to ask how you plan to protect your children's inheritance

(243 Posts)
OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 14:19:56

DD only aged 10 but my main goal is to make sure she has a home for life; with us whilst she's young then a house for herself when she's an adult. So I eventually want to make provision to buy her a house that can't be touched to pay our care home fees, should we need them.

Anyone else got similar goals for their kids and, if so, how to you plan to achieve them?

WadsCollop Thu 25-Apr-13 14:21:13

I plan to teach my children to work hard to better themselves and to help other people when they can.

hth.

I think home ownership is massively overrated and one of the reasons the financial situation in the UK and the US is as bad as it is.

I'm saving for DD's education. Let her buy what she wants with her salary.

bamboostalks Thu 25-Apr-13 14:23:50

How do you propose to fund your care home needs, should you need them?

WynkenBlynkenandNod Thu 25-Apr-13 14:25:01

I don't really. Current plan is to work on my health so it's as good as it can be in old age. Then to make sure I have enough so if/when I need care that can't be provided at home then I can go to a decent home and leave my children free to live their lives.

LadyBeagleEyes Thu 25-Apr-13 14:26:02

What inheritance?
I live in an HA home, I'll never have anything to leave unless I win the lottery.
He's going to university this year, he'll have to learn to live like everybody else, like I did without an inheritance from my parents.

OrWellyAnn Thu 25-Apr-13 14:26:34

I don't suppose it will need protecting, I can't see anyone else wanting my old blue guitar and grandfather clock...

LadyBeagleEyes Thu 25-Apr-13 14:28:33

You have a grandfather clock OrWelly?
<impressed>

CockyFox Thu 25-Apr-13 14:30:28

I pay off my mortgage when DS is 16 I plan to put the equivalent of 1/2 the mortgage payment into his savings and 1/2 into DDs (until I retire) it won't buy them houses but it will mean I have left them something if my house had to be sold for care fees.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 14:31:45

bamboo - how would I fund care home fees? With whatever assets/income I have. Making sure DD has a home is my priority - one that the authorities can't force a sale on. Just wondered if anyone has or is planning to do this?

Cavort Thu 25-Apr-13 14:33:28

Let your DD buy her own house if and when she chooses to, she needs to learn to stand on her own two feet. You might think you're being nice but you'll do her no favours long-term.

Lilymaid Thu 25-Apr-13 14:35:29

We made sure DCs had a good education so that they should be able to earn a decent wage. But, we have been fortunate and inherited from our parents - we may use some of that to help them buy their first property but will retain an interest in the property until they buy us out.

StrangeGlue Thu 25-Apr-13 14:43:18

If you give her the money for a house and have it all in her name and died more than 7 years after having done so she won't have to pay inheritance tax on what you have her under current rules.

As long as her house is in her name she can't be forced to sell to pay for your care. If you want the house in your name ( ie to prevent her selling it) then it isn't technically hers so she could be forced to sell to supper your care.

I don't really understand why you're asking really. Are you under the impression that any family member can be held responsible for the care costs of another? It's only your own assets that can be used to assess how much you're entitled to.

The exception is if you gift more than £7k to someone and die within 7 years then they'll have to pay inheritance tax but the asset is there's so they wouldn't have to hand it over to anyone else for any reason.

Sounds like it'd be worth you seeing a financial adviser.

Teeb Thu 25-Apr-13 14:43:34

If you are planning to purchase a property for her when she's an adult, you could put that into her name when you buy it? Then it would no longer be your asset, so long as you don't need care/die within 7 years of handing it over.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 14:54:03

It's "deprivation of assets" that worries me. Will seek financial advice in RL just wondered what other MNs were planning.

LessMissAbs Thu 25-Apr-13 14:57:44

I plan to teach my children to be independent, value education and hard work and to make their own way in the world. That should arm them with the knowledge to protect their own assets as I have seen too many who have been given everything on a plate lose it due to their own ineptitude.

whois Thu 25-Apr-13 15:01:12

The exception is if you gift more than £7k to someone and die within 7 years then they'll have to pay inheritance tax but the asset is there's so they wouldn't have to hand it over to anyone else for any reason.

Not 100% true.

You have a £3k annual exemption per year which won't be liabal for IT should you die in 7 years.
Additionally you can give away unspent income (so NOT proceeds from house sale) so you can give a regular 'allowance' to your DCs
If you have enough income left to maintain your lifestyle and are not eating into savings.

50BalesOfHay Thu 25-Apr-13 15:01:52

Protect the kids inheritance? Nah, we intend to squander it on fast living and fun in our old age grin

MrsSchadenfreude Thu 25-Apr-13 15:03:54

I don't. I plan to spend it. grin

50BalesOfHay Thu 25-Apr-13 15:05:34

X post there, Mrs s. Woman after my own heart!

UnexpectedItemInShaggingArea Thu 25-Apr-13 15:05:34

What Lilymaid said. I think it's odd in the extreme to expect to receive an inheritance. The most valuable thing you can do is support them to stand on their own two feet in the world.

I would be mortified if my parents gave me an inheritance and then relied on state benefits for care home fees etc. They brought me up well, supported me in full time education and then after that I was on my own (financially speaking).

MiniTheMinx Thu 25-Apr-13 15:07:12

Antiques, I plan to get to about 80 and then have them delivered to DCs homes before I trot down the garden with my shot gun.grin

But she won't have to pay your care home fees?

Surely she can buy her own house like everyone else and you sell yours to pay the fees?

And if you buy her a house, if she ends up divorced, she may well lose half of it anyway.

Maybe buy house wherever they go to Uni and rent out test of rooms in house to pay mortgage and sign over to dc once they earning.

DH was talking about seeing an IFA the other day, something to do with setting up trust in case he kicks the bucket but I didn't really understand what he was talking about.

higgle Thu 25-Apr-13 15:08:44

We don't have a lot, though we do own our house. I have put a lot of money into my children's education and expect them to make their own way in the world. I shall be spending what is left on having a good time!

imour Thu 25-Apr-13 15:09:41

i know loads of pensioners who have died in their own homes not needing to go into a care home , not every one ends up frail and needing help .

Portofino Thu 25-Apr-13 15:12:51

So you want your dd to have a free house, and everyone else's kids to pay for your care in your old age? Nice. hmm

mrsmalcolmreynolds Thu 25-Apr-13 15:13:18

Agree with what all have said in relation to inheritances etc.

However, a v. quick google search turned up this which explains what needs to be present in order for an authority to consider there to have been deliberate deprivation of assets (which is what there has to be before they come after assets which have been put outside their reach). Seems pretty clear that if you give assets away when you are fit and healthy, there shouldn't be any question of the authorities attacking that.

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/Documents/EN-GB/Factsheets/FS40_deprivation_of_assets_in_the_means_test_for_care_home_provision_fcs.pdf?dtrk=true

If on the other hand your need for care is foreseeable when you give stuff away, I think it's probably right that there should be some ability for the state to unwind that. My DM (64, in decent health) has just started to pass on some of her savings to us in order to manage inheritance tax etc but is deliberately keeping back enough (when combined with her house) to fund a fair stretch of care just in case (think she's basing this on at least 10 years). That's not because she's worried that anything she gives us might be clawed back, but because she thinks it's the responsible thing to do...

Oh, kids will be taught value of money, financial responsibility, to work hard at school, college, university and their chosen career and be able to support themselves too. We just think that doesn't automatically mean that we shouldn't give them a hand if we have the means to do so. Working hard and having help do not have to be mutually exclusive of each other.

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 15:20:00

Deliberately making yourself poor in old age so that you can attempt to use public money to fund your elder care seems kind of a scrounger thing to do, no?

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 15:21:30

There is no moral difference between doing that and deciding to have a life on benefits.

Shanghaidiva Thu 25-Apr-13 15:24:56

My goal is to ensure my children have the necessary skills to support themselves - decent education, understanding of finances, etc.
They are welcome to live in my home rent free when they are studying, but whether they choose to purchase a house later is up to them and I am certainly not buying them one!

I'm assuming that the OP means she will have a family home, that will be sold for care homes fees. She will also separately give her DD a home so DD can live in it. Or, have I got that wrong?

I know a couple of people whose parents did this. One remortgaged and lost the home eventually, making his friends who were renting rooms from him homeless. Nice. The other is a twunt.

badguider Thu 25-Apr-13 15:31:01

I don't plan to leave an inheritance unless I die unexpectedly early. I would prefer to live to such a ripe old age that I need all my money and assets to live on smile

My parents also intend to pay their own way until death (and burial) as a first priority and only leave anything to my brother and I if any left.

Poledra Thu 25-Apr-13 15:37:17

My parents always say they gave us our inheritance in university fees - they spent a shitload of money giving us all a bloody good education then turned us loose to sort ourselves out. That there is my plan too.

<Addendum: they also helped out their children when we needed it urgently but my siblings and I have always paid them back>

Timetoask Thu 25-Apr-13 15:39:07

OP, how big is your property?
Could you downsize and buy a second small property that you could put in your dd's name (and rent it our while she is little)?

If it is in her name for 7 years before you die she does not need to pay inheritance tax. (best double check that with a tax expert though).

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 15:42:14

I plan to see my children work hard, earn their own money and spend it wisely, just as my own mother planned for me.

Chiggers Thu 25-Apr-13 16:02:31

Is it true that if you sell your house to your DC, for less than the market price (say house is worth £250,000 and is sold to DC for £10,000), then your house can't be touched to pay for care costs because the house sold and wasn't given away?

Not up to date on inheritance and so on.

higgle Thu 25-Apr-13 16:11:34

You won't be having a very happy old age, OP, in the type of care home the state pays for. They will probably be kind and caring but understaffed, the food will be very basic and you can forget good interior design.

Chiggers Thu 25-Apr-13 16:33:29

Good grief!!!! That was meant to be "house was sold". I'm going to bed. I shouldn't have got up at all this morning as I'm suffering secondary brain malfunction with the evidence being my inability to compose a sentence grin <<waves and trudges upstairs>>

Jengnr Thu 25-Apr-13 16:45:06

Why do people get so angry that houses have to be sold to pay care home fees? It's only the same as having to sell your house to buy another.

Inheritance isn't inheritance until you are dead. Until en it is your money. Treat it as such.

Jengnr Thu 25-Apr-13 16:45:20

*then

DIYapprentice Thu 25-Apr-13 16:45:51

You would start up a trust which they could gain control over at a certain age, and you would put into that trust money, sufficient to purchase the investment of a property. You oversee the trust fund while you are alive and before they reach whatever age you set out in the trust, and you appoint someone else to take over the trust fund should you die.

If, however, you do this to the detriment of your own financial stability then you'd be very foolish.

Once they gain control of the property/trust then it is theirs to do with as they wish. They could sell it and squander the money. They could marry, divorce and lose half of it.

Or you could try to set up a complicated trust which maintains the property as family property, but that is expensive, and I don't think it's looked upon as favourably anymore and some of these can be overturned.

LooseyMy Thu 25-Apr-13 16:47:51

By never getting married :-D I'm a single parent and own my own home and it's all going to ds when I pop me clogs!

Fast Thu 25-Apr-13 16:52:46

You can have the house put 50% into your name and 50% your DH's so that if one of you did have to go into care but the other one didn't it would only be half the value of the house taken into account for care fees. It's called 'Tenants in common'.

EssexGurl Thu 25-Apr-13 16:55:53

We are buying a buy to let property and the idea is that either the kids can share it together, or we will sell that to give them a foot on the ladder. If the first one works out we will probably get a second.

We won't be able to afford private education - and also there is no guarantee that a private school would be right for them or they would come out with lots of qualifications. I also think university is not a great idea now with too many graduates and qualifications not being what they were. The current funding means they only pay back any loans at a certain salary point, which I agree with as a principle, so they can get loans if they want to go to uni.

Our approach is to hopefully give them a foot on the property ladder at some point. Our own house would be used for any care bills. Theoretically you don't need lots of money to get a BTL property as the rent should cover the mortgage. Fingers crossed. But it is a way of trying to spread the risk for us and giving them something.

Fast Thu 25-Apr-13 17:23:33

Another reason to go tenants in common is that if you died first and your DH remarried and went onto have more children or step-children your own children would inherit your full 50%.
I know more than one family where the children have ended up with nothing because the mother died first, father automatically got the house, father then remarried to someone who already had children from their first marriage. The father has then died and his new spouse inherited the house from him, original child has nothing from either parent.

Iggi101 Thu 25-Apr-13 17:38:18

Tbh a decent wage won't get you a (lovely) house anymore <looks round tiny flat>. It would be lovely to have a big inheritance to at least use as a deposit. Really surprised you would say it's your "main goal in life" though, sounds pretty shallow.

LynetteScavo Thu 25-Apr-13 17:38:54

I plan not to have any care home fees to pay, by having several children and being nice to them, in the hope at least one of them will look after me in my old age. wink

I plan to ensure my DC have a home for life by encouraging them to get a job which will enable them to support themselves sufficiently.

If I had a DC with SN, and potentially unable to support themselves, I would feel very differently.

specialsubject Thu 25-Apr-13 17:45:17

the inheritance you give your children is the values, security and education that you give them. Spend money and effort on that now.

to answer the basic question: you should have guardians and care sorted in your will in the (hopefully non-) event that she is orphaned before she is an adult. After that, the family home cannot be sold to pay care fees if someone still lives in it. If no-one lives in it, then what does it matter? If she lives elsewhere in a house she owns, it also won't be used for care fees.

no-one should ever make their life plan based on inheritance. It is 2013.

All my kids will inherit is my dodgy CDs from my teens.

Kendodd Thu 25-Apr-13 17:54:22

I hoped to sell our house when the children leave home, buy a smaller house more fitting to the needs of a couple. Then lend (will proper legal agreements drawn up) the DCs the purchase price of a house for each of them. They make monthly 'mortgage' payments back to us. We don't charge them interest so they just pay back the amount they borrowed. Win-win they get to buy a house cheaply without interest, we get an income. The fatal hole in my plan is that the sale of our house will not produce enough money to then buy four smaller properties, we do have three BTL properties so we could always sell them though. Oh, and the DCs might not want to/be ready to buy a house when it suits us.

cantspel Thu 25-Apr-13 17:54:41

My oldest child is special needs. He is never going to be able to earn enough to buy himself his own secure home. I will be setting up a trust for him so that at least i know he will always have a roof over his head.

I lke this, "the inheritance you give your children is the values, security and education that you give them"

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 17:57:31

I plan to get my children through university and set up in a home before I die. I had them young so it might happen, but plans can quite easily be screwed over! I'd rather do that than leave them an inheritance.

I will probably give them what I have before I die while in still youngish and healthy. I don't plan on having much left either to leave, or to be taken in care home fees. I'd rather make the most of what I have while my children need it and I can enjoy it.

You won't be having a very happy old age, OP, in the type of care home the state pays for.

This just isn't true. There are state funded patients in exactly the same care homes recieveing exactly the same care as self funding patients. I don't see the point of saving for the possibility that I might need care when I may well have no need for it, and when I do, it's unlikely to get me anything I couldn't have got anyway.

iseenodust Thu 25-Apr-13 17:59:48

Another agree with "the inheritance you give your children is the values, security and education that you give them".

We're going down the spend on education now then find your own way as an adult route.

digerd Thu 25-Apr-13 18:01:04

To ensure your children get your inheritance, and not another woman's children, is to leave your assets to your children in your will.

This is law anyway in France and Spain - blood line children are the heirs not spouses or stepchildren

WilsonFrickett Thu 25-Apr-13 18:03:01

The greatest inheritance you can give your children is your own financial independence. That's what I'm leaving DS, anyway. The square root of nowt, because I've squandered it on gin and my care home fees. Independently.

MrsGrowbag Thu 25-Apr-13 18:03:38

Most people going into care homes are in their 80s and 90s. So, depending on when you had your kids, they are likely to be in their 50s or 60s. They will probably have their own home (rented or bought) by then. My parents worried about this, but I was very clear that I would MUCH rather they sold their home to fund decent care should they need it, than do some (morally bankrupt) "financial planning" to move assets so council can't sell home, and then end up in a care home that might not meet their needs.
Most people NEVER end up in a care home, and most people can be supported to live at home until they die.

lashingsofbingeinghere Thu 25-Apr-13 18:05:54

OP, so basically you want to kill two birds with one stone - give/gift/transfer (whatever the legal term is) your assets to your DD to secure here future which wil at the same time remove the threat of your LA insisting you use those assets to pay for your care.

There probably is a way to do this, but I would ask a solicitor who specialises in IHT planning, not MN.

Kendodd Thu 25-Apr-13 18:06:10

The other problem (as you may see it) with my plan is that I don't actually 'give' them anything, I make them buy things from me blush

thegreylady Thu 25-Apr-13 18:12:27

We are lucky in that all our dc are adults and all are home owners now.I do worry about future for dgc though. We didn't buy houses for any of the dc but I think it is harder now [our dc are aged between 38 and 44].

SoupDragon Thu 25-Apr-13 18:18:01

I don't plan to protect my children's inheritance, I plan to spend it.

Wibblypiglikesbananas Thu 25-Apr-13 18:19:53

I think you have lovely intentions, though I have no idea about the financial aspect of things.

One thing you could do is help your DD with a house deposit, were she to want to buy herself. That was the best thing that my parents and ILs did for us as we could afford mortgage repayments, we just didn't have a massive cash deposit.

Roll on to now, I'm a SAHM and we have a toddler and another on the way and it's always nice when a grandparent offers to pay for something pricey but necessary, e.g. first shoes for DD or a new double pram. I would never expect these things btw, but ILs especially have a real sense that this is the time in our lives when money would be at its tightest, however we did things - so me working and childcare costs or me being a SAHM and down to one salary. They're very much of the opinion that we won't need any potential inheritance when we're in our fifties or whatever - so like to help now when it's needed/most appreciated. I hope I can do the same for mine when they're older.

mrsjay Thu 25-Apr-13 18:21:24

we have no inheritance they can buy their own house when they get jobs we will probably need to sell our tiny flat for care anyway , or a cruise and a piss up before we pop or cloggs,

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 18:29:33

I plan to teach by children the importance of working hard and paying for things themselves .

If I have a property worth a significant sum of money or significant savings it would be wrong to hide that and expect the tax payer to foot the bill for my care.

Lonecatwithkitten Thu 25-Apr-13 18:29:48

I think you need to think very carefully about this having since first hand in my extended family how detrimental being financially really secure can be.
My mum and dad are self made and then have become very wealthy due to inheritance. I am self made (to a substantial value at 40 and a single parent )based on the values my parents gave me and in all likelihood will become very wealthy on inheritance, but I'm not bargaining on this and hope it is a very long way away.
I hope to instill these values in my DD and as my parents did I hope to be able to 'gift' her her education. I would hope she will become self made until late in her life when yes there is probably a very good chance that she will become very wealthy. On our side the wealth is slowly growing with each generation.
The extended family have had all the same advantages, but the money has been up front as opposed to later in life and to be honest it is being frittered away by each generation. There will be virtually nothing for DD's generation.

DontmindifIdo Thu 25-Apr-13 18:37:33

OP - i'm confused about the timings you are thinking of, are you planning on your DD living with you forever and wanting her to keep your current family house after you go into a home or are you thinking that when she's in her 20s and ready to move out of the family home you'll buy her a house in her name for herself and want to be certain that wouldn't be taken off her to pay for your care fees?

At the risk of being nosing, how old are you and how good's your health? If you are in your 40s with a 10 year old, and you think you could afford to buy her a house in 15 years time, then she will have that for what, 20 years before it's likely you'll need to pay for care home fees or pay inheritance tax?

I think (although you need to check) if she's living in the family home at the point you move into a care home (and has been for a long time), she can't be forced to sell it to pay for your care - but check that. However, do you think it's likely she'll never marry/move away before she's in her 40s? not go off and have a family of her own? Realistically, unless there's SN you've not mentioned, it's unlikely your house will be her home at the point you need care fees, she might well have bought her own house and be mortgage free before you need care/in a home.

If you are trying to work out a way to ensure she will get to keep your house as well, think about what's going to happen to it for the time you are in a care home. Realistically, your house will be sold if you need long term care because well, in the case of my Grandmother, that would have meant her house standing empty for over 10 years (7 of them in a carehome, the rest at my parents house - funnily enough my mum didn't want to moveback into her childhood home to care for her, Grandmother moved in to my parents' house).

Will you be able to give her the money for a disposit or total costs of her own house when she's first looking for a property of her own?

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 18:37:50

Is there really much difference in avoiding care home fees, or avoiding your children having to live in social housing and claim HB? I can't see the difference myself. Either way, you are going to provide something for your own family and your family is going to take from the state.

mrsjay Thu 25-Apr-13 18:41:10

who says the OP child couldnt pay her own social housing rent ? not everybody in social housing claims benefit you know ( no offence tot hose who do )

imour Thu 25-Apr-13 18:43:02

i will be putting my house in my kids names when im older , why should they not get what i have worked bloody hard for ,the goverment gets enough out of me , im not giving them my house into the bargain,my kids dipped out on holidays and things so i could afford a home for us, i wasnt lucky enough to get a council place , i dont see why should i pay for care when the person next to me gets it free because they smoked or pissed their money up the wall and didnt invest it .my money is for my kids and grandkids .

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 18:43:37

"I don't see the point of saving for the possibility that I might need care when I may well have no need for it, and when I do, it's unlikely to get me anything I couldn't have got anyway."

I thought you were against scroungers taking advantage of the public purse?

Or is this another little hypocrisy you allow yourself?

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 18:48:13

A Thing, if you can't beat em, you might as well join em! wink

Except there is a massive difference between planning to claim from the state and ending up needing a care home. No one chooses that, I'm sure most of us would prefer to plan to live out our lives in our own homes. Needing a care home because your health fails you in old age is scrounging, just the same as needing state assistance because of ill health in what should be working years isn't scrounging.

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 18:50:38

God, Britain really is fucked.

Full of spiteful nasty fuckers who hate the poor but who plan to milk the public purse for every penny they can get out of it.

These people want it every fucking way - they will boast about their supposed hard work and how they'd never depend on the state or have children they couldn't afford.

But they plan to give these children inheritances they can't afford by making themselves deliberate destitute in old age and forcing tax payers to fund their care.

Absolute naked hypocrisy.

DontmindifIdo Thu 25-Apr-13 18:55:08

imour - in my Grandmother's case, it wasn't the person next to her getting it for free, but then my Mother and her siblings would not leave my Grandmother in the home the council innitially put her in - which is the sort people who aren't able to fund themselves get put in. do some research locally, visit the sort of home you can get for free, visit the sort of home that's too expensive for any free places being offered at it, but that your house sale would pay for 10 years at. I wouldn't leave anyone in the 'free' place.

What you are saving for and what your family will need the money for, is if they find you have been put in a shithole that stinks of piss home that they aren't happy to leave you in, they have the funding available to move you without having to use their own savings to pay for it. I felt so sorry for anyone who had to see their mum or dad in that home and didn't have the money anywhere to move them to something better. I know several richer people who are directly paying their parents' care home fees, their parents don't have the money to pay themselves so could get a free place, but again, their children who can afford the spare cash have taken the decision to not leave their parents in the free home.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 18:56:30

Erm, ok then Thing! grin confused

exoticfruits Thu 25-Apr-13 19:02:33

I have given them a great start in life and a good education- part of that is to work hard and be financially independent - for that reason I didn't buy them cars and won't be buying them a house. I hope not to go into care but if I do I expect to pay for it. I want my mother to use her money on herself and not scrimp to leave it to me.
I hate the idea if 'your inheritance' as if it is a right.

bassetfeet Thu 25-Apr-13 19:03:48

The idea of inheritance has long gone I think.
My mother sold her house and 6 years later is still in her care home. The fees are like pouring money down the drain despite careful investment at the time .
Because she is self funding her fees are higher than those council funded .
Why I have no idea.

Because of the "Deprivation of Assets " rules [which are very bewildering] she feels unable to give family wedding/birthday /Christmas gifts of money or anything vaguely substantial now. I am not talking large sums given her capital at the moment . I hope it lasts her because she would hate to not pay her way ...but it is kind of wrong she cannot use her own money to have the pleasure of giving small help or gift to grandchildren on their wedding .

So my advice is to give while you can and fairly healthy . Serious illness hit our house out the blue . Am glad that I gave my children what little I have in savings when they were starting out .
Neither them nor I expect an inheritance which is as it should be .

imour Thu 25-Apr-13 19:05:28

i have worked in a private care home that had equal amounts of private and state paid people in , same care , same food ,same everything , private people were paying £500 a week ,state paid £500 a month for the others , it was a lovely big mansion , in the country , somewhere any one would dream of living , they arent all shit holes , so seems to me the state rip you when you own a house and you have to go private so its best to pass it on before they can .

lilystem Thu 25-Apr-13 19:08:33

Good post lonecat.

I don't agree that it's ok for the op to deprive any assets for care home fees. However, I think it is an extremely admirable aim to leave an inheritance for the kids - I think it shows ambition and guts. I think that you would want to be pretty financially secure yourself before considering inheritances though.

Fwiw, I was the beneficiary of a trust age 25 which is used on a house deposit aged 27. Glad I didn't get it at 21 as I'd have spunked it up the wall. We're about to make a will for our son And will use a trust based system that he can access at wht we think is an appropriate age. He won't however be told about this fund and will be strongly encouraged to build his own secure financial future.

Weegiemum Thu 25-Apr-13 19:09:02

I might sound rubbish here. But I don't want to inherit anything from my parents. I'd rather they spent the last penny on the day they died.

I'd also want my dc to fend for themselves. In fact, if we die after our dc are all 21, we plan to leave our entire estate to charity.

We made our own way. So should they. Inherited wealth doesn't help at all!

bassetfeet Thu 25-Apr-13 19:10:43

It is mad isnt it Imour ? My dear mum has to pay for chiropodist too at £16 a pop while those council funded get it free .

DontmindifIdo Thu 25-Apr-13 19:11:10

imour - no, not all shitholes, but some are, and if you aren't self funding, you get what you are given in most areas. Self funding gives choice.

Bowlersarm Thu 25-Apr-13 19:12:38

Just as a matter of interest OP what age do you want your daughter to have this house? What would you feel if she flogged it, aged 21, 25 or whatever and used all the money for something you disapprove of? Then she's spent a huge amount of your money and she's back to square one.

Maybe a trust fund (no idea how this works though) would better protect her/your money.

Savannahgirl Thu 25-Apr-13 19:13:08

As far as I understand it from when my GMother was in a nursing home as a self funding resident, the reason they pay higher fees than state funded people is that the state doesn't fully cover the entire cost of the fees so the self - funded patients are charged extra to cover the shortfall. In other words they are subsidising the care of the state funded residents hmm

exoticfruits Thu 25-Apr-13 19:14:16

I admire people like Anita Roddick who left her millions to charity rather than her children- lots of unearned money isn't good for people.

Snog Thu 25-Apr-13 19:20:18

No, I don't have similar goals for my child.
I want her to be financially independent but with the security of emotional more than financial support from me. I would happily help her with a deposit for a house if I am able to but certainly wouldn't take it upon myself to try to provide her with a home for life (although she would always be welcome in my house if she had nowhere to live).
I don't want to be a burden on her in any way so would prioritise looking after myself such that this does not happen.

mrsjay Thu 25-Apr-13 19:28:52

I agree with you exotic i try and make dd1 finacially independent and will help her out but I wont be handing out money to her she works she has her own money although i wil probably leave hundreds rather than millions when i go grin

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 19:31:14

"However, I think it is an extremely admirable aim to leave an inheritance for the kids - I think it shows ambition and guts."

Yes, ambition and guts.

Just like Kim Jong-Il.

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 19:34:06

We would never sell our home to set up our dc's in their own property, but we have savings accounts for them and put money in whilst we can. If we get to a situation where purchasing a second he is viable we will put it in our Dcs names. We don't intend for the govt to pay for us, but we would like to give our dc an opp to purchase their own homes. We save and invest our money for them but not at the detriment of our whole family. I want them to be independent and not expect a free life from us so will start with their education and home teachg of good money management. If for some reason one of the thinks they are going to have an easy life they will not be bailed out by us.

I do however think it is strange that those of us with dc wouldn't want to give them the best possible emotional and financial future we could? I want them to stand on their own two feet but if that means 10 cruises a year for us whilst they are relying on state handouts I just don't think that is responsible parenting. Might just be me but who in reality does that help socially, kids reliant on state whilst dh and I squander money on Champagne and caviar sad if we give them handouts if necessary then the state handout money can go to someone who needs it more. That IMHO is responsible.

Likewise, dh and I have own home (mortgaged to the hilt) but I expect my parents to enjoy what money they have, life is too short not to. But they helped us out where they could with help for a deposit etc, we never asked them to but isn't that what parents do?

But then perhaps I am skewed, I never now offer to pay when dps take me and dc out for a day as they would be insulted and enjoy our company, if all of us go out dh pays our way, il contribute fuck all and give sil everything (school fees, horses, clothes for entire family) we might get something that couldn't be returned ora magazine but not else! My parents are generous with all of their family and that gives them great pleasure (conversed at length, they love having the time with us when they can if I can't afford to do it). I fully intend to be the same sort of parent and go if I getnthenopportunity.

BrienneOfTarth Thu 25-Apr-13 19:35:30

OP I think you would be doing a great disservice to your DD by taking responsibility for giving her a home for life. You would be teaching her to be passive and entitled and to expect her wishes to be fulfilled without work. Much better to invest what money you have in equiping her with the skills to be sturdy, self-reliant and enterprising - equally capable of either holding down a steady job and earning a decent salary OR innovating and identifying something she can do independently to make a good living in an unsalaried way e.g. by running her own business.

That way your investment in her future will continue to increase even after you are gone. whereas if you just give her material posessions, once you stop earning her inheritance stops growing.

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 19:37:00

And if we had millions, it would be put in some form of trust to ensure our gc were left with a decent start without taking the piss. Otherwise I expect them to attempt to stand on their own two feet. The ecclestone girls have learned me. I want my children to be ambitious for what they want not for what I can give them when I am dead.

Not helping much am I?grin

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 19:37:38

Good post Briene

Bowlersarm Thu 25-Apr-13 19:37:44

You seem very cross about it all Athing. I would think that most parents would like the idea of their kids having some sort of inheritance, big or small.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 19:39:20

A Thing, do you think it's ok for someone to leave an inheritance if they haven't had to pay care home fees? Or is leaving something for your children something awful that should be a avoided at all costs?

I don't know if I'm taking you wrongly on this thread, but you seem to have a massive objection to inheritance and that to me is very strange.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 19:47:59

"the inheritance you give your children is the values, security and education that you give them"

Values sorted, thanks, she's a lovely little girl smile

Don't need to waste money on private education as we are fortunate enough to live in an area with good/outstanding state schools.

Don't expect her to live with us any longer than she wants to but would like to gift her a house (not ours) when she wants move out. No matter what values we instil or how hard she works it's highly likely she would be unable to buy.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 19:51:17

"But they plan to give these children inheritances they can't afford by making themselves deliberate destitute in old age and forcing tax payers to fund their care."

Exactly!

I also have a major issue with people saying they don't want their money "taken by the state" if they require residential care. It goes towards their personal 24 hour specialist care. Christ on a bike!

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 19:54:18

Been out so am trying to catch up. Thanks to all who have offered helpful advice.

Nowhere have I said I don't want to pay care home fees. I'd actually rather top myself than go in a care home but sadly sometimes you don't have choice.

Provision will be made, hopefully, for a good retirement - we're certainly enjoying ourselves now.

You could always do what my parents did and die young. sad

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 19:55:55

So are those people who can't afford to have children without claiming tax credits also making themselves deliberately destitute and forcing tax payers to fund their care then?

After all, they could be working all the hours of the day to pay off a mortgage or build up a savings account just in case they need care in their old age couldn't they? hmm

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 19:58:47

I have no particular objection to inheritance, although as unearned wealth I think it is wealth a society should seek in part to redistribute.

I think it is hilarious to describe the ancient and selfish desire to pass on your advantages to your kin as some kind of moral good.

I think it is fine to pass on money you had saved after you die.

I think it is not fine to pass on money before you die and then claim state benefits.

That is giving your children an inheritance you can't afford, to use the logic of benefit bashers.

Saving for care in our old age is the responsibility of every one of us.

People like to talk a lot about various benefits that can't be afforded because they just don't approve if them.

But there genuinely is a massive crisis coming our way with the cost of elder care and its inaffordability. People are living longer and that means more and more of them are needing longterm residential care at he end of their life.

At present there is no agreed plan in place for how to pay for this.

And yet people with means are planning to make themselves poor in old age so that should they need care they will get free care.

They are planning to pass on assets to their children and expect the children of the assetless to pay taxes to cover care that they know full well they might need.

You can't have that plan and call anyone else a scrounger.

The problem is that the system as it exists currently does create unfortunate incentives.

Some kind of cap on the assets taken (which is what has been proposed) is fairer than the current system which bleeds self-funders dry.

There should be some advantages to having saved responsibly for your old age.

If we don't sort this issue out, that advantage could well be access to adequate care.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 19:59:27

Clouds You are being deliberately obtuse. People who give away their home to avoid paying for their care home fees are actively avoiding paying, knowing it will drain the social care budget.

Bowlersarm Thu 25-Apr-13 20:05:34

Has anyone said whether this is actually possible or not? Apologies if I've missed the bit where this is covered.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 20:06:41

So did mine, Sauvignon - they both died when I and they were young.

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 20:06:43

It is outrageous that people on here are attacked for claiming benefits they need to survive. Yet it is fine to keep hold if money out if greed and then take money from the state.

AThingInYourLife Thu 25-Apr-13 20:09:15

"So are those people who can't afford to have children without claiming tax credits also making themselves deliberately destitute and forcing tax payers to fund their care then?"

You could argue that it's similar (although I would argue that producing and raising children is a public good).

But there is a crucial difference in that the person claiming tax credits has the potential to go back to work and become a net financial contributor to the exchequer in the future.

The elderly person divesting themselves of all assets has no ability (or intention) of ever being anything but a financial drain on the system.

NoWayPedro Thu 25-Apr-13 20:13:56

OP - If you are willing and able to help out your DCs financially, beyond investment in education, that's great but I find the tone of your posts rather obnoxious and self-entitled in a 'let's get one over the system way'.

Why do you want to buy her a whole house? Why don't you save for a deposit for her and let her earn the money to buy the rest of it?

My parents will be in the position to bung me and my 3 brothers a house deposit in a couple of years. They have never been in that position before. That will be an amazing help as it will allow me to get a mortgage. I will be paying that mortgage myself through money I earn, which is the right and proper way IMO.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 20:16:51

I'm not meaning to be obtuse, I just don't see anything wrong, or immoral, in spending whatever money you have while you are able to enjoy it. I don't see that as deliberately avoiding paying care home fees, I see it as making your own choice with your own property.

Like I said, most of us hope not to need to live in a care home, plenty of people die from old age or age related illness without needing to live in a care home. Therefore any choices they make before they become ill are not made for the sake of knowingly draining the social care budget.

A Thing, we agree on something, the current system does create a disincentive to saving for possible care in old age. I think it's understandable that some people are reluctant to save for the possibility that they might need care when they have every reason to believe they will be no better off because of it.

thebody Thu 25-Apr-13 20:18:10

Too busy spending it op. whoop whoop!

HollyBerryBush Thu 25-Apr-13 20:18:54

You are being deliberately obtuse. People who give away their home to avoid paying for their care home fees are actively avoiding paying, knowing it will drain the social care budget.

But it is legal, that's the difference. I'm sure the time limits have been covered.

I'd also add that giving your childa lump sum or passing the house to them actually saves the socail budget as they aren't going to be claiming HB for a life time.

Whilst I'm grateful for my inheritance, I'd much rather DM had spent it on herself.

Portofino Thu 25-Apr-13 20:20:28

In Belgium your care home debt passes down 2 generations. Granny pays for herself, you look after her yourself, or you pay. I wonder if this has any link to the fact euthanasia is legal in Belgium.

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 20:20:41

I think the op has made herself clear, she intends that they will pay however for their care be that selling it or saving for it. OP I think you are being responsible in wanting to provide what you are able to for your dc so that they dont have to worry about being a burden elsewhere.

I like the question you are asking, you want to know how to provide a good steady life for your child in the future. By providing financially for her you are doing a good thing (especially as you are not asking the state for anything and depriving someone in true need of something) imho set her up well morally (if there is such a thing - get her to budget when you can i.e saving pocket money for a wanted toy) and she will flourish regardless and be a provider for herself and those who aren't able to provide for themselves. A good all round base will set her up for life and I really commend you on that.

ihateveggies Thu 25-Apr-13 20:21:59

Hi,

I was thinking about that recently. I have a chronic medical condition that means I won't probably live that long (70s if I am lucky).

I plan to sell my house as soon as they leave home for uni (in about 10 years) and buy them a flat each ( in their own name) and rent something cheap for myself and my dh.

So, with about 20 years left there should be no inheritance and no care home fees for me.

If I needed care, I would move abroad and find a nice place with a couple of helpers (much cheaper than in the UK)

NoWayPedro Thu 25-Apr-13 20:25:25

I'm confused: if the OP has made it clear she intends to make provision for potential care home fees then what is the point of this thread?

She has explicitly said she wants to gift funds for a house so it can't be touched for care home fees.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 20:25:50

Ah it's legal, so fuck morals and other vulnerable people. hmm The social care budget is stretched as it is and there are some very vulnerable people in the system. I judge people who think they have the right to state funded care and do everything they can to avoid paying for it for themselves.

Portofino Thu 25-Apr-13 20:27:30

Quite, crashdoll.

imour Thu 25-Apr-13 20:29:16

cant see the problem , why should people who try and help themselves and their family be worse off , so someone who drinks ,smokes,holidays,nights out, spends every penny they earn on frivolities and such get it free and some one who buys a house and went without cant ,mine is going to kids or grandkids or sell and buy them something frivolous , same thing really at the end of the day ,just done a different way round , no one has a right to tell anyone how to spend their wages , so no one has a right to tell anyone what to do with the things they spend it on smile

Portofino Thu 25-Apr-13 20:30:58

But she appears to be new to MN, so is maybe a little naive or something.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 20:31:25

NoWayPedro - then you have misread my tone. Your problem, not mine.

I just want her not to have to worry about a roof over her head. She'll need to work to pay the bills and have fun.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 20:31:36

The elderly person divesting themselves of all assets has no ability (or intention) of ever being anything but a financial drain on the system

They might be a financial drain on the system for the few years at the end of their lives, but if they are in a position to make it worth considering passing down money to their children while they are healthy, then they have probably paid a considerable amount of tax into the system up until the point where they might need a care home.

There's no difference in the comparison you made. You make it sound like its ok to take from ten system if there's a chance you might contribute in the future, but not if you have already contributed in the past, no matter how significantly. That's the wrong way round IMO.

Portofino Thu 25-Apr-13 20:33:13

Well they won't be worse off will they imour? Their children might but that is a different argument. .

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 20:33:55

Yes because all the people who can't afford to buy their homes are spending their money in drink and fags.

We have been lucky enough to earn good wages and buy property and amass saving. We are not harder working or more virtuous , we just were lucky and therefore I see no problem in paying for my care out of money I earned because I am more fortunate than most .

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 20:35:44

It suprises me how many people seem to not understand the point of paying tax. It isn't "I put in £10 so I deserve £10".

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 20:37:01

Ah it's legal, so fuck morals and other vulnerable people. The social care budget is stretched as it is and there are some very vulnerable people in the system. I judge people who think they have the right to state funded care and do everything they can to avoid paying for it for themselves.

I'd be right there with you if we could agree that people who have children when they need CB, tax credits, HB are also fucking morals to do what they want. Except those things are seen as legitimate entitlements by many on MN, which is fair enough, but you can't have it both ways.

It's either wrong to take from the state when you could have made different choices or it's not. So which is it?

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 20:37:36

I dont see where the op has suggested she will rely on state care but give everything to her dd? If you do please point me to it!

Portofino Thu 25-Apr-13 20:40:20

The idea of social security is to provide a safety net and minimum standard of living for those who need it. If you can support yourself, you don't need it. Bein supported by the state should be a fall back, not something to aspire to. And that goes equally for OAPs as it does for young families.

The fact that this message seems to have got lost somewhere over the last 20 odd years is why the country is currently fucked.

2rebecca Thu 25-Apr-13 20:40:32

I would hope that my kids have the capacity to earn enough money to support themselves.
If my father's money all goes on cruises, sweeties or carers to keep him happy and comfortable in old age that's fine by me. It's his money, I think inheritence is an idea past its sell by date.
Each generation should be able to support itself. I'll help my kids whilst they are kids and students but hope that that is enough for them.

imour Thu 25-Apr-13 20:40:47

oh we got nit pickers who only comment on what they want to read smile well id like to thank all you self funders , leaves a bit more in the coffers for the likes of me cheers everyone wine see you at the singalong in the lounge .

overprotection Thu 25-Apr-13 20:45:34

Quite frankly if your parenting skills are so inept that you feel that you have to provide for your child's every financial need via inheritance you really oughtn't to have had children in the first place.

Decent parents bring up children that can look after themselves.

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 20:52:26

Both me and DH have worked for what we have with no help and I worry about the future too for us (care home fees) and future children (due our 1st in October). We plan to help our children with property / university and don't see it as not helping them learn to fend for themselves. We bought our first house when we were 20/23. What 20 year old can buy a house these days? We were both at the bottom of the ladder but were lucky to have both been savers and had a 5% deposit. Those days are long gone now and our kids will need a leg up. We'll make sure they're ready and won't fritter it away. They certainly won't know our plan.

YANBU

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 20:54:07

Decent parents bring up children who look after themselves, yes, but some bring up children who expect to be looked after. That is the problem, regardless of income.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 20:54:07

I didn't say I wanted to provide for her every financial need.

grin at being told I'm inept and shouldn't have had a child.

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 20:56:28

Yes op yu are inept, you wan to look after yourselves but you also wan to loo after your dc. You stood be taken outside and shot for that very reason. How very dare you!

firesidechat Thu 25-Apr-13 20:58:09

We plan to spend all of our money on enjoying ourselves and possibly paying for a top notch care home, therefore leaving no inheritance for the children.

Hopefully we've given them enough good grounding to make their own way in the world without relying on us.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 20:58:31

I'd be right there with you if we could agree that people who have children when they need CB, tax credits, HB are also fucking morals to do what they want. Except those things are seen as legitimate entitlements by many on MN, which is fair enough, but you can't have it both ways.

It isn't comparable because the person is not deliberately 'getting rid' of their money and actually, the social care budget is the issue being discussed and it is a seperate pot of money. Do you know anything about social care? I take it that you don't because you would not be arguing for doing this if you did.

Bowlersarm Thu 25-Apr-13 21:01:01

But she's not 'getting rid' of her money. She's choosing to buy her daughter a home to live in.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:02:51

And then sponge off the state.....

Bowlersarm Thu 25-Apr-13 21:06:12

a) only in the event she is unable to stay in her own home b)when all her money, separate to daughters house runs out

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 21:06:47

OP would still have her own home though? That would go a long way towards care home fees if it came to it and I expect from the posts she has made there will be pensions too.... A decent company pension and the state pension go most of the way towards care home fees.

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 21:08:09

I think if someone deliberately reduces their income to claim a benefit that is wrong . I thought the same about all the handwringing about child benefit and I feel the sans about hiding money to claim free care,

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 21:08:09

I wonder if it would have been the same response if op hadn't mentioned care home fees and had said the idea was to stay under the IHT threshold?? IHT is a completely avoidable tax IMO with careful planning.....

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:08:19

But it's not deliberately getting rid of your money by spending it on what you want to spend it on either. Otherwise you could apply that to every luxury purchase someone makes.

The point is that not every elderly person needs social care. Money to pay care home fees might not be needed. We aren't obliged to save for it just in case in the same way as we should pay into a pension if we can.

I don't know a huge amount about social care, but I know that in the perfectly nice care home closest to my home has residents who are both state funded and self funded. The people who have self funded are no better off, and the people who are state funding are no worse off.

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 21:08:34

So the point is, how does she do this? She is no sponging from anyone or the state she warns to have a good plan to set her daughter up!

CruCru Thu 25-Apr-13 21:09:00

One option is to put some money aside into a junior Self Invested Pension Plan. I think the current maximum you can put in each year is £2,880 but the Government will make it up to £3,600. The earlier a pension is set up the more chance it has of earning investment returns is.

Also, do you contribute to a junior ISA? Most Americans I know set up a college fund as soon as their kids are born.

firesidechat Thu 25-Apr-13 21:09:01

No way would I want to be reliant on the state for my care home if needed. There isn't enough money to pay for it all now, can you imagine what the standards of care will be by the time we are all old. I'm quite happy to pay for choice when I'm elderly.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:09:40

"A decent company pension and the state pension go most of the way towards care home fees."

It won't even get close, especially not if someone were to need complex, specialist care.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:11:23

The OP has admitted she wants to 'protect' her money and Clouds doesn't want the state to 'take it away'.

HollyBerryBush Thu 25-Apr-13 21:13:22

Just for the hell of it, I'm going to throw a spanner in the Ops thinking. Because I can.

my main goal is to make sure she has a home for life; with us whilst she's young then a house for herself when she's an adult. So I eventually want to make provision to buy her a house that can't be touched to pay our care home fees, should we need them.

What if, thechild marries, divorces and has to give half theequity to theex partner? How are you protecting about that?

I've had serious chats with my boys about protecting their assets and tying assets up in trust so they cant be taken as divorce settle ment.

SuedeEffectPochette Thu 25-Apr-13 21:16:07

yes, if you buy your child a house, and then they marry, and then they divorce, the ex will get half "your" house. not an obvious way round that one!

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 21:17:31

A client of mine has his wife in a care home with dementia. Its a very nice one and costs £600 per week.... He came in to see me fretting their life savings would be eaten up within months. Between both company and state pensions the care home fees were well covered and his own living costs very low as no mortgage. I agree if someone needs more specialist care of course the cost would ramp up but that's the extreme. I've only known my clients go into care homes for the usual reasons. Should someone really plan to that degree?

firesidechat Thu 25-Apr-13 21:17:46

crashdoll, that is very true.

My MIL is in a specialist care home and costs are approx £2,000 a month. Not many pensions would cover that.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:20:25

It's not really that I 'don't want it taken away' its more that I don't want to pay for something that others who live a similar life to mine get for free.

And more to the point, I want to help my children. That is more important to me than the type of care home I might have to live in for a few years. I'd rather take the chance that I might need state funded care than take the certainty that my children won't ever be able to own a home or that they will have to rent and claim benefits to do so.

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 21:20:44

But I wouldn't want to live if I was so old and frail and ill. I want to enjoy life now with DH and DD, hopefully have some retirement time and then if I do end up in a care home, pay my way for a while and then pop my clogs. But the NHS will probably insist on keeping me alive whilst the care home bleeds me dry! I'd rather buy DD a house than line the pockets of a care home owner whilst living in ill health.

overprotection Thu 25-Apr-13 21:24:39

It's not really that I 'don't want it taken away' its more that I don't want to pay for something that others who live a similar life to mine get for free.

And more to the point, I want to help my children.

Or to rephrase this line of argument, you want the taxpayer to pay your children an inheritance.

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 21:25:07

Operative words were decent pension and go most of the way.... But its all semantics. A sizeable savings pot and a property in the background won't be decimated as rapidly as people often expect.

I won't lose sleep that the op is planning to be a drain on the system in her old age.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:28:35

"Its more that I don't want to pay for something that others who live a similar life to mine get for free."

Breathtakingly entitled and selfishness in one sentence.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:30:18

Clouds Do you think a younger adult who suddenly finds themselves in need residential care should not contribute to their care if they have £50K in the bank then?

DontmindifIdo Thu 25-Apr-13 21:30:46

well then, as I said, unless you're an old parent, the chances are you'd be looking to buy your DD a house when she was in her 20s, and then not be looking at care homes for yourself for another 20 years - the whole 'disposal of assets' thing really won't be looking at gifts made 20 years earlier.

the issue of how you deal with the chances of an exH taking half of that asset depends on how much you see your money being a way of buying control over her adult life. You can insist she gets legal advice, but you will need to accept that she might make bad relationship choices that leads to her losing that house. Of couse, she might also make bad choices like borrow against the value of the house to invest in a business that goes under, or sells the one you bought her, buys something much larger using that money as a deposit and then ends up not being able to pay that mortgage etc. There's lots of ways in which your adult DD might not make the most of your gift - that's not a reason not to give it, and you can't insist on micromanaging her life choices to avoid her not losing "your" money once you've given it.

serin Thu 25-Apr-13 21:33:44

Our care in future old age may not look anything at all like the model in place today.

In a world where food and natural resources are at a premium future generations may well see fit to introduce euthanasia. Or it may be the "done thing" to take oneself off to the equivalent of dignitas at the first sign of mental or physical deterioration.

We have fucked our kids world up, and its a terrifying idea but who could blame them really?

Our personal plan is to sell the house, buy a smaller house, buy a camper van and travel.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:33:56

Or to rephrase this line of argument, you want the taxpayer to pay your children an inheritance.

Well, no. That's just pure bollocks really isn't it?

What I want is to spend the money we (dh and I) have in our lifetimes on helping our children get set up in their lives, and spend whatever we have left over on whatever we need to be relatively comfortable in old age.

Oddly enough, I'm not planning to need residential care in my old age.

I don't want my children to have an inheritance at all. I had my children young, so if we all live to a reasonable life expectancy, they will be well past needing, or even wanting, an inheritance by the time I die.

Takingbackmonday Thu 25-Apr-13 21:36:10

7 year transfers, decent accountant

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:36:30

Do you think a younger adult who suddenly finds themselves in need residential care should not contribute to their care if they have £50K in the bank then?

No, I don't. £50k is nothing in terms of a residential care home bill. I'd rather that money was spent on making a younger adult be able to have some quality of life. The basics should be provided by the state when a person can't work.

Takingbackmonday Thu 25-Apr-13 21:37:36

Death taxes are disgusting

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:38:37

Clouds You are no different to the person claiming benefits, (not that there is anything wrong with legitimately claiming your entitlement) yet you seem to think you are in a different class of person.

PoohBearsHole Thu 25-Apr-13 21:41:32

Whole different thread I am sure but if a young person needing care has 50k and that lasts 2 years what happens then? They have paid and not relied on anything for perhaps 2 years do they then get thrown out as theyndont have none to pay? Or do the signings the have to fund themselves and their families too as well as the young person?

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 21:41:34

Nothing wrong with legitimately claiming your entitlement to benefits just like there is nothing wrong with planning your finances to the benefit of yourself and your family as long as it is with the parameters of the law / tax legislation.

overprotection Thu 25-Apr-13 21:43:41

Well, no. That's just pure bollocks really isn't it?

Nope.

You want to give you children £x, so the government to pay £x for your care. Or to cut out the middleman, you want the government to give your children £x.

Now fair enough if you personally aren't going to go out of your way to avoid care home fees, but my more general point is that the argument "why should I pay X when others don't have to, I should be able to give the money to my children and the state can pay for me", boils down to the above.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:44:45

People claiming benefits aren't one homogenous group. There are people that claim benefits because of circumstances beyond their control, and there are people claiming benefits because they chose to have children they can't afford, or because they are unemployable.

There is nothing wrong with claiming benefits because you have to as a result of circumstances you couldn't control and couldn't reasonably foresee. Same as there is nothing wrong with helping your children with the money for a deposit on a house, or helping them with university costs just because you might end up needing care when you are old 30+ years down the line.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 21:47:36

"People claiming benefits aren't one homogenous group."

I'm only repeating what you said.

There is a distinct difference between supporting your children throughout their lifespan and purposely signing over your house to them as you approach old age to purposely avoid care home fees. Anyway, if things in social care continue as they are, it might come to bite you on the backside one day. smile

ivykaty44 Thu 25-Apr-13 21:48:37

Thing is Orange - what happens if you give your money to your dc and they spend it all - will that be ok? or if they get married and then they get divorced and the spouse walks away with half - which they can do? How are you going to plan for that?

Takingbackmonday Thu 25-Apr-13 21:49:26

Inheritance is POST TAX income. inheritance tax is wrong

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 21:49:52

Exactly clouds... Where would people draw the line? Sorry kids, I can't pay for your driving lessons / first car / uni / wedding in case I need that money for my care home fees! Its ridiculous. People are free to spend their money on whatever they choose. Some people in state funded care homes have spent the equivalent of a house on fags over their lifetime!

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:51:05

overprotection, I see it completely differently. I pay tax and contribute financially to society, therefore if (and its a big if) I need it, I don't see anything wrong with expecting society to be there for me in return. It works two ways.

If you want to be as ridiculous as to say that anyone who spends their own money on their children is expecting the government to give them an inheritance, then you may as well say that anyone who uses state education when they could afford a couple of years of private education is doing the same.

Is anyone that could afford to pay for a private GP appointment expecting the taxpayer to give their children an inheritance if they pop along to their local GP instead?

No, of course not. That's just silly.

Glittertwins Thu 25-Apr-13 21:52:05

Asset protection clause and trust written into our wills which kick in now that we have severed the joint tenancy on the house and are tenants in common. The house cannot be sold to pay for care home fees as one half will belong to a trust.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 21:54:25

Anyway, if things in social care continue as they are, it might come to bite you on the backside one day.

Maybe, but I'd rather take my chance and do what I can for my children when I have the chance than set myself up to be bitten hard on both cheeks by not helping them and then not having any benefit to that as well.

Bowlersarm Thu 25-Apr-13 21:55:34

overprotection what you are saying is not really logical. What you say is well couple a shouldn't be paying school fees as they may need that money for their old age. Couple b shouldn't buy a new car every year and antiques because they may need the money for their old age. Couple c shouldn't have a sahm/d because they need to earn for their old age. Where do you draw the line on dictating what people should or shouldn't be allowed to spend their money on?

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 22:02:16

Once again, I am surprised that reasonable intelligent adults have no idea how the UK taxation system works.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 22:02:35

*reasonably

detoxlatte Thu 25-Apr-13 22:09:27

Going off at a slight tangent here from some serious issues deserving of attention...but am I the only one who can't get past the breathtaking presumptuousness of the the op??

I have come back to this thread three times tonight, just to make sure I'm not reading too much into it, but no - how much more stealth boastingly, middle class and downright rude can you get than this opening question (and subsequent blatant nosey-ness)?!

To assume that people will have anything to leave, then to assume that people have planned to do anything with it, while saying that you plan to buy you only child a home...wow. Doesn't invite much sympathy from these quarters...

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 22:11:25

Well, in my mind the taxation system works so that we all have what we need, so we all contribute to that. Some more than others, some not at all. As long as I pay in when I can, I'm happy to take out what I need.

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 22:13:00

"As long as I pay in when I can, I'm happy to take out what I need."

What you think you 'need' seems to a tad warped though and you cannot take out as and when you feel like it.

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 22:15:54

We pay a lot of tax. I am in the 40% bracket and DH usually in that bracket. I don't see that entitles us to claim benefits or have the right to hide money away so we do not pay what is fair.

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 22:16:14

DH is in the next bracket - sorry am on iPad

Arisbottle Thu 25-Apr-13 22:17:49

I think there is a difference between buying things that you need and deliberately trying to shift money about to avoid paying for things you can afford to pay for. If you own your own home you are exceptionally lucky IMO.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 22:18:38

Why is it warped to think you need a care home if you do actually need a care home? confused

I don't get it?

You can't take out when you feel like it, but we can go to the doctors when we need to, we can send our children to school when we need to, we can phone the police when we need to, that's the sort of thing I mean.

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 22:21:58

I didn't see this thread as stealth boasting. Its a genuine dilemma for some people to arrange their affairs. This thread may not be appreciated, as indeed hasn't been appreciated by everyone. But people can choose to ignore the thread.

I've been quite astonished that there are people that think the op shouldn't spend her money on whatever she choose - if a consequence of that is that she may get state funding for care later in life then so be it.

The money is still in the economy. Just supporting a more worthy cause in the ops mind. If its her own money she can do what she likes with it.

Just like someone on benefits can buy wine / lottery tickets.... Freedom of choice.

Toastoppers Thu 25-Apr-13 22:24:34

If I become so frail that I have to live in a care home I think I will consider popping off of the planet.

Greythorne Thu 25-Apr-13 22:25:28

OP - I do think you haven't quite thought this one through.

Your DD is 10 and presumably biddable. But gifting her a house when she is an adult is not necessarily the right or repsonsible thing to do.

Help her with a deposit, fine.

But a house? No

crashdoll Thu 25-Apr-13 22:26:54

This thread had included people purposely looking at ways to avoid paying their way when they are older and that is what's pissed some of us off.

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 22:28:43

Why not gift her a house though? If OP feels she has done a good job bringing her DD up why not?

Friend of a guy at work lost both his parents in an accident. He used his inheritance to buy a place in London and works with disadvantaged kids earning a pittance of a wage.

Is there an assumption that anyone who receives a sizeable gift would squander the gift as opposed to see the opportunity it brings??

PuggyMum Thu 25-Apr-13 22:36:39

Careful financial planning is purposefully avoiding paying for things we don't have to though. But people who do this generally pay more in taxes / spend more / take less over their lifetime.

Is this wrong? If it is I'm out of a job! (Currently having to reapply for my own job!).

I don't think its a case of you should get back what you paid in but money doesn't disappear. Whether you gift it / spend it / gamble it it is still in the economy.

There was a post flying round Facebook about men in the pub and the poor guy didn't pay for beer and the richest guy paid most. Till they made him pay more and he stopped going the pub....

OrangeMabel Thu 25-Apr-13 22:49:04

Detoxlatte - Why would you think I was middle class (I'm not)? Don't you think working class people can get jobs that pay good money that enables them to save? Or do they automatically become middle class if they have a profession, a mortgage and an ISA?

No boasting from me, stealth or otherwise. I will admit to being nosey but am not rude. If we weren't all nosey buggers there'd be no MN. And you wouldn't have opened this thread wink

Iteotwawki Thu 25-Apr-13 23:06:25

Agree with the poster up thread - where do you draw the line with regard to dictating how people spend their income?

Family A who live comfortably with good food, one or two holidays a year, renting because they prefer not to buy - will not have a house to find care home fees and so will be state funded if required.

Family B who choose to save, no holidays (or few, local ones), pay into a mortgage - will have a house to be sold to fund care home fees. Why shouldn't family B choose to spend money on their children and thus have state funded care if needed in the same way as family A?

Or do we go through everyone's bank statement at age 70, judge their every financial decision and then fund their care or not depending on whether overall we approve?

To answer the original question - we have a Family Trust which owns our house. There are listed beneficiaries (our sons, their children should they have any, our immediate relatives) who may benefit from any income to the trust. If our house has to be sold the money will go into the trust - which may approve a house purchase for the boys with any proceeds but should that house be sold (eg due to divorce) the money goes back to the trust. So ex-spouses can't take money away from the family although they may benefit from the use of house and trust money while they are married to the children. And their children will be beneficiaries.

Any use of trust money has to be agreed by a trustee meeting (currently me, DH and our lawyer). If we die, there is provision for the trust to take care of the children including uni education and to provide for a named family member to be their guardian (and support her while she is their main carer).

It sounds more complicated than it is!

Care homes may or may not be needed. If state provision isn't available or appropriate and there is money in the trust, it may approve funding. However all decisions have to be in the entire family best interests - selling the family home to fund care fees for one member wouldn't be authorised.

I fully intend to leave my children with my work ethics and the education and ability to be self sufficient. However I also intend to leave them and their children with a firm financial base.

imour Thu 25-Apr-13 23:13:02

i thought it was an interesting thread that is why i opened it and because i am nosey and wanted to know what other people would answer , weird how some are being all pc on here saying its wrong to put your house in your kids name or sell it and give them money etc , i dont see a problem with giving my kids my house that i paid for with my money that i earned and payed tax on ,i think its wrong that the tax we pay all our life is wasted , hidden,given abroad ,if it wasnt wasted there would be enough to pay for everyone who needs care in there old age smile

CloudsAndTrees Thu 25-Apr-13 23:28:40

Iteotwawki, your post has interested me as I think the family trust you have may be something similar to the route we old like to go down. I haven't thought too much about it yet, but will need to within the next couple of years.

Do you mind me asking, was it complicated to set up, and is there anything else I should have thought of that I might not have done at this stage?

MidniteScribbler Fri 26-Apr-13 00:18:15

To assume that people will have anything to leave, then to assume that people have planned to do anything with it, while saying that you plan to buy you only child a home...wow. Doesn't invite much sympathy from these quarters...

Oh FFS, so now we can't discuss anything that has the potential to offend someone who can't afford it? That puts an end to those parents with prams spaces threads because someone might not be able to afford a car. And no more debating rude visitors because someone might not have a spare bedroom. In fact, we can't even share some recipes because some people might not be able to afford food. Better just shut the internet down because some people might not be able to afford that.

Do kindly go and fuck yourself, please.

Iteotwawki Fri 26-Apr-13 02:06:37

Clouds - not complicated at all. The only difficulty you may come across is that your family trust is a separate legal entity to you / your partner, even though you're the same people. So if you are paying the mortgage but your trust owns the house, you have some extra paperwork to sort out (the trust has no income so can't get a mortgage, so you guarantee to the bank that you will pay it - all sorted by a solicitor).

Also means that if I get hit by lightning, my boys will benefit from my earnings & insurance payout and not some gold digging head turning floozy who would obviously snap DH up smile

Snort. What inheritance!? I haven't got a pot to piss in let alone leave my four kids a house each.

I live in council housing, and have no savings. Ill be leaving the kids with nothing except hopefully the ability to be independent, educated and able to help themselves.

Saying that though I do intend to start saving for driving lessons for them when I get sorted, that will help them to get a job, move out and if my plan works buy their own house just a little bit quicker grin

PuggyMum Fri 26-Apr-13 06:37:29

Ghosts, I'm the youngest of four and there was no inheritance from my dad and there won't be from my mum.

But what they did I still were values and a work ethic (need to haul bum out of bed!) that many don't.

This thread boils down to should you help your kids financially if you can so if driving lessons are within your means and helps them up the ladder a bit then thats your decision.

Mine couldn't afford that but what they did give me were skills to help me get ahead.

I'll be doing what I can for my kids in the future.

OrangeMabel Fri 26-Apr-13 07:16:27

Iteotwawki - thanks, that's the type of thing I'm interested in as I wanted to guard against someone else getting the benefit should DD divorce or become a crack addict!

And to those suggesting I'm trying to control my DD's adult life; things such as putting assets into trust are what the rich have done for centuries - you do know that the wealthy don't pay inheritance, don't you - that's for us plebs.

And of course I value education and am teaching her the ethics and morals I believe will make her a happy adult who contributes to society. I just want to use some of my money to buy her the security and safety net of a house.

firesidechat Fri 26-Apr-13 07:16:37

i thought it was an interesting thread that is why i opened it and because i am nosey and wanted to know what other people would answer , weird how some are being all pc on here saying its wrong to put your house in your kids name or sell it and give them money etc , i dont see a problem with giving my kids my house that i paid for with my money that i earned and payed tax on ,i think its wrong that the tax we pay all our life is wasted , hidden,given abroad ,if it wasnt wasted there would be enough to pay for everyone who needs care in there old age

I don't know if this has been mentioned on this thread before, although I assume it has, but this could be a really bad idea.

What happens if you gift your house to your children, continue to live in it yourselves and one of them gets divorced? Your house could form put of the marital assets and the house may need to be sold. What happens if your child dies before you do? Also there have been cases where this has been done and the children have forced the parents out of the house. Also the government may still consider that you own the house and not your children and wouldn't pay for your care needs ( Deprivation of Assets). Far too much to go wrong just to protect a few bricks and mortar.

Also everyone talks about the tax that they have paid, as if this is some kind of justification, but who do you think will be paying for your care fees? Well party it's me and all the other tax payers on hereor your own children, just so they can have an inheritance. Tax isn't a savings account that you're paying into. it's paying for the care needs of the current generation of elderly.

DIYapprentice Fri 26-Apr-13 07:19:44

Well if I can, I would like to purchase a small London flat for my DSs. If they chose a London profession the starting salary/training can be really low and as a result there are many careers only those well off can really afford to take a gamble on. A small London flat (probably in a family trust arrangement as described above) would give them the ability to live in London, have lower commute costs, and have their income support them in food and bills. If I manage to save up a deposit for it over the next five years the rent will hopefully pay enough of it off for them.

I have no intention of that being at the cost of having my own house though, and by the sounds of it neither does the op.

Care homes have a certain amount of self funded places and state funded places. The payment for state funded places is very low, and the self funded places very often subsidise them. As a result if you are self funding in a care home and your ability to self fund stops, the state will take over your care but that does NOT mean you get to stay in that care home just because they have some state funded places. If they are at their maximum number of state funded places (and the nice ones have long waiting lists for those places so are likely to be) you will be moved elsewhere.

So think and plan carefully people!

imour Fri 26-Apr-13 07:27:31

thanks for the info Iteotwawki will be looking into that smile

Glittertwins Fri 26-Apr-13 07:37:20

CloudsandTrees, we have a similar arrangement and it was set up when we wrote our wills, its not overly complicated.
I don't see anything wrong with giving our children the best possible advantage in life that we can give them. We don't spoil them, we are careful with our money and plan things financially. We will give them a good education in financial planning so that they can make their own decisions but if we don't have to saddle them with debt and still live comfortably then we will.

DontmindifIdo Fri 26-Apr-13 07:43:22

Orange - the point I was making earlier is highlighted through that, the rich have held property and assets in trust for generations, and therefore have been limited in their options for generations - stuck with houses that don't meet their needs etc.

It's one thing if you can afford a full house for her, but if you are only going to buy what you think she should want/need, not what she does want/need, being a trustee so you get to decide if she sells it and buys something else, if she borrows against the value to invest in a business or many other changes she might want to make - you will be giving a gift with strings. Personally, I'd treat it as something to rent out to subsidise my income, refuse to live in it and get my own house, just because I wouldn't want my parents to have any say in my finances. I also think it would put a strain on any marriage if your PIL have more say in your finances than you do. Worrying about gold diggers is understandable, but it also means that you are setting up a very strained relationship with your future son/daughter-in-law and potentially putting problems in their marriage.

(ignore if your home is actually something like a family farm that's been in the family generations)

CloudsAndTrees Fri 26-Apr-13 07:48:16

Iteotwawki and Glitter, thank you. I really need to start getting my head around these things, it's good to know it's not too complicated!

OrangeMabel Fri 26-Apr-13 08:06:42

Erm, firesidechat, have you read the thread?

firesidechat Fri 26-Apr-13 08:14:53

I was replying to one particular post and not trying to address the whole subject. There have been lots of opinions and I was giving mine. Is that ok?

auntpetunia Fri 26-Apr-13 08:15:26

We've set up our Deeds so that the kids are Tenants in Common so the house is owened by all 4 of us, and as long as nothing happens to us in next 6 years (the rules are 7, but we've had it a year ) then they can't be forced to sell it, if DH goes before me I get his share and vice versa and then when we go its split between the kids, but it's protected against care home fees as it's like having a surviving spouse.

LadyInDisguise Fri 26-Apr-13 08:26:41

Orange

Hope you are still reading.

Just go to see a good estate planner, NOT a will writer of some sort.
They will be able to guide you re how to protect that specific asset. they will also be able to guide your guardian etc... which is something you need to plan for too (eg if you die before she is 18yo, no one can sell the house 'for her' etc...).

imo too few people do take care of their estate, even if it's just the house they live in.

Doubtitsomehow Fri 26-Apr-13 08:47:18

Lady in disguise - what is an estate planner? Hw do you find one?
Is it a solicitor, or something else?
Probably need to go down a similar route, grateful to the op for starting the discussion and others for providing info.

SuedeEffectPochette Fri 26-Apr-13 10:12:42

Iteotwawki - if the beneficiary of a trust needs a care home, whether or not the trustees approve it, the local authority would not pay the fees if there was money available (but withheld) so i am not sure that works.

SuedeEffectPochette Fri 26-Apr-13 10:14:03

aunt petunia
To some extent the house of tenants in common is protected against SALE but not against the local authority taking a charge on the share of the person who needs care and getting the money when the property is eventually sold.

Glittertwins Fri 26-Apr-13 10:41:04

It depends on how the trust is set up. Speak to a solicitor.

Iteotwawki Fri 26-Apr-13 10:49:39

Suede - the point is, the trust owns all the assets. So if I needed a care home but to finance it would involve selling the family home and making my children homeless, that's not in the majority best interests. So the trust wouldn't fund it.

In terms of LA finance, we don't live in the UK so it may well be different here.

SuedeEffectPochette Fri 26-Apr-13 10:55:25

Yes I guess it depends on the jurisdiction. There are lots of companies in the UK purporting to protect assets that fail to advise on the other consequences (usually tax!). A proper solicitor or accountant is best. Don't use these "asset protection" advisers or firms IMO they are just out to make some money out of people now and won't be around to sue when it becomes clear that what was promised doesn't work. A solicitor's office will always be better because they have to maintain an insurance policy. Probably accountants do too.

SuedeEffectPochette Fri 26-Apr-13 11:30:36

I could put my house in a trust but then kids would pay CGT on it. As it is, living in it, I get the main residence exemption. So many tax considerations to consider with trusts. Proper advice is needed.

kyz1981 Fri 26-Apr-13 11:43:30

Iteotwawki - Thank you- I had been very worried about what to do -My DS has complex and Special needs - at the moment we are spending the money we would be saving for education and stuff trying to help him reach his potential- I am very unsure for his future and would worry with leaving him nothing or just a trust fund that my DD could possibly end up as a full time carer- (she may not mind this but I would want to protect her). The family trust sounds ideal as it could be for both DCs and flexible for DS if he needs more care.

Saying that I am also retraining in a to a career that I should be able to work in easily and anywhere in the country as I know I will have to support my DS for most if not all of my life.

OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni Fri 26-Apr-13 11:51:21

I am doing this OP. I rent my late mother's house currently and am in the process of building us a home. Idea being that I will sign one into her name (and not tell her - I want her to have it but don't want her to think her future is completely set!) and it will be a nice surprise when I pop my clogs. Having somewhere rent free to live takes massive pressure off life, and if she would rather sell it and live on a boat travelling or living like a hobo then that is fine with me too smile

OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni Fri 26-Apr-13 11:57:27

rent OUT my late mother's house, I meant blush

ssd Fri 26-Apr-13 12:04:39

interesting thread

Kendodd Thu 02-May-13 14:29:12

Any of you knowledgeable people like to comment on my plan?

I hoped to sell our house when the children leave home, buy a smaller house more fitting to the needs of a couple. Then lend (will proper legal agreements drawn up) the DCs the purchase price of a house (or let them use the money for other purposes such as setting up a business) for each of them. They make monthly 'mortgage' payments back to us. We don't charge them interest so they just pay back the amount they borrowed. Win-win they get to buy a house cheaply without interest, we get an income. The fatal hole in my plan is that the sale of our house will not produce enough money to then buy four smaller properties, we do have three BTL properties so we could always sell them though. Oh, and the DCs might not want to/be ready to buy a house when it suits us.

I do plan to be ruthless though, if they don't make the payments, I will confiscate their assets. I don't believe it's in their best interests to just give them things, that's why I want them to stand on their own two feet. I do want to help them though, hence the free loan.

MN experts, would this work?

PuggyMum Thu 02-May-13 15:46:02

Nothing wrong with that in theory. Its basically lending your kids money.

How you would enforce if they do not repay is the snag here. If they bought a house, you would need to take a charge over the property to have any legal power. Then if they don't repay you can enforce the charge but if you did that you're relationship would no doubt suffer!

You would need proper legal advice for this one. FIL lent us quite a sum and we repaid as planned. He lent BIL a small amount and is struggling to get the cash back. FIL doesn't want to look like a tight wad as BIL has a young family.... Its tricky.

I've seen families ripped apart by money.

Personally, if you can't afford to gift the money outright, I wouldn't do it.

Anything that gives you security will cost money in terms of legal fees an legal charges etc.... With the potential to cost a lot more in heartache.

CloudsAndTrees Thu 02-May-13 16:31:50

I've thought of the same thing Ken, but I think I have too many reservations to actually make it happen.

By the time I'm retired, I'd probably rely on the money or have to make sacrifices and I don't feel comfortable putting that sort of pressure on my own children. It would be awful if they couldn't or wouldn't pay for some reason, and it's not just them that you are relying on, it's whoever they choose as their partner too. What if they had children and split with their partner, and you end up in the position of having to put a charge on the house either they or your grandchildren live in?

I'd lo e to be able to just gift them at least a deposit for a one, but even then it could be lost to a partner.

It's a perfect plan in theory, but the reality has the potential to cause a lot of heartache.

OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni Thu 02-May-13 16:51:45

I think if you give the money you have to accept whatever they do with it is their decision. I think giving them enough for a deposit is fine but save the rest until they have their first birth and perhaps re-asses, leaving as much as you can afford to (without getting shafted by IT) for when you die. Most people get wiser with money with age, IME. I would hope that by the time I go DD will be settled in whatever way and know what to do with the inheritance to make full use of it.

OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni Thu 02-May-13 16:53:45

That way you are also covered personally if something extra (special nursing care etc) is needed.

aldiwhore Thu 02-May-13 17:10:15

At present I cannot plan to leave any inheritance. We have very little in the way of assets and spend what we have on what we need to with modest treats, family holidays and days out now.

My PIL scrimped and sacrificed to leave their children their home, MIL died, FIL has Alzheimer's, any inheritance goes on his care (rightly so) but I'm sad they missed out on so much to leave their children something they'd never ever actually get.

My own parents are doing well, both approaching 70, DF still working, almost mortgage free, they were winners in the boom years and losers in the bust years and always ALWAYS bounced back. I don't want their money, I want them to enjoy their life now.

I want my parents to be able pay for their care if they need it, and their funerals. Of course if they were rich enough I'd love them to leave me a fortune to set me up, for me to invest and grow... and I'd do the same for my children.

I wouldn't hoarde a lottery win, but I won't sacrifice a decent life together just so they can put a deposit on a house they could lose, our annual trip to Alton Towers or %interest on my dead value? For me it's a no brainer.

I am striving for balance. I want to creat wonderful memories for my children now. I'd like to pay for my own care and funeral. I'd like to leave them enough to buy a piano/car/holiday/PhD. I will not sacrifice the truly important things in life to leave my children a wad of cash. Sod that.

somewherewest Thu 02-May-13 19:15:17

Simple answer to the OP. No. We don't own. We may never own. Such is life for many people in our generation. And the grabby, entitled assumption that the state should step in and fund old age care for those who do own, so that they can pass their property on to their children (who have done nothing to earn it) irritates the tits off me.

I'm in a blunt mood this evening grin.

Theoretically I'm in line to inherit property, but I fully expect it to be sold to provide dignified care for my relatives in their old age. Anything that's left over will probably go on caring for the in-laws in their old age (they don't own any property). And I'm 100% fine with that. We're actually very fortunate that there's something to sell down the road. Lots of people don't have that.

cheerup Thu 02-May-13 19:32:57

Much as I hope to leave my children something, I don't see why many people with less than we have should fund my care (should I need it) so that my children can have an inheritance. Who do you think should pay for your care if not you and your family?

Personally I'm very much in the use what we have to create good memories now whilst not being reckless camp. We have frequent but modest family holidays and enjoy our time together. We are paying off a reasonable sized mortgage on a very average terraced house in the South East and hope to be mortgage free by retirement. If care home fees take the money from the house, I hope the children will still have fond memories of the times we spent together and we will have laid the foundation for them to have happy and successful (what ever that means to them) lives. It's not all about money and 'stuff is it?

BallerinaZeena Thu 02-May-13 19:38:02

Completely agree with what AThing said way up top!

Why should I pay your care home fees OP if you can afford to pay them?

Absolutely disgraceful.

BallerinaZeena Thu 02-May-13 19:40:43

And don't say you haven't said you wouldn't pay your care home fees if needed - your OP is explicitly clear that you are trying to avoid that and hide your money.

aldiwhore Thu 02-May-13 19:48:05

There's a 'hit parade' of needs in my life.

Saving for my own care in old age comes before leaving cash for my children.

It's the lesser burden.

FIL may well be gutted that his dream is dust, but he was never realistic, but he CAN pay for his care, and the government don't/won't take it all, he will still be able to leave a modest amount for his children to (hopefully not) squabble over.

At Number One right now, is "LIVE". Take that as you will.

Oh and your care will be funded if there is medical need for you to have it. FIL is quite at that stage yet, we just can't leave him alone, he has his house, he pays his way (or will, when dead and hosue sold).

I do have to say though that if you're fantastically wealthy, and have a loving family, you are a bit of a cunt if you leave every penny to the local cat's home, that's spiteful.

littlebillie Thu 02-May-13 19:50:12

SKI ing all the away (Spending Kids Inheritance)

Probably won't but put money every month into their Children's Trust Fund. It is doing quite well.

OrangeMabel Thu 02-May-13 20:25:00

Oh for heaven's sake read the thread before chucking insults around!

We're "making wonderful memories" with our DD. We hope to have a fulfilling retirement many years from now. I'd rather top myself than go into a care home but, if I don't get a choice in the matter, then we'll hopefully have money to pay for it. I want an amount ring-fenced for a home for my DD before I line the pockets of a care home owner. Hopefully, if this happens (and as somebody pointed out up thread, the majority of people don't end up in a home) there will be a change in the law that allows euthanasia for the very old and sick who've expressed a wish not to live under such circumstances.

PoohBearsHole Thu 02-May-13 21:00:27

Aldi, that's what my grandmother did as she didn't want my dads children to get her "money" so distressing for my mum. Even her jewellery was sold and although my df tried to buy some back for my dmum they were outbid. Although for that I blame her brothers and their thieving wives who even after I was born and my mum cared for them they ignored me and again left their inheritance to the dogs trust. Noble but a bit nasty. All because my dmum had the audacity t marry someone who was divorced. Oh the good old days, if she had put it in a trust then fine but my dmum missed out on an inheritance of memories too as it was all soured.

Disclaimer my dmum did get a small amount that she wisely invested, however the jewellery thing upset her, especially as she and df paid for gm care sad

FarBetterNow Thu 02-May-13 21:10:11

Mabel; So your daughter will have a house paid for by you, whilst other peoples' daughters will pay your care home fees?

Really?

Currently own 10 properties, 9 are multi let. We run them when needed, but they more or less look after themselves. Planning to have 20+ by the time ds is 18 (currently 20 months). He can either take over running the houses when we want it retire fully, or hire someone and go and do a 'proper' job if he wants to work. Up to him, but he will always have a property of his own, and we will all always have a salary.

OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni Thu 02-May-13 21:17:43

I hate the idea of care homes too. I plan to put enough aside to pay for a live in carer that way I can neck something deadly if I feel it is 'time'/can't eat chocolate hobnobs any more

Oh, and they will be under a business so they can't be taken off him when we die smile

OhHullitsOnlyMeYoni Thu 02-May-13 21:26:57

Choccy that sounds very similar to my long term plan! Our family (dad and I) own 3 houses outright now. Hoping to build some new houses so would need to be a very long term investment and with a building project of my own on the go already, I don't know if I can face another one in the next few years! I figure if I make the houses big/nice enough, just 3/4 should keep DD in a very nice income and she can then do with them what she wants.
DD is also 20mo! Property moguls ahoy!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now