deduct that amount from the purchase of the house, plus we would then come in with a cash payment. With both these amounts combined we could only purchase the house at 50% of its market value, but it would be a quick cash injection to her account which would certainly be there for the remainder of her days. What I really want to know does this seem legal and above board. I would just like to add, that in her Will my husband is left a share of the house between him and his children, and they would be willing to sell their below market value shares to us. Would it not be better Sister in Law benefits now, then to do without.
Please any helpful sources here would be appreciated.
Finally, my husband and I between us are not only paying the appropriate rent as advized by a agent, but also covering additional expenses of spendy money (£400 a year) and clothes purchases as required to save the depleting of savings too fast.