Putting house into trust to avoid care home fees

[Winterday1991]

A friend mentioned that her parents had put their property into trust to avoid potential care home fees liability. Is this as simple as she suggests? Would this not be classed as deprivation of assets by the council?

The real reason we were advised to do it was in the event of divorce or death my/DH half is guaranteed to go to our son, not to a future spouse or SC

You can arrange that in other ways via Wills - we have one to ensure Mr Monkey's share of our flat goes to his son but equally so I am not made homeless in the event of his death.

It may be easier for us to do that though as we are not married.

We did what we were advised as the best option in a planning for retirement seminar I did through my NHS job. It's very common and perfectly legal.

I am not a solicitor - this is important to know - but I do think there is a difference between putting assets in a will in trust ( so DP's would no longer be there ) to putting a house they are still living in in trust . I may have made a mistake here but I think the 2nd would very much be more liable to scrutiny for deprivation of assets. They are still benefitting from the asset.

If I were your friend @OP I would want to read the small print and also some of the posts others have made about this not being necessarily a good idea but perhaps more of a financial product / Service which is being pushed without explaining all the ways in which it might go wrong

So bitter

@TaraRhu
£2000 childcare is temporary and a choice, as is living in London, a joint income of £130k is high and if your in debt then maybe you should rethink how you live, crying poverty on that income is beyond distasteful.

This! The absolute height of selfishness.

And all Attendance Allowance. I used to do financial assessments for care homes, I know what I'm talking about

My father is in a care home having sold his flat. If he had put his home in a trust he would be in a local authority funded place in a home and the quality would be substantially less - £500 a week less in fees. I used to run care homes and I know what a big difference that would be in quality. I wouldn't wish that on someone dear to me. It will be his last home on this earth. Oh of course we, as his family could top up the fees (which we would find hard to afford), but that would make a nonsense of trying to protect the value of our inheritance.

Seems like a really dumb gamble, crossing fingers and hoping they don't end up needing to be in a care home or needing to pay for care at home. 16 percent of older people end up in a care home (60 percent of them with dementia) but 1 in 3 need care at home. Why deprive yourself of money to pay for it?

So they’re paying possibly 10% of the person in the next room

I’m genuinely confused as to which group you’re referring too here.

Because my parents worked bloody hard to afford a house and paid tax and national insurance I to the system. Whereas those who haven’t worked a day in their puff will get it free of charge and not need to sell the one thing they grafted fot for several years. That seems fair!

Very unlikely as the LA don't put people in the really expensive places. Which are not always all that, incidentally. There's a top price place near here which I wouldn't put my dog in, money obsessed and constant Safeguarding issues because they can't actually care for anyone with any but the lightest care needs

Do you vote labour? Because if you do you need a lesson in socialism. You don't get to take out what you pay in (very few pay in the amount they need to take out anyway).

Let's be honest. You don't care about what's right for your parents you just don't like the idea of your inheritance disappearing. It's your parents money to spend as they need. If they need care they pay for care.

https://ukcareguide.co.uk/care-home-costs/

And AGAIN

THERE IS NO SUCH ANIMAL AS FREE RESIDENTIAL CARE.

I wish people would stop trotting out this ignorant trope.

Do people really believe that people get the same in care in care homes, whether they are paying or LA pay? It’s not easily seen but the differences are there. If you are paying you will get more incontinence pads a day (through the NHS you only get 4 and you have to pay for any more), get more choice on what time you get up, what you eat for meals, what time you go to bed. The management is going to want to keep the people paying more fees happy, so you get more choice.
You also get the choice to leave if standards drop, you won’t get that through LA care unless there is a safeguarding concern.

The other side of this, is people keeping very unwell elderly parents with advanced dementia in their own homes, lady local to me is regularly returned home by neighbours from her wanders, she has 2 carers per day for 30mins, daughter stays 20miles away and visits at weekend, house is worth about £300k. Poor woman is going to end up found dead in the woods one day.

Only about half a million people are resident in care homes currently in the UK - and the majority (about 70%) of those have dementia or similar.
Most residents in care homes are there on average for 2 years.

The likelihood is that many of the older generation will not need to go into a care home and can manage with help at home.

It seems an over-reaction (regardless of the ethical aspect of trying to avoid care fees) - to go to the convoluted step of moving assets into a trust
Just IMO of course.

@BashfulClam as I and other posters have said, lots of people work hard and pay taxes, but can never afford to buy a house.

DH and I were able to buy a house 25 years ago, we've almost paid off the mortgage. With interest, we've paid about £300k in total. Our house is now worth over £800k, we've made an (on paper) profit of £500k. Why shouldn't that untaxed profit go towards paying care home fees if it needs to?

👏 @EmmaGrundyForPM

It boils down to people stop seeing their loved ones as human beings and instead see them as a monetary asset. People are disgusting.

I can totally understand why people would want to do this but my understanding is that the fees paid will be capped at £85k. In most circumstances this will still leave a reasonable amount from the sale of a house. I think there is also still a chance that it can be considered avoidance of paying the fees even if a reasonable amount of time in advance.

We have seen the care home situation from both sides, my grandma never worked a day in her life, had a lovely 3 bed council house that she lived in long after her kids had left home (probably 45ish years) so got her care paid for. MIL also got dementia (20 years younger than my nan) sold her house worth £130k to pay for the fees, plus they took her full very good workplace pension. The £85k cap is only for people going into care after the date it's brought in so she is now left with £14k. I totally understand that it has to be paid for somehow, I actually have worked in that finance dept at my local authority but it just feels so wrong. I feel like a % cap would be fairer overall. I don't really know the answer.

MILs care home was around £1k a week, in all honesty it was pretty grim and is supposed to be one of the nicer ones, they left her to deteriorate without getting health intervention and her/her room was extremely unhygienic as they weren't providing personal care due to her dementia getting worse. She has just moved to council funding and we are fully expecting her to be moved when the care home don't want to look after her on reduced fees. They have already lied about situations which is awful given how vulnerable the person is and not everyone has families who can cope/manage with sorting these things out.

Personally rather have a wander and risk death in the woods than a care home. - after 25 years in elder care demented or not- 99% of elderly just want to go home. Don't lose your mental capacity whatever you do or you will not have any say in where you are put. Look after your parents folks.

Sheltered Housing is not a care home. The staff are very limited in what they can do, and, generally, only do 9-5 weekdays.

Many homes won't take council funded residents. The others take them, but charge more to self funded, to cover the flat rate they get for council funded residents.