How Much Can They Take ?
- Thread starter Bree
- Start date
If somebody is LA funded they will forfeit all state benefits and pensions but only half of any private or occupational pension if the spouse is still alive.
Capital of between £14,250 and £23,250 is assessed to show an assumed (or ‘tariff’) income. For every £250 or part of £250 of capital between £14,250 and £23,250 you are assessed as though you have an extra £1 per week income. The value of the house is not included if the spouse (or certain other classes of people) lives in it.
The resident is allowed to retain a PEA (Personal Expenses Allowance) of £24.90/Wk
Capital of between £14,250 and £23,250 is assessed to show an assumed (or ‘tariff’) income. For every £250 or part of £250 of capital between £14,250 and £23,250 you are assessed as though you have an extra £1 per week income. The value of the house is not included if the spouse (or certain other classes of people) lives in it.
The resident is allowed to retain a PEA (Personal Expenses Allowance) of £24.90/Wk
Last edited:
We sold our house six months ago to move in with my daughter. I am assuming that I am entitled to split the equity so we have half each and SS don't assess us on the whole? OH is still at home so this isn't an issue at the moment but I know SS will want to know how any capital has been used. I have had a few alterations to our new place for Bernard's benefit, walk in shower, wider doors etc. so hope I can offset that cost against his share of capital but not sure what the rules are.
Sent from my iPad using Talking Point
You certainly can split the proceeds of the sale, don't know rules about the alterations but as they were done to enable your OH to live in the property I would offset the cost against his share and see what they say.
Did you get any recommendation about the necessary work or do any invoices or quotes say anything like 'widen doorway to facilitate use of wheelchair' or 'install disable access walk in shower' ? If so use these to prove that the work was essential for your OH to remain at home.
EDIT
You don't say who owns the new place, if it is owned by your daughter this may cause problems.
Did you get any recommendation about the necessary work or do any invoices or quotes say anything like 'widen doorway to facilitate use of wheelchair' or 'install disable access walk in shower' ? If so use these to prove that the work was essential for your OH to remain at home.
EDIT
You don't say who owns the new place, if it is owned by your daughter this may cause problems.
Last edited:
Jinx, I'm not speaking from any particular expertise but I was wondering if you intend to carry on living with your daughter if anything should happen to Bernard. If you intend to move out and buy a property on your own I am wondering if you could protect the capital that was realised from the house. If you were still living in it as his spouse then they would not be able to put a charge on it unless you were tenants in common (I think it's that one) which is normally done if one or both of you have children from a previous relationship.
I think it would be important for you to get legal advice if you haven't already. Love, Es
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think it would be important for you to get legal advice if you haven't already. Love, Es
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I don't understand this comment I'm afraid. Tenants-in-common doesn't have to be anything to do with children from a previous relation ship, though if course it can affect that.
Also, if a spouse is living in the house, whether owned jointly or as Tenants-in-common, the house is disregarded.
Hi Saffie, I'm not a solicitor but I'll explain the situation as I understand it. Obviously people would have to check things out with their own solicitors.
Tenants in common is usually recommended if partners have children from previous relationships so that each partner's share of the property can be protected for their own children if one pre deceases the other.
It might also be desirable if for example your partner has dementia or needs long term care for another condition. If you die before your partner and and the property is owned as joint tenants the whole value of the property can be taken in care costs. If you are tenants in common your half can be protected for your heirs.
Two solicitors have now told me that if you own the property as Tenants in Common then although the surviving Tenant can live in the property for their lifetime and/or sell it to reinvest in a property which they will live in, the Local Authority can put a charge for care costs against the cared for person's share of the property. Indeed my understanding is that the new Care Act requires the LA to do this now whereas it was discretionary before.
Hope this is clear. I think it's very important for people to understand when making decisions for wills etc.
I brought it up because I thought it might be useful for Jinx to know in case she intended using the capital to buy another property which she would live in.
Tenants in common is usually recommended if partners have children from previous relationships so that each partner's share of the property can be protected for their own children if one pre deceases the other.
It might also be desirable if for example your partner has dementia or needs long term care for another condition. If you die before your partner and and the property is owned as joint tenants the whole value of the property can be taken in care costs. If you are tenants in common your half can be protected for your heirs.
Two solicitors have now told me that if you own the property as Tenants in Common then although the surviving Tenant can live in the property for their lifetime and/or sell it to reinvest in a property which they will live in, the Local Authority can put a charge for care costs against the cared for person's share of the property. Indeed my understanding is that the new Care Act requires the LA to do this now whereas it was discretionary before.
Hope this is clear. I think it's very important for people to understand when making decisions for wills etc.
I brought it up because I thought it might be useful for Jinx to know in case she intended using the capital to buy another property which she would live in.
Is it not as simple as if the proceeds of the house remain as cash then half is an asset of the person with dementia and as such included in any financial assessment.
If the money is used to buy another property and the person with dementia lives there with their spouse then when being financially assessed for care, the whole of the money will be disregarded as it was used to buy the home in which the caring partner needs to live.
If the money is used to buy another property and the person with dementia lives there with their spouse then when being financially assessed for care, the whole of the money will be disregarded as it was used to buy the home in which the caring partner needs to live.
My understanding is that it is 'disregarded' while the caring partner is alive but if Tenants in Common then when the caring partner dies the money will be taken from the cared for person's portion of the value of the property as there will be a charge against it. If the caring person goes into care themselves and the property needs to be sold then presumably the LA could take their share of the cared for person's portion at that time.
I understand about Tenants-in common as our house was owned in this way which was why I said I didn't understand your comment about it usually being formed because of children from earlier marriages.
When my husband's capital reduced to the upper level of £23,250 and the LA became involved in contributing towards his NH fees, they said the house was disregarded totally and didn't even enquire how the property was held. So the TiC situation wasn't even broached so I don't know about it being discretionary. It certainly doesn't seem to have been so here.
I gather the new Care Act has altered a number of things and can understand why this might have changed regarding this matter. Fortunately, it no longer has any effect on me though very sad for the reason this is so.
When my husband's capital reduced to the upper level of £23,250 and the LA became involved in contributing towards his NH fees, they said the house was disregarded totally and didn't even enquire how the property was held. So the TiC situation wasn't even broached so I don't know about it being discretionary. It certainly doesn't seem to have been so here.
I gather the new Care Act has altered a number of things and can understand why this might have changed regarding this matter. Fortunately, it no longer has any effect on me though very sad for the reason this is so.
Jinx was referring to the money that came from the sale of the house and how it would be regarded by the LA when care might be needed. Whose name is in the deeds only comes into play once one half of the couple dies. So money in this case would be seen as half belonging to the wife and half to the person with dementia. If another property was bought whilst Jinx's husband was still at home then the disregard comes into play and no part of the home is taken into account. If the fact they for a while lived with family could be explained by saying they were looking for the right property.
Once one or other of the tenants in common dies then it is another story but at the moment that does not come into what Jinx was asking, as Saffie says.
Once one or other of the tenants in common dies then it is another story but at the moment that does not come into what Jinx was asking, as Saffie says.
I am not sure you have this quite right.
No charge can be put on a property without each part owners consent.
If the spouse still lives in the property (who ever part owns it) the property is disregarded and in no way forms part of a CH residents capital assets. There would no charge on the house unless the LA have agreed to offset any first party top up fees. Again all would have to agree.
If the spouse has to go into care (and assuming there is no one else left living there that an automatic disregard applies to) then the property will be valued and each will be classed as having their share. Those remaining not in care would then have to decide whether to sell the property or ask the LA to enter into a Deferred Payment Agreement.
Last edited:
Just to add to what has been said. It may be wise to split the capital from the sale into 2 separate accounts for both of you. Then use the capital in your OH account to pay/have paid for the alterations. There are examples in the New Care Act Guidance to say if it is not separate accounts the amount will be split equally.
Thank you for clarifying that. As I have no need for knowing about the changes now, I admit to not having kept myself informed regarding changes.With regard to the Automatic Disregard nothing has changed under the New Act.
So the disregard is automatic as I thought rather than discretionary. Maybe Esmeralda's solicitor was speaking about homes held as Tenants in Common by other than married couples.
No, sorry Saffie, the solicitor (from a firm which specialised in issues around funding care) was speaking specifically about our situation as a marrried couple. Because a friend expressed doubts I confirmed it with another solicitor.
Anyway I didn't wish to confuse matters just share information which I thought would be useful. Apologies if I have brought issues up inappropriately Bree.
I can only speak from my own personal experience but I do think this point is very relevant to Bree's original query and could cause her concern.
This is taken from the AS's factsheet on paying for Care home fees.
Are they wrong then? There is no mention of how the house is owned and Tenants-in-common and nor was I ever asked about it.
I could understand if the new Care act had changed things but Pete seems to think it hasn't done so and the AS haven't altered their Factsheet. So it's a bit confusing.
This is taken from the AS's factsheet on paying for Care home fees.
Are they wrong then? There is no mention of how the house is owned and Tenants-in-common and nor was I ever asked about it.
I could understand if the new Care act had changed things but Pete seems to think it hasn't done so and the AS haven't altered their Factsheet. So it's a bit confusing.
Last edited:
