This is going to sound so mercenary, but...

@MereDintofPandiculation a lot of the help isn't medical though. Someone with cancer/heart disease etc isn't provided with a cleaner, shopping help, someone to chat to or someone to keep an eye on their admin however incapable they are of dealing with it. The medical needs are covered it's the rest that's a big problem. We would all be happy with a government that covered the lot but the majority will vote for tax cuts and therein lies a lot of the problem. So either the individual pays where they can or we impose on younger generations, possibly for decades.

Have they even had an assessment from the older peoples team that they need residential care?

You need to get this first.

There may be other options to allow them to remain in the community for as long as possible.

Do they go to full time day care?

Have telecare alarms fitted in the home?

Tried live in care?

Councils won't fund residential care unless they assess it as necessary.

You can self pay if you want but if your assets run out then social work say they don't meet their criteria they can be kicked out of their residential home!

The average life expectancy of a care home resident is 2 years so you are likely to still be left with around £100k inheritance which is well under the inheritance tax threshold anyway.

Also make sure they are claiming everything inc attendance allowance/ carers allowance/ pension credit etc.

Ask CAB for benefits advice.

At least there is some attempt to share around the cost of public services. The way we fund social services is akin to saying “you have cancer? Well, you can’t expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab while you’ve got savings to pay for your treatment”

I find the older generation would very much prefer that they have at least the family home to leave to their children, rather than their life savings used up and house sold off to pay for care fees. Especially when they no longer wish to be alive. If the state is going to keep me alive after I’ve had enough, the state should damned well pay for it.

If they’ve been getting £3000k a year, then you can continue that if it’s the parent’s wish and they can afford to do so. But if they have a foreseeable need for care, and don’t have enough separate funds to cover it, then it’s likely to be regarded as deprivation of assets, and the LA will carry out the financial assessment as if they still had the money.

what he can do is apply for Attendance Allowance, provided he’s receiving no LA finance for the care home. If he qualifies for the night time rate, then it’s about £100 a week, which is more than the £3000 (total not per person) a year that is disregarded fir inheritance tax.

Rather than ask your solicitor, ask the accounts team at your local council’s Social Work team if they allow for one payment of £3000 per year as allowable gifts in their calculations.
They are the ones who matter.
(And when you have the conversation don’t be emotional about how you need the funds.)
In previous years some Councils granted this but I think the system has tightened up and they all take the same view, but it is worth asking, nonetheless.

I didn't just mean from a moral point of view actually as it would be seen as deliberately depriving the person of assets so can be reclaimed from those receiving the gift I think.

Of course everyone would prefer that. Just as they'd prefer to pay hardly any tax and still have well funded freely available public services.

OP it doesn’t sound like their estate is going to meet the IHT threshold when the time comes, even before care fees start being paid, so that doesn’t need to be a consideration. (The threshold is £325k, and can go up to £500k if you leave your home to your children)

Yes it is £3k per year, not per person. I gift £3k between my 3 DC so they get £500 each twice a year.
If your Dad needs to go into a care home and the house is sold and he gifts you and/or your sister money then the council will claim 'deprivation of assets'. They will make you repay the money if your Dad needs care taking his assets down below £23,250.

If they haven’t been giving you £3k a year before now, it will be seen as unreasonable to suddenly start.

They can legally gift more than £3K but it’ll be liable for inheritance tax if they don’t survive at least seven years. Plus you’ve got to consider deprivation of assets if their remaining funds run out.

Def. discuss with the solicitor before letting them gift you anything.

It's £3k total each year, not £3k each per year. You can roll the previous year if it was unused, so potential of £6k in the first year.

Gifts from income can be made if it does not impact on standard of living. So if for instance they have a monthly income of £4k, but monthly costs for everything are £2k, they can gift the surplus £2k. However, if the money is needed for care, this route would not be open to you. You also need to keep fairly stringent records for HMRC, otherwise they could potentially include it for IHT.

Any house maintenance / improvements/ alterations should come from capital, not income. If there is a medical diagnosis that means alterations are needed (accessibility alterations, stairlift, wet room etc) you can get them zero rated for VAT.

Especially when often their adult children may have given up paid work or cut down on it in order to keep them at home as long as possible.

As a carer I can say I’ve only ever seen this opinion on mn. I find the older generation would very much prefer that they have at least the family home to leave to their children, rather than their life savings used up and house sold off to pay for care fees. And I don’t blame them one bit because I’ll be doing the same.

I think it's £3K in total that can be gifted each year, not £3K each.

Just out of interest, how much equity will there be when the house is sold?

If they need to pay for care I don't think they should be giving any money away.

You can’t do it, sorry but not mercenary!

It doesn't sound mercenary, it is.

Ask the solicitor's advice.