Sibs think we should sell to pay care home fees

[SeriouslyTryadifferentstory]

Context: Victorian semi, converted into two one bed flats by myself and my parents in the '90s. I married and DH and I have continued to live in and own the ground floor flat, with extension and garden (and paid off the bloody mortgage!) , parents owned (paid for outright) and lived in the upper flat. Mum died a decade ago and Dad has recently moved into a care home so his flat has to be sold to pay the fees. DH is also battling a chronic illness.

My brothers (2 of them) think that we should "just sell the whole house and we'll find you "somewhere to live". My Sis is telling them to back off and I just want everyone to go away and leave me alone.

Sorry, just needed to vent.

@tonyatotter , TBH I fail to see why a house that is not needed by either spouse (not any dependant) to live in any more, because they’re both either dead or have moved to care homes, should not ultimately be sold to pay rolled-up care fees. In the case I mentioned the house would have sold for £500k plus. Why should that money not be used to repay the cost to the local authority? Any left over would go to whoever would be entitled to inherit.

I don't make the rules!, but that is what they say, here it is from the actual legal text:

1. Where an adult goes into a care home any property they own will be taken into account in the financial assessment for charging for care and support unless it is subject to a disregard. Subject to certain conditions, from April 2015 a property must be disregarded where it is occupied as their main or only home by one of the following:

a. the adult’s partner, civil partner or former partner (except where the adult is estranged or divorced from the partner,

1. a lone parent who is the adult’s estranged or divorced partner with a child that is under 18,
2. a relative or family member of the adult who: i. is aged 60 or over, or
3. ii. is a child of the adult aged under 18, or iii. is incapacitated.

Well, she would, because she has no obligation to pay her father's care home costs, whereas the council does have that obligation once his means go down to the threshold which triggers that duty. The same would apply to you if you had to go into a care home: you would only have to pay while you had the means to do so, your relatives could not be made to give you money to enable you to carry on paying. Jesus.

Ahh...

But it does if they believe they can:

A/ buy OP's property at less than the market rate.
B/ buy DD's property at less than the market rate.
C/ then stiff OP a second time by paying her 50% of the total price of both properties.

Why they believe they can do this, don't know.

Perhaps they have an estate agent friend who can provide a low valuation, perhaps they would then have their 'buyer' ie a secret third party, play silly buggers with any offer, dropping the offer repeatedly due to spurious claims of new roofing needed or expensive re-wires needed etc etc..

Beyond shitty, unspeakably cunty and probably based on them not realising OP and her sister have LPA.

Nowhere did I suggest it was not fair. FFS, the reason I know about this is because my mother's care was paid for from the proceeds of sale of her flat, and never once did I complain to anyone about that.

What I pointed out was that it would not benefit OP's father or indeed her brothers to sell her property and give some or all of the proceeds to her father; the chances are that the only people who would benefit are the council because their obligation to start paying would be postponed till OP's money had run out. And that it would be illogical for OP to do that.

My sister has also emailed them, saying that Dad gave his daughters joint LPA over his health and wealth not them and that Dads insistence that "his girls" look after him now makes perfect sense. She's also said that she wants no further contact with them.

Thank goodness your dad did this.

Several? Just you and one other person, and neither of you seems to have read the post properly. Others have responded disagreeing with you. You are the one who was rude in implying I thought people should try to slide out of their obligations.

When someone quotes a post, they are replying to it and the response has to be read in that context and no other. My post quoted one from OP where she pointed out that, by doing what her brothers wanted and selling her flat and splitting the proceeds 50/50, she would just be giving money to her father. I responded to that point by saying that this also meant that, by following through on her brothers' proposal to sell her flat, OP would effectively just be giving money to the council. I emphasise "her" flat because I never once suggested or implied that they should not sell her father's flat, and no-one with basic comprehension skills could have read my post to think that I did.

Not only did I not say that, I would not say that, because (a) I don't believe it, (b) I am aware that if you force the council to pay they will go for the cheapest option which may not be a great care home, and (c) it would be a stupid thing to say - refusing to sell the flat would be pointless, because ultimately the council could either stop funding the fees or get a charge put on the property so that they can be reimbursed once the flat is sold.

I wondered if your brothers were somehow under the impression that you had got your flat cheaply through buying direct from your parents, and think that it's unfair for you to keep that benefit. But they could find out the actual facts with very little difficulty so, if they do think that, they are deceiving themselves.

OP, so sorry that your brothers are trying to screw you over in this way, and Im glad your sister has got the measure of them too. No contact, a solicitors letter if they keep pushing at you and deal with your dads estate/flat sale/finances as well documented and honestly as you did with buying your flat, so there is clear evidence that you are above reproach when they come with inevitable complaints.

They are the ones who have destroyed trust and sibling relationships because of their greed and dishonesty. I think the 'daily phone call' from your brother in an attempt to argue and wear you down when you have enough to think about with an ill DH and elderly father is the worst aspect - planned, manipulative and bloody cynical, totally self interested and showing no care for you and your DH as sibling/in law or even as people.

I'm going to guess it will stop now, unless the OPs Brothers and mates are thick as mince they must now know they have been rumbled and their plan is dead in the water.

Dont threaten them aith a solcitor. Get one anyway.

Why? They have zero right to OPs flat, they don't have LPA, there's shit all they can do bar contacting OP, which she can block. No need to shell out money when she has other things to worry about unless it becomes necessary.

I'm so sorry, OP, that you had to discover at this point what your brothers are like. It must be a real shock to both you and your sister. Perhaps not to your father. Parents are often far more aware of the children's true character than their children ever guess.

Another way to deal with it is to say make me an offer, and laugh when it's nowhere near high enough.

Sorry to say that your brothers sound awful, OP. But at least your sister is a decent person who has your back!

All good wishes to you and your DH, Dad and sister.

I've thought about this quite a bit, and (admittedly bending over backwards) can sort of see the brothers' POV. Imagine this scenario

You see your family home, and realise that it's a great development opportunity. Sold separately, the flats might together raise x, but if the whole property were sold as a development, it might raise 6x (for example).

But there's a drawback. Your sister has bought the downstairs flat from your parents, so no-one can buy the whole development opportunity without your sister selling up.

So you go to your sister and explain to her that it's a great opportunity and obviously you'll give her 50% of the sale price for the whole property.

Probably because you are blinded by greed, but it could be naiveity, you overlook the fact that your sister actually owns more than 50% of the property (because she ... I forget the deets here but she has the larger flat with the garden). You also completely fail to take into account the fact that your sister's DH is unwell, and just refuse to hear the fact that she doesn't want to move in any case.

(My business brain is telling me that if my ridiculous example was true, and the whole property really was worth 6x what the sum of the two flats was worth, some negotiation ought to go on. And so the OP ought to give a tiny bit of thought to what percentage of the sale price actually WOULD be fair. But a valid answer might still be 'I don't want to move, even for £1m')

If I were the brother and really believed the above, I would be trying to negotiate - and I don't think that would make me an awful person (although unless I was very stupid indeed, the initial offer of 50% says a lot about my shitty character).

Just wanted to look at it from another angle, really.

Having read your updates OP including the info about the family meeting it’s clear that your brothers were fully in the picture about the sale of the ground floor flat two decades ago. It seems as if their self absorption plus also I bet their lack of involvement in taking care of your dad has meant that they are only just realising that what money there is from the sale of your dads flat will probably be absorbed by his care needs and there is going to be no inheritance in the pot for them. It’s ironic that it is the same older brother who was so happy that you were going to be close at hand to look after your dad who is now trying to bully you into selling your home.
Your dad also must have been aware of the attitude of your brothers to give you and your sister LPA.
It’s good you have the support of your sister and it is going to be a tough time having to have any contact with your brothers while the sale of your dad’s flat is negotiated but once that sale is completed they will eventually have to give up and go away.

Mm...

Except this wasn't an idea discussed with the OP. It was a plan crafted behind her back, between the two brothers and only revealed to the other sister when she went on a bit of a fishing trip.

Oh and it involved one of the brothers calling her a selfish bitch, and that was before the true plan was actually revealed.

Don't shoot th

Don't shoot the messager.
Brother 1 has a plan with his pal.
Brother 2 has only told sister what that plan is. He's only the messager

I know this is a bit of a controversial suggestion on Mumsnet but is it really worth terminating yours and your sisters relationship with your brothers. They've behaved badly. You and your sister have told them that they are out of order.
Would it be better to be pissed off with each other but not sever ties.
Your families have been though a lot with dealing with your Dad. That is a stressful and difficult thing for any family to deal with. Would it be better in the long run to maintain relationships. It doesn't mean you have to forget or forgive but you can put it to one side.
If you have SIL's and nephews and nieces might you still want to see them.

Your dad really had them sussed, didn't he?

Oh shut up. Brothers are toxic. It's just this sort of mamby pamby attitude that has people carry on being shitty

@weirdoboelady No let's not imagine that scenario. She doesn't want to sell. I dont get why people keep trying to suggest it. It's weird. They can't touch the fathers flat either anyway she and sis have LPA.

@Tellmeimcrazy

Oh shut up. Brothers are toxic. It's just this sort of mamby pamby attitude that has people carry on being shitty

Hmm apt user name I suppose! You can respond to posts you disagree with without being rude, it's not hard.

The OP has stood up for herself and as I said in my post she might still want to have a relationship of sorts with her brother and their families.