To think it would benefit my 2 sons if their grandad's house didn't have to be sold in the future for care home fees

[supersec]

We have 2 sons (aged 16 and 18). Everyone knows about the dire prospects of any teenagers today ever getting on the property ladder. My sons have always been close to their paternal grandparents. Grandmother died 4 years ago after having Alzheimer's for 7 years. She ended up in a home for last 6 months as my father in law looked after her at home.

He is now 81 and has been diagnosed with dementia. We own our house outright. My husband has one brother who is married, nearly 5o with no children. He owns 2 houses outright, one which he rents out.

We save extremely hard for our future and hopefully house deposits for our sons but the outlook is very bleak from reading the papers/watching the news and I find the outlook for their future very depressing - will they be living with us until they are 40

After the diagnosis my brother in law said he thought it would be a good idea to get his dad's bank balance down as he has nearly £90,000 in the bank. He and my husband withdrew £3,000 each a few months ago with my father in law's approval But I think it is too late for this to make any difference to any possible future care needs. Even if it was reduced to under £23,000 which I understand is the threshold limit for contributing towards your care, the care home would say the house had to be sold.

I am sure my father in law would like to see his only grandchildren live in the house when he passes away, rather than it being sold for care home fees. My brother in law has no children to worry about, has a brilliant final salary pension and a very large bank balance.

I don't know why he came up with the idea to start reducing the bank balance when it will make no difference to his dad having to fund his care if the time comes. No more money has been withdrawn yet but my husband is burying his head in the sand over this and is just agreeing with his older brother.

I do not want a penny from any estate, I would just love to see our sons get a helping hand for the future but this would be via us as the will is 50/50 between my husband and his brother.

I am a very positive person and don't get depressed about much but I feel utter despair at the housing prospects for today's teenagers.

Please tell me if I am being out of order .

I don't want to comment on how distasteful the Op's posting is, as it's already been said.

I do want to comment on the difference between the bog standard council run homes and the privately run 5 homes, because, in my experience, there is a hell of a difference. We persuaded MIL to go into a home as she was not coping and she was putting it off precisely because she wanted to leave her money to DH & SIL. She went into a 5 one which looked and operated like a 5* hotel, (although I have to say it was a bit like all fur coat and no knickers when it came to the actual caring part). It cost about £5,600 per month and that was without any nursing care.

MIL's sister went into a council run home, and I can hardly bare to visit her there as the place smells like urine and cabbage (although I accept not all council run homes are like that). I know which one I would prefer to end up in, if needs must, and it made DH & me realise that we need to have money at our disposal in order to pay for something decent, rather than be left without choices. Running your assets down to avoid having to pay for care is IMHO extremely foolish.

With her savings and the value of her flat, we knew MIL could afford less than 6 years at most in that home, and we were quite concerned about what would happen when the money ran out. As it happened, she didn't live that long.

OP, if you want to try to make your FIL's money go further when he goes into a home, don't sell his house immediately, as the proceeds will make next to nothing in the bank. We kept hold of MIL's flat and let it out for 2 years, which made her savings last longer. That is a legitimate approach.

By the way, encouraging elderly people to give their homes away before they need residential care will not work, as councils have the power to claw back money/assets which have been disposed of in order to avoid paying care fees (and quite right too). This is a different issue to the inheritance tax issue & the 7 year tapering relief rule.

This thread has been interesting reading. I have an elderly mother who lives in a home she owns outright. She may at some point in the near future have to move to a care home, which would have to be self funded. However, she lives with and cares for my sibling who has severe SEN. They have lived together in this home for decades and her plan has always been that after her death my sibling will continue to live in the property with the help of social services and relatives. How do you think my mother's possible care fees should be funded?

WooWoo you seem to think that looking after our most vulnerable somehow penalises our more fortunate.

There will always be a minority that swing the lead - benefit fraud, expenses scandal etc. That doesn't mean the majority should suffer.

Surely the answer is for the young to live with the old and hire in care when needed? That would make much more sense to me. And one sister in a swanky home while the other sister lives in the cheap cabbagey home? How did that happen? Surely the family pull together somehow?

Polyethyl, surely there are more to their memories than how much money was left for them at the end of her life? What if she had never been a home owner? What if hg he had always lived in rented accommodation on benefits? Would they not have happy memories of her?
As I said before I think if all that she worked for and built up was spent on her old age care then it was money well spent.

I was wondering the same littlefunpug.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/301250/CRAG_34_April_2014.pdf eels look at 7.003

Unrealhousewife MIL owned her own home. Her sister, who does not have children to help out, did not.

Surely, you are not suggesting that we used some of MIL's money to pay for her sister's care? Our duty of care was to MIL, and we were concerned that her money would not pay for her own care for the rest of her life. She had a small flat to sell, not a mansion, and we wanted the best for her. We certainly could not have afforded to fund her sister's care. As it happens, she as always been very happy at the council home and doesn't appear to notice the smell!

As I was trying to say above, we all need to make plans for our old age. It will be upon us before we know it. I suspect most people don't give it a fleeting thought - as I probably didn't before I had to deal with ML's affairs.

By the way, I too cannot understand how a family can think ill of a relative simply because that person's own money was spent on their own care. Bizarre.

unrealhousewife - you clearly have no experience of people with dementia. Old people do not generally become a little bit dotty or frail. With improved drugs and lifestyle they are increasingly living longer lives but with a degenerating brain. You need teams of people to care for a confused, angry, night-waking, incontinent, heavy person, who may live for a very long time in that state. It would tear most families apart to have to deal with this.

How do you think my mother's possible care fees should be funded?

I hate to say it but perhaps your sister will be funded to go into care, and the house will STILL be sold. Money has to come from somewhere.

What example are you setting your children by committing fraud? Of course, if they follow suit they won't need a home of their own.

My DGM three sons are just like you.

All waiting for her death to divi up her assets - like vultures.

I've told her to go on a round the world cruise or sell her house and go in to a lovely retirement home where most of her friends are.

But she won't be because she feels she needs to leave her sons the lot. The three sons that barely visit her. Maybe three times a year if that. She is aware how they feel.

Stop dipping in to your FIL money and get him n to a fantastic home to spend the last years of his life in good care.

I can't find words strong enough to describe how disgusted I was reading your OP and subsequent posts.

My only hope is that your FIL spends every single penny of his money for his care and leaves a big fat zero.

Everything that family had worked for, saved and built up was gone. That family do not remember their grandmother happily

Grabby ungrateful gits. It wasn't 'gone'. It was providing care for someone who needed it.

Neither DH or I expect to inherit houses from either side of the family. We're just grateful there will be something to sell to pay for decent care.

Thank you Ashtrayheart. That's good to know.

Sadly I don't think the FIL will get chance to spend his own money as his kids already feel it's theirs !

I know when I'm older I won't give Jack for having a nice house or being in a fancy care home, I would be far happier knowing that my children have what they need for themselves and seeing them happy, having holidays or paying for anything that would benefit them.

Care homes are just big business really. 1500 a week? Really?

Do you live in a smelly, noisy house now unreal?

Fab

Because a lot of people are utterly vile.

"I know when I'm older I won't give Jack for having a nice house or being in a fancy care home,"

At what age will you stop wanting to have a life of your own, and only live through your children?

I just want a care home with its own bar; they do exist