Are the LA always right?

[Early riser]

Although this is my first post, I've been using this site daily for over 2 years. The information and help so freely given by Nitram, Fifimo and others is amazing.

My husband has advanced vascular dementia, diagnosed in 2006 but he showed early signs after a bypass in 1994. I'd always cared for him at home but following a spell in hospital 2 years ago, it was decided he needed to be transferred to a nursing home. The LA did a quick assessment and because we had assets said he would be self funding.
With help from other posts, I applied for deputyship to be able to release capital.

My question: 2 years prior to all this, we moved out of the house we'd lived in for 30 years and bought a flat to make it easier for my husband. The house has now been sold to fund his care. The LA said because it was in my husband's sole name I'm not entitled to any of the proceeds. Is this correct? The COP in their assessment only used 50%.

The COP seem much more understanding. They allow my husband to carry on supporting me financially and for me to continue to use the joint account to pay household bills.

I live in fear of the money running out and the LA becoming involved.

The site has brought me so much comfort on this long lonely path. Thank you.

 

[nitram]

For starters have a read through this summary of >>>BENEFICIAL INTEREST<<<

There may be an argument that you had a beneficial interest in the house.

 

[Early riser]

Thank you for your post Nitram. Somewhere in the back of my mind I always thought needing to go into care was similar to a divorce, where everything is split 50/50.
This cruel illness takes much more than the person we love.

 

[Saffie]

The COP seem much more understanding. They allow my husband to carry on supporting me financially and for me to continue to use the joint account to pay household bills.

They are much more understanding because they don't have a vested interest in your husband's money and his self-funding which the LA very much do.

The OPG told me that it was fine for our joint account, most of which was funded by my husband' pensions, to be used for all the household expences.

However, the LA took a completely different view when my husband's financial assets reduced to the upper level of £23, 250 and they became involved. They took £5,000 of that £23,250 so didn't start to contribute until the level was £18,000. The SW and LA financial advisor both argued my case, but to no avail. The finanacial officer said he was reaching a compromise but I think the only thing compromised was my husband's bank balance!

The truth is that the OPG are very much on the side of protecting the person's capital, the LA is very much not!

 

[nitram]

"...About the house, I really don't know but I would have thought you would be able to remain in it though..."

The house is sold. My understanding is that the OP is not worried about the value of the flat which will be disregarded but is worried about the capital released in the downsize as the house was in her husbands sole name. My proposal is that she should argue that she had a beneficial interest in the house.

 

[Saffie]

I have now edited my post.

 

[Early riser]

Thank you for your post Saffie, that is why I dread the LA becoming involved.

I'm going to take legal advice about beneficial interest, as it's not simply down to living in the marital home for 30 years. I've no proof that I contributed, it's something you don't think about at the time.
I wish now we'd changed it to joint ownership whilst my husband still had capacity, just as I should have done POA when he was first diagnosed and then not had to go down the expensive COP route.

Looking back now it seems silly, but I always thought my husband would get better!

Saffie I've followed your journey over the years as it's a very similar path to my own
Best wishes.

 

[Saffie]

I wish now we'd changed it to joint ownership whilst my husband still had capacity, just as I should have done POA when he was first diagnosed and then not had to go down the expensive COP route.

Thank you Early Riser.
It's easy to be wise after the event as so many of us have discovered, so don't be too hard on yourself.
I didn't think my husband would get better but I did think we had plenty of time to sort out the LPA.The emergency amputation put paid to that and hence my having to go down the Deputyship route too!

Half the money I had for selling a holiday chalet, bought with a small inheritance from my aunt ten years previously and sold whilst my husband was in hospital, was used to pay my husband's NH fees as for some reason he had also signed the original transfer of ownership papers when we bought it. It was always considered to be solely owned by me so this was a big shock and of course, I had no way of proving that it was not part of my husband's capital.
Had the building sociey retained records for longer then I could have done so. Also, had we put it up for sale earlier, the money would have been safely in my account way before any need for it arose.
Bad timing and again foresight would have been helpful!

Good luck with the LA when the time arrives.