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

[OrangeMabel]

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?

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.

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 .

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 .

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.

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!

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 .

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

"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.

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 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.

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.

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?

Good post Briene

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.

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.

"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

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.

"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!

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.

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?

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.