Leave House to brother or DCs

[HouseDilema]

I've name changed for this as I don't want to be identified, post may be a little vague because of that.

DH and I own 2 properties, one is a very nice House in a lovely area just outside of London, the other is a cottage by the beach that we rent out throughout the year.

I have a brother, who's 15 years my junior and who has ASD and DCs ranging from 15-25.

Until recently DH and I had our Will set up so that DB would inherit the cottage and DCs the family home to sell off and split, however we've now changed our minds for a number of reasons, including the governments current attitude towards the disabled.

We want to give DB our family home for the rest of his life, he's currently in his 30s with the mental age of an early teen, he can't live alone and he'll need care for the rest of his life. To fund the help that he will need, we have decided to keep the cottage for him as well so that he'll always have a income.

The new Will states that now we shall be leaving DB both properties and once he passes, the DCs can inherit both.

DH and I thought the best approach was to tell everyone and make our position very clear. It didn't go down very well, especially not with our eldest who's only 10 years younger then DB.

I don't think I am being unreasonable but I can see that their attitude really hurt DH. I understand the current housing climate but they are not the ones with the greater need.

nrtht
What struck me was even if db didn't marry someone could move in with him with very young children and if db died no court can remove the mum and her children from the home. We have had a similar issue and the woman in question has been given a lifetimes tenancy. Only when she dies will the house return to the person it was left to. Unfortunately short of some tragic accident befalling this woman then the person who the house was left to will be dead.

Not sure if this is helpful but wouldn't it be better to sort out your brother sooner rather than wait until you die if you can afford it? I'm assuming you are fairly comfortable if you are talking about helping your children.

Where is he living now?

He might easily outlive you. You might all need expensive care as you get older. You really don't know what the future holds.

Brasty at the moment it looks as if dc can earn a living, yes, but as pps have said, that could change very quickly at any point after the death of the dparents. The example given, that dparents can die in an car accident that leaves a dc disabled/unable to work, is blunt, but these things do sometimes happen, sadly.

I also could see problems with 'friends' moving in with a vulnerable adult, as pp have suggested, if he has a large house. And yes, how will the buildings maintenance be paid for?
However i don't agree that op should 'only' rely on dcs to look after db. It's never wise to leave thse things as a matter of 'oh you should trust that dc will do the decent thing ' . you just don't know, and suppose they lose their assets theough divorce, bankruptcy, any number of ways. But more fundamentally, it is too much of a burden on the dc. As others have said, suppose they want to emigrate to australia or go and live on a mountainside? So i can see that op feels she wants to make some formal provision.

But DC will be able to work and earn their own living.

Yes, and by the sounds of it, they'll be the ones left to pay for the upkeep of the houses because the brother won't have the capital to pay for that, especially if lifetime care is having to be paid for. And if they are having to pay for the upkeep, they could end up having to pay that for the next 40 or 50 years, depending on how long the brother lives in the house for.

And also, assuming the estate is large enough, who is going to pay the inherritance tax? The children?

Imbroglio - I absolutely agree with you. It would be far better for the OP to get her brother settled in a suitable property now - one that is the right size for him (i.e. not a 4-bed family home), that is easy to maintain, and has the right support available for him, than to leave him two houses, neither of which are suitable for him to live in, and all the issues that go with this.

Then set up a trust for him, with the money from selling the holiday cottage, to pay for his care.

But I think the OP has flounced because they didn't get the response they wanted here.

It is your money and your choice. I thought it was better disabled relatives inherited nothing as then they continue with their state benefits so it was kinder to ensure they were cut out of wills but I might be wrong I suppose. Could you not leave the properties to your children and then leave a letter of wishes requesting them to take care of their uncle?

Rousette

Maybe the parents are dead? Maybe they are dirt poor and have no means of supporting their ASD son. The OP has her reasons and doesn't want to spill all the details of her life on here (specially with DM lazy journos hanging out here).
I think it's clear that her children are not destitute. Op states she has provided lots of financial support and will continue to do so. Should she leave everything to the kids and hope they will look after their uncle? It sounds like she is putting in place a plan to fund the long term care of her brother then after his death the capital sums will be passed to her children.

FAD - what about the big flaws that people have point d out with the OP's plan? The fact that the brother will end up in a house that is far too big for his needs, whilst someone has to ensure that his care needs are paid for (because he may well lose all benefits, if he 'owns' two houses), and that both houses are properly maintained (because without the rental income from the holiday cottage, he will have no income to cover his care costs) - who is going to take care of the two houses and manage the income for him?

What if he lets someone move in - that person could be very difficult for the OP's children to get out if her brother dies. What about the risk of someone scamming him?

A number of people with real-life experience and knowledge in this area have commented on here to point out the problems and risks of what the OP is planning to do, but appear to be being ignored.

I commend the OP for wanting to look after her brother, but I do not think this is the best way to do it - even if one completely ignores the hurt that this is already causing some of her dc, and the potential irreparable divisions it could cause.

*Today 12:13 FrancisCrawford

And there have been no answers about how the DB will be responsible for maintaining the upkeep of not one but two houses. The DC could ultimately be left with two properties in a very poor state of repair and not have the financial wherewithal to remedy all the defects before sale.
*
The estate will be in a trust, the brother will not be managing the houses himself, the brother will not own the properties. He will however be looked after and the OP seems to be planning that the capital will remain intact to be eventually passed to her adult children

There will be a trustee appointed to look after the trust. Hadn't Op already said that? Isn't that how a trust works?

*SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius
*
What ifs and buts. What if she does manage to get him in a council flat, whose going to look after him then? Surely better to arrange care through a trust so that the children don't have to look after uncle but then they will still inherit? Anything could happen, the OP could live to 90, her brother could die before her. Heck if her oldest is 25 he could die before the OP! He is also an adult without speacial needs and should be responsible for his own finances. The OP has every right to want to look after her brother.
The OP has acknowledged that she needs to look more into his access to additional support but I am happy to believe that she knows her brother, knows her children and knows her own finances well enough to know that her brother who will be the most vulnerable member of her family.

I don't understand the rationale of one person in a four bed house, even leaving aside the obvious pitfalls in this case.

Did you join MN just to comment on this thread, FAD? Since you only started posting today, and all but one of your posts are on this thread?

I'm sorry that I haven't RTfT.
I just wanted to pipe up though and say that I'm an adult SW-
It is worth remembering that:
If you are receiving domicillary care (at home) and you have another property that you don't reside in, you are automatically classed as over the capital threshold and therefore have to pay the full amount for your care.

If at any point your DB has to go into a residential placement, if the house is in his name, he will have to sell both properties to pay his care charges.

Your DCs might be left with nothing.

Good points Mooey. I hope someone tells the OP this (I think she has flounced and isn't reading the thread any more). It doesn't sound, from what she has said here, as if she has had good advice or advice from someone with actual expertise like yourself, in r/l.

All very odd.

Is FAD a sock puppet?

It is a bit strange.

One last thing occurred to me from my own situation of having a disabled sister living in the parental home - she has a tendency to set fires.

When my parents die, and she is living alone in the house, I'm not sure who will insure the property, as although the house will be in my name, with carers coming into see to her several times a day she will still have many hours alone. We will have to declare to the insurers the situation, but which insurance company would take the risk?

People of OPs DB level of disability will likely be living in their own anyway, unless with family.