• All threads and posts regarding Coronavirus COVID-19 can be found in our area specifically for Coronavirus COVID-19 discussion.

    You can directly access this area >here<.

Protecting assets.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lawson58

Registered User
Aug 1, 2014
2,502
0
Victoria, Australia
Isn't it funny how we look at life.
Mum and dad worked hard for their money and I want mum's money to be spent on her comfort on the last leg of her journey; if she lives a long and fruitful life, it's goodbye quarter of a million to the CH. Fine by me.
I don't like inherited wealth, can't see the pleasure in enjoying someone else's hard work.
And yet the money OH I have accumulated (not huge but comfortable) is for us to enjoy, but also to pass on as much as possible to our children. Who, in their turn, have said we must spend our money on us!
I can't equate it.
I'm with you on this one though I have no great urge to leave anything to my children. My parents worked hard but had nothing to leave to their children and we didn't expect anything.

So everything I have comes from my own hard work and my children understand that I would not appreciate them trying to protect my assets for their benefit. They know that we are neither rich nor poor but we never discuss money. They are themselves hard working and responsible people who had experience with with care homes when their dad became ill so they know how it works. I have no idea of how much they inherited from their father and I would never ask because I don't consider it to be any of my business.

Philosophically, I believe that if I have the money to pay for care then I should, rather than costing taxpayers funds that could be spent on others more needy.
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
It just seems unfair on those in the middle (regarding assets) :

If you have very little money, SS will pay for your care. You may be left with £14,000 you can pass on to your children.

If you have some savings and/or only a small property to sell, ALL that will probably get used up paying for your care costs but you may still be left with £14,000 to pass on.

If you're well-off, you will also have to pay for your care but you should still have money to leave to your children.

Maybe it's my skewed viewpoint but it seems to me that those in the middle do worse under the current rules.

(OK, yes, it definitely is skewed.)
 

Banjomansmate

Registered User
Jan 13, 2019
3,015
0
Dorset
But @Jaded'n'faded , you would be amongst the first on here ( and I don’t mean this unkindly) to say that there comes a time when the person with dementia’s needs outweigh their wishes so I don’t think saying in an Advance Directive that you insist on staying at home is a viable statement, do you? ;)
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
But @Jaded'n'faded , you would be amongst the first on here ( and I don’t mean this unkindly) to say that there comes a time when the person with dementia’s needs outweigh their wishes so I don’t think saying in an Advance Directive that you insist on staying at home is a viable statement, do you? ;)
Hehehe! My kids will fight for my rights! (There's a house in it for them if they do.)
 

Dimpsy

Registered User
Sep 2, 2019
1,867
0
It just seems unfair on those in the middle (regarding assets) :

If you have very little money, SS will pay for your care. You may be left with £14,000 you can pass on to your children.

If you have some savings and/or only a small property to sell, ALL that will probably get used up paying for your care costs but you may still be left with £14,000 to pass on.

If you're well-off, you will also have to pay for your care but you should still have money to leave to your children.

Maybe it's my skewed viewpoint but it seems to me that those in the middle do worse under the current rules.

(OK, yes, it definitely is skewed.)
No @Jaded'n'faded , you're definitely not skewed, it's the system that's skewed. I like reading your posts, you've got a nice way of cutting through the chase.
 

Andy54

Registered User
Sep 24, 2020
59
0
I think the problem with the current system is that the thresholds haven't changed for a while and bear no relationship to the cost of care. In todays terms £23500 isn't a huge amount and is unlikely to provide an income equal to the "tariff income" Perhaps if the threshold started at the level of the average cost of a years care it might be more realistic.
 

nitram

Registered User
Apr 6, 2011
23,199
0
North Manchester
I think the problem with the current system is that the thresholds haven't changed for a while
Do these terms sound any better?

Non-residential care​

You may have to pay up to a maximum of £100 a week if:

  • you have a high level of disposable income
  • you have savings and investments over £24,000, not including the value of your home
In deciding charges for non-residential care, local authorities must allow you to keep a set amount to help you meet your daily living costs.

Residential care​

If you have capital over £50,000 you may have to pay the full cost of your residential care.

If your capital is at or below this limit, the local authority will help pay for your residential care.

How much you pay towards this care will be calculated from your eligible income, such as pensions or welfare benefits.

Local authorities must ensure you are left with at least £33.00 a week to spend on personal items.

Click to see where this applies
 

Shedrech

Volunteer Moderator
Dec 15, 2012
10,625
0
Yorkshire
maybe my view is skew-whiff in another direction
I have no children and no intention of leaving anything to estranged family ... anything I leave will go to charities
I count myself blessed that mum and dad saved so dad was able to fund himself, and he left me a generous amount when he died
I will be happy to pay for my own care should I need it, and grateful that if my money runs out we live in a state which will fund our care

I am mindful that 'the state'/ the government/the LA/ Social Services (call it what you will) is not some money magician .... it is, in fact, all of those who pay taxes/contributions, so those who are working or have worked .... therefore anyone saying they will give their own assets away so the 'state' can pay for their care is expecting everyone else to pay for them .... which doesn't seem right/fair to me
 

Susan11

Registered User
Nov 18, 2018
3,768
0
One if the problems with the current system is that the people who have more than the limit in care homes end up paying something towards the costs of the people below the limit in the same home. I have no problem at all Mum paying for her own care but I think the country as a whole should pay towards the people who can't pay not the people sitting next to them!
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
One if the problems with the current system is that the people who have more than the limit in care homes end up paying something towards the costs of the people below the limit in the same home. I have no problem at all Mum paying for her own care but I think the country as a whole should pay towards the people who can't pay not the people sitting next to them!
That's exactly what happened to my mum. She paid £200 per week more than the lady in the identical room next door who was council funded because - apprently - the council don't pay enough so the home have to get the shortfall from somewhere.
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
maybe my view is skew-whiff in another direction
I have no children and no intention of leaving anything to estranged family ... anything I leave will go to charities
I count myself blessed that mum and dad saved so dad was able to fund himself, and he left me a generous amount when he died
I will be happy to pay for my own care should I need it, and grateful that if my money runs out we live in a state which will fund our care

I am mindful that 'the state'/ the government/the LA/ Social Services (call it what you will) is not some money magician .... it is, in fact, all of those who pay taxes/contributions, so those who are working or have worked .... therefore anyone saying they will give their own assets away so the 'state' can pay for their care is expecting everyone else to pay for them .... which doesn't seem right/fair to me
Hmmmm. I actually agree that those who can afford to pay should do so - but within limits.

But we don't all have crystal balls and we don't all make careful decisions with our money. Lots of people spend their money as quickly as they earn it, others save 'for a rainy day'. My parents - like many of their generation - were savers. But a lot of the money they believed would go to their children actually went on care home costs. They had no idea that would happen. If they'd known they would certainly have given more away when they were (somewhat) younger.

Regarding inherited money, I'm also ambivalent and could argue it either way. But... the money I have inherited from mum, albeit less than she thought I'd get, has enabled me to buy the house I rent, which saves me money every month and gives me an asset that will - no doubt - offer me some security in my old age. I'd just like to do the same for my kids if it were possible, though my assets are far, far less than my parents'!

I certainly don't think people should be penalised because they've saved their money rather than spending it.

Maybe instead of buying this place I should continue to rent and just give the money to my kids now so they could get on the housing ladder. So many possibilities, so many difficult decisions.
 

Susan11

Registered User
Nov 18, 2018
3,768
0
That's exactly what happened to my mum. She paid £200 per week more than the lady in the identical room next door who was council funded because - apprently - the council don't pay enough so the home have to get the shortfall from somewhere.
Wow. That is a lot extra. I don't know how much extra Mum paid. I wonder what solution the Government will decide is the right one !
 

jennifer1967

Registered User
Mar 15, 2020
5,918
0
Southampton
Hmmmm. I actually agree that those who can afford to pay should do so - but within limits.

But we don't all have crystal balls and we don't all make careful decisions with our money. Lots of people spend their money as quickly as they earn it, others save 'for a rainy day'. My parents - like many of their generation - were savers. But a lot of the money they believed would go to their children actually went on care home costs. They had no idea that would happen. If they'd known they would certainly have given more away when they were (somewhat) younger.

Regarding inherited money, I'm also ambivalent and could argue it either way. But... the money I have inherited from mum, albeit less than she thought I'd get, has enabled me to buy the house I rent, which saves me money every month and gives me an asset that will - no doubt - offer me some security in my old age. I'd just like to do the same for my kids if it were possible, though my assets are far, far less than my parents'!

I certainly don't think people should be penalised because they've saved their money rather than spending it.

Maybe instead of buying this place I should continue to rent and just give the money to my kids now so they could get on the housing ladder. So many possibilities, so many difficult decisions.
@Jaded'n'faded i feel i need to apologize at this point as we were on low pay so couldnt really do the saving. never own our house but rent and he was laid off a few times in the 80s as lorry firms went under. my dad is still living as far as im aware. i wont inherit and dont want it. my 4 kids are all housed with their own families. they wont inherit off of us. my point is that it wasnt my fault i couldnt save and have mortgage etc but reading your post i feel guilty that this never happened. there are as many different circumstances as people. the most we are trying to do is pay for a funeral. maybe be aware of other people. the system is not fair but nothing about dementia is fair and i cant change that
 

Lynmax

Registered User
Nov 1, 2016
815
0
If year on year after allowing for expenses like a new car your bank balance (including cash investment) increases you have excess income.
Your situation is the opposite of living above your means and going into debt.
Gifts should be 'regular' so best made by standing order.
IHT403 asks for details for the last 8 years
View attachment 64525
Thanks, this really helps as I’ve just met my financial advisor for a review and he told me off ( in a nice way) for not spending enough! At the moment my assets are increasing as my main pension fund is doing very well so even after I pay for my new car, I will still have more assets than I had last year. If you add the increased value of my house in the crazy prices near me, then I have even more! I’m by no means rich but it’s good to know I could help my children without incurring the wrath of the tax man!
 

Lawson58

Registered User
Aug 1, 2014
2,502
0
Victoria, Australia
Mum and Dad bought their house, many years ago. It's far from being a mansion but it was their own, a place that I grew up, a place I left to walk down the aisle.
To get this house, my home for many years, sacrifices were made, Dad worked, Mum worked, holidays were few and to a certain extent, I was the latch key kid. They would have liked more children; I asked Santa for a sister but to no avail.
And so I grew up, with this ideal that you save, you bought, you married and if/when, you could afford it, a family followed. Yes the holidays were limited, family size was restricted, we went without the luxuries in life.
This was the mantra, I followed it as best as I could. We met, we saved, we bought and at times, we struggled. We did our best, we never missed a school assembly but dreaded any time a child got sick. We would have liked a bigger family, but nobody was going to give us a bigger home. It was hard, hard on our family and hard on us, hard on on family when they sometimes had to provide child care.
Fast forward to day-
Dad's gone, Mum has Alzheimer's with enough understanding that a care home, would mean selling the house. Yes they've saved but that precious money will go nowhere towards the fees.
Then there's me, accepting that the house that impacted on my childhood, will be swallowed in fees. This is the home that my parents worked for and worked blooming hard.
Alzheimer's a we know, can be hereditary. So I'm sat here waiting to see if the bullet is aimed in my direction. So whilst I have to accept that my parents house will probably be lost in care home fees I'll do everything in my power to prevent a second home being lost.
With over 40year of paying tax, NI, rates, poll tax and council tax, my family going without my presence, why should we loose out yet again? Aren't we supposed to be rewarded for hard work instead of being penalised at every opportunity?
When my children were small, we really struggled financially but they have grown up to be great human beings. We rented for years before scraping together a deposit for a house then spent a long time renovating it when we had enough money.

I have also paid my share of taxes but I always felt that people have a social responsibility to do so, just that sometimes some were able to avoid paying their fair share and left the rest of us to do the heavy lifting.

We now own a modest house and I have some small investments that have done well but I consider that my assets are for my benefit and security, so that if I need care, my children will not be scratching financially to provide for me.

So why do we all work so hard for most of our lives? Is it to provide for ourselves in our old age or is it to give our kids lots of cash when we die? I understand that we all wish for our children to be better off than we were but I have achieved that in giving them life's values, a good education and a great work ethic. I have never understood the need to continue to sacrifice more of my life so that I can leave them something when I die. And frankly they won't be expecting anything. Should I outlive my husband and the pandemic, I will be doing my utmost to enjoy myself with their blessing.
 

Dunroamin

Registered User
May 5, 2019
118
0
UK
Life is not fair nor just a lot of the time. I learned that very early on in life. The system we have regarding funding is an excellent example of this.

I will stick my head above the parapet and say that energies spent railing against this and harbouring grudges does no ones mental health any good. We need collective action to change the system. However, I will not hold my breath ..
 

Banjomansmate

Registered User
Jan 13, 2019
3,015
0
Dorset
I don’t know what the latest figures are but what annoyed me when I was dealing with The Banjoman’s finances was the Government’s rules on how much you had in savings and then how much you had to pay towards care, with the assumption that you were getting something like 8% to 10% interest on savings when it was nothing like that
 

jaymor

Volunteer Moderator
Jul 14, 2006
14,185
0
England
When my children were small, we really struggled financially but they have grown up to be great human beings. We rented for years before scraping together a deposit for a house then spent a long time renovating it when we had enough money.

I have also paid my share of taxes but I always felt that people have a social responsibility to do so, just that sometimes some were able to avoid paying their fair share and left the rest of us to do the heavy lifting.

We now own a modest house and I have some small investments that have done well but I consider that my assets are for my benefit and security, so that if I need care, my children will not be scratching financially to provide for me.

So why do we all work so hard for most of our lives? Is it to provide for ourselves in our old age or is it to give our kids lots of cash when we die? I understand that we all wish for our children to be better off than we were but I have achieved that in giving them life's values, a good education and a great work ethic. I have never understood the need to continue to sacrifice more of my life so that I can leave them something when I die. And frankly they won't be expecting anything. Should I outlive my husband and the pandemic, I will be doing my utmost to enjoy myself with their blessing.

I so agree @Lawson58 My job is done, I can look after myself, I no more think my children should do that job than they think I should provide for them. Yes there is a will, gifting to my children after gifting to grandchildren. I’d like to think I have gifted wisely and hope they enjoy the money IF I haven’t used it on having a decent retirement and care if I should need it.

My husband was diagnosed at 62 and died aged 73 so dementia denied him his hard worked for retirement. Both my children think I should enjoy it for both of us and I do, my husband is with me wherever I go.
 

silkiest

Registered User
Feb 9, 2017
362
0
Hi @Jaded'n'aded, I don't know what the rules are re trusts now but it might be worth asking a solicitor about putting your house into one now or having it written into your will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
120,671
Messages
1,767,965
Members
71,693
Latest member
angelasconcerned