Is there any con to staying with parents for life?

[onlychildhamster]

I was at lunch with my MIL and my SIL over the weekend and the discussion moved to young people living at home. MIL and SIL said that it was ridiculous that young people felt pressured to move out and in the old days, bachelors stayed with their mums for life (not actually too sure about that). From the sounds of it, SIL is aiming to stay with MIL for life. Some people might say that she would change her mind but I am not so sure because of the following factors:

1. She has suspected Aspergers
2. She writes for a living and the income from that is not likely to pay rent.
3. She doesn't meet other people IRL (except family friends and family) so is unlikely to find a partner and get married.
4. MIL is happy with the status quo.

I mean, I don't think its a bad thing. In my home country, people often choose to live with their parents i.e. my father purchased a house with his parents but of course that is a different situation from someone living with their parents without their names on the title deed etc. DH and I lived with MIL for 3 years until we bought our flat.

However, in this country where care home fees are often financed through sale of property etc, what difficulties would that pose if MIL has to go into care (she is only 60 so this is a long way off). SIL is 24. I know they do not sell the house if the child is below 18 but SIL would be way older than that! I have also read that the council may elect to put a lien on the house rather than sell it straight away, but that is not guaranteed right? Also as SIL has 3 other siblings, there may not be much left for SIL to get her own home after the care home fees are deducted and the remainder divided even though its a London house (the 2 other siblings might want an equal share!). Of course this is quite far off and hypothetical and MIL might say that its a minor risk (cos not everyone goes into care!)

What do you all think? Do you think SIL is better off getting her own council flat (assuming she can get one) cos at least she has secure residency in her own right and wouldn't be kicked out of her own home if the house is needed to be sold to pay for care home fees?

@LindaEllen I am not western so its not really the house sharing with the parent that is the issue (i grew up in a multi-generational home).
If someone has a job and savings and chooses to share with parents, thats a very different situation. If the mother has to sell the house to fund care or medical bills or whatever, the child would be in a good position to get his or her own place. Its a very different situation from someone who doesn't want to get a job, has no reliable source of income and is only managing because the parent is paying the bills. And doesn't realize this, because it is not a current problem.

@caringcarer your BIL has lots of money in ISAs. your aunt had the ability to get a job and support herself (plus has a history of working).

It would be very different if my SIL said- yes I aspire to get a job and I aspire to live with mum. That is completely 100% fine. The lack of work is connected to living at home, i think, because living at home means that even money from casual work may seem sufficient (when that is not the true cost of living).In theory, for many people, that shouldn't matter because many people earn money based on their capabilities rather than just earning what they need to survive. But I think it could be different if you don't want to work anyway.

[quote onlychildhamster]@sanbeiji buy her own property outright? I mean yes definitely, if she was the only beneficiary and MIL gave everything to her, which is possible but not guaranteed.

I wasn't actually going to give her the whole deposit, but encourage her to get a job (even part time), save up her earnings for a deposit and top up maybe 20-30k. She could buy a property and rent it out. I don't think its a good idea for her to move to the north by herself so she can stay at home. But this way it means she doesn't really need to hold down a job for very long..[/quote]
Managing a rental is harder than holding down a job!. You’ll probably make very little profit/loss if you pay a management company to do it all. Even then you need backup cash in case something very expensive breaks.

There’s no such thing as a ‘cheap’ BTL. If you want a steady stream of good tenants, a property in good condition will cost at least 150K. You’ll see ‘cheap’ properties but upon investigation these have damage, a short lease (making it hard to resell), steep management charges or undesirable area.

Easier to get her into the habit of working, and when MIL passes help her find a property with her inheritance. Or top up a deposit as you’ve agreed to do.

Also I was looking into this as an option for my parents. They own a few properties in my home country.
It’s ‘easier’ there. All they need to do is fix anything that breaks. Even for them there’s the risk of void periods or tenants causing expensive damage.

In the U.K. there’s a whole host of rules and regulations… even harder

Also to be clear I’m not suggesting dont do it!
But only if you’re prepared to step in and take on all that hassle if she cant. Even then she’ll be the legal owner and if she doesn’t want to sell you’ll be stuck.