Challenging valuation of property under CRAG

[WILLIAMR]

In all cases I have dealt with there was no trust deed .
The offspring were just half owners.
The surviving parent had the right to occupy the property by virtue of the fact they were also half owners.

An interesting clause on the land certificate relating to the bungalow I half owned with my father.
It said no sale, transfer, or charge to be given over the property without the consent of both owners both owners being myself and my father.
It appears if Dad had willed the property to somebody else I could have blocked the transfer.

William

 

[Prudence]

Hi thanks for the reply

The house was held as tenants in common which meant my dad could leave his share to whom ever he wanted. This is allowed and isn't classed as deprivation of assesses.

We are renting the house out to help with mums care costs which also assists the council as it means she has increased income.

 

[garnuft]

I think the reason run-of-the-mill Estate Agents will struggle to find a value for 50% of a property is because it is worth virtually nothing.

That's the point to get across to any Local Authority.

I don't think you need to go to any expense, it's for the LA to do a legitimate financial assessment.

Half the market value of a house is not the same as half the value of a house in which the other party is not willing to sell their 50%.

I think if you argue this point you will always win.

 

[Cloverland]

There was a very similar thread yesterday where WilliamR gave a couple of very good examples of relations winning against LA's. I have pasted the link below, hope it works.

http://forum.alzheimers.org.uk/showthread.php?74825-Dementia-Tax-Pure-Robbery

 

[Cloverland]

This is also interesting. You may already know about it.

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/Documents/E...rmanent_care_home_provision_fcs.pdf?dtrk=true

 

[Prudence]

Thanks William

I have just read the age uk fact sheet and will definitely take a copy with me to the assessment.

Prudence

 

[sue38]

This is my current argument with the LA as they are insisting that there is no trust therefore they need to take the half into account but even though there is no actual legal document entitled "Property Trust" the Legal & Binding Will clearly states that upon the first death the property enters into a trust until such time as the other party is no longer with us. Then the "Trust" i.e. the property is split amongst the beneficiaries.

I think the LA need to have a quiet word with their legal department who will tell them that wherever you have more than one owner of a property you have a trust. You might not have a document that says 'Trust Deed' in big bold letters but you still have a trust. Even where there is only one owner there may be a trust.

 

[lexipaul]

Hi thanks for the reply

The house was held as tenants in common which meant my dad could leave his share to whom ever he wanted. This is allowed and isn't classed as deprivation of assesses.

We are renting the house out to help with mums care costs which also assists the council as it means she has increased income.

Yes, we thought of doing that when we thought they would have to take the property into account. I think we're going to fully make that decision when we finally win/lose the argument!
Considering we're already at the point of care fees owing since December, the LA are insisting that when the "Bill" is finally calculated it will have to be paid in a lump sum it will have fast depleted grandma's funds anyway and it is very soon going to reach the point where she won't be paying anything herself!

I think the problem with fighting these things is that 98% of the population don't want to come across as greedy and have people think they're only out for what they can get, they're genuinely only fighting it because it's what the parents would have wanted, they didn't work hard all their lives to have the state take it when all is said and done.

Makes you think what we'll do with our own houses and if we'll do it sooner rather than later so our kids don't have all this!

 

[lexipaul]

I think the LA need to have a quiet word with their legal department who will tell them that wherever you have more than one owner of a property you have a trust. You might not have a document that says 'Trust Deed' in big bold letters but you still have a trust. Even where there is only one owner there may be a trust.

Hi Sue, tell me about it. My argument though is that it's supposedly their legal department that's saying it's not in trust!!!! They've got copies of the will, copies of the severance of tenancy between granddad and grandma, land registry deed saying they're tenants in common and also the land registry deed saying since granddad's death the owners are me, mum & grandma as tenants in common. Do they need blood too?!

 

[WILLIAMR]

Hi Sue, tell me about it. My argument though is that it's supposedly their legal department that's saying it's not in trust!!!! They've got copies of the will, copies of the severance of tenancy between granddad and grandma, land registry deed saying they're tenants in common and also the land registry deed saying since granddad's death the owners are me, mum & grandma as tenants in common. Do they need blood too?!

I would just say you are not paying and tell the council to take you to court.
It is unlikely they will.
Councils are short of money or are just trying it on.

William

 

[vernumamy]

Thank you for sharing this, we are going through the same process. My dad died in Feb 2014 leaving his share of his home to his three children, my mother has now gone into residential care and we are awaiting a financial assessment. The LA have requested we provide an independent valuation of the property.

I am finding it difficult to find a valuer who understands CRAG, estate agents just want to provide a valuation of the house rather than the value of my mothers share.

I look forward to hearing how you go on.

Hello Prudence,

Tell the LA that you are not providing them with a valuation and if they want one they will have to provide their own, as the house is not for sale, nor is it going to be sold.

Besides your mother owning a 50% share, you also own a 50% share between you and your siblings and you have no intention of selling your property share.

You can also tell them that they cannot put a charge on the property for your mother's share ( if they suggest it ) without your consent, which you will not be doing.

 

[vernumamy]

Hi, all the comments on here are very helpful. My mum & I are just going through a challenge for my grandma's care fees and whether they're going to take grandma's half share in the property into account.

We are wanting to get the valuation of my grandma's "share" done just in case we need further back up for the argument that the property is actually in trust, so cannot be touched, but my question is - would all valuation companies deal with this and know what I was asking for or are there specialist ones? Also is it reasonable for the fee for the valuation to come out of Grandma's money seeing as it's her share we're valuing?

"jenniferpa
I'm assuming you've waved 7.017 - 7.020 of CRAG in front of them? Never underestimate how little some LAs know about CRAG. P.S. I'm not suggesting you do it, but I do wonder how they would respond if you said - "OK I'm prepared to pay £5K for my mother's share - match that""

I tried this one with the finance lady last night but she said "bear in mind the price you're willing to pay has to be deemed as reasonable and would you call £5k reasonable"!!!!!!

Cheers

Lexi

Hello Lexi,

Please see my above comment to Prudence as this also applies to you, if one person or more own the other 50% share to your Grandma's, then you do not really need a " trust " as such.

Somebody else other than your Grandma own 50% of the property, and they cannot be forced to sell, nor do they have to allow a charge to be put on the property.

 

[vernumamy]

Yes, I cited those sections right from the outset and have quoted section 7.019 in full in quite a few emails. They don't deny it's existence just say it's not the way they do the valuation... The financial advisor I spoke to said that she's had some clients who manage to 'negotiate' a price after protracted discussions. I'll certainly keep that one as an option if we hit a real stalemate. At the moment they say that a sale will not be forced and they're happy for the rental to continue with income used as a contribution to the fees. There is talk of a deferred payment agreement but of course I'm not signing anything as yet. I've had differing opinions from 'professionals' as to whether a charge can be placed on my mother's share of the property without permission (I act as power of attorney). Thanks for your interest, I was starting to feel a little battle worn but as it's stat guidance I feel that the LA shouldn't get away with it!

Hi assistance12,

You say you have had different opinions from " proffessionals " as to whether a charge can be placed on your mothers share of the property without permission.

I am not a proffessional, but it is my understanding that a charge put on a property covers the " whole " of the property and not just a persons share.

If a charge is put on a property it is a blanket charge covering " ALL " the property, the other owners can object to this, as it will mean a charge being put on something " THEY " own, also the LA cannot force a sale on a property part belonging to somebody else.

Also to add, tenants in common cannot be classed as deprivation of assets, irrespective of when it was done, because it can be done by " any " joint owner, not just the person who is ill.

 

[WILLIAMR]

I am not sure of the situation where a property is rented out as all the people I have helped have been joint owner occupiers.
In 1 case the council wanted to charge the daughter rent on her parents half but the daughter refused to pay.
The mother lived for a further year and no action was taken.

If the property is owned half and half logically only the patients half of the rent should go to the council but half the expenses should be deducted ( insurance, maintenance etc ).

In 1 case a daughter was living by herself in a 6 bedroom detached house by herself half of it belonged to the father.

The council wanted her to take in 5 lodgers but got nowhere when she refused.

William

 

[WILLIAMR]

Crag

Have you asked the council to show you what part of CRAG or other law allows them to take in to account the value of a jointly owned property?.

Don't accept anything written by the council.

William

 

[sue38]

I am not a proffessional, but it is my understanding that a charge put on a property covers the " whole " of the property and not just a persons share.

If a charge is put on a property it is a blanket charge covering " ALL " the property, the other owners can object to this, as it will mean a charge being put on something " THEY " own, also the LA cannot force a sale on a property part belonging to somebody else.

You can have a charge against one person's interest in a jointly owned property. If, for example, you have joint owners and one of the owners has run up debts (e.g. credit card debts) in their sole name, the credit card company could get a county court judgement for the debt and apply to register the judgement against that person's interest in the property. In fact, they frequently do this.

I have never seen a Local Authority seeking to put a charge on a jointly owned property, but I don't see any technical reason why they shouldn't be able to do so.

I'm not saying that they should, just that technically I think they could.

 

[WILLIAMR]

You can have a charge against one person's interest in a jointly owned property. If, for example, you have joint owners and one of the owners has run up debts (e.g. credit card debts) in their sole name, the credit card company could get a county court judgement for the debt and apply to register the judgement against that person's interest in the property. In fact, they frequently do this.

I have never seen a Local Authority seeking to put a charge on a jointly owned property, but I don't see any technical reason why they shouldn't be able to do so.

I'm not saying that they should, just that technically I think they could.

Hi Sue

Looking at paragraph 7.019 of CRAG it appears if the co owners are not willing to buy the residents share the value of it is nil.


William

 

[sue38]

Hi William,

Yes, I agree that the guidance says the value could be nil. The only point I was making was that a 3rd party can seek a charging order against one owner's beneficial share of a property without the other owner's consent. Of course the LA would first have to prove that there was a debt owed, and to do that they would have to prove that the half share has a value.

 

[WILLIAMR]

Hi William,

Yes, I agree that the guidance says the value could be nil. The only point I was making was that a 3rd party can seek a charging order against one owner's beneficial share of a property without the other owner's consent. Of course the LA would first have to prove that there was a debt owed, and to do that they would have to prove that the half share has a value.

Hi Sue

Something which could be interesting.
A son who I have helped is a joint owner of a house with his father ( tenants in common ) and has befriended a lady and he has willed his interest in the house to her in case he dies before his father as he has no relatives.
As she has family he does not wish to be a beneficiary of her will.
Looking at Crag it appears if he does pass away she will in effect step in to the son's position and will get the father's share as well as the son is the beneficiary of the father's will.
I know it is unlikely the son will die before the father but it could happen as he is driving up the motorway most days to see his father not always with his lady friend.
I am not sure what action the council will take should those circumstances arise.


William

 

[vernumamy]

You can have a charge against one person's interest in a jointly owned property. If, for example, you have joint owners and one of the owners has run up debts (e.g. credit card debts) in their sole name, the credit card company could get a county court judgement for the debt and apply to register the judgement against that person's interest in the property. In fact, they frequently do this.

I have never seen a Local Authority seeking to put a charge on a jointly owned property, but I don't see any technical reason why they shouldn't be able to do so.

I'm not saying that they should, just that technically I think they could.

As assistance12 was talking about a share in a property that was shared as tenants in common, my reply was in regard to tenants in common and not joint owners.

If you think my reply was misleading, I apologise to you or anybody else who did not see it that way.