Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

242 replies

OrangeMabel · 25/04/2013 14:19

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?

OP posts:
crashdoll · 25/04/2013 19:59

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 · 25/04/2013 20:05

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

Original poster
OrangeMabel · 25/04/2013 20:06

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

OP posts:
Arisbottle · 25/04/2013 20:06

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 · 25/04/2013 20:09

"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 · 25/04/2013 20:13

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'.

EhricLovesTeamQhuay · 25/04/2013 20:16

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 · 25/04/2013 20:16

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 · 25/04/2013 20:18

Too busy spending it op. whoop whoop!

HollyBerryBush · 25/04/2013 20:18

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.

SauvignonBlanche · 25/04/2013 20:20

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

Portofino · 25/04/2013 20:20

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 · 25/04/2013 20:20

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 · 25/04/2013 20:21

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 · 25/04/2013 20:25

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 · 25/04/2013 20:25

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 · 25/04/2013 20:27

Quite, crashdoll.

imour · 25/04/2013 20:29

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 :)

Portofino · 25/04/2013 20:30

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

Original poster
OrangeMabel · 25/04/2013 20:31

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.

OP posts:
CloudsAndTrees · 25/04/2013 20:31

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 · 25/04/2013 20:33

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

Arisbottle · 25/04/2013 20:33

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 · 25/04/2013 20:35

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 · 25/04/2013 20:37

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?