It's an inheritence one...

[InheritenceArguments]

I'm one of three siblings, the oldest if that makes any difference. My parents sold the family house last year and moved close to me and DH, renting for the moment. Neither of them are in great health, and over the last year or so I've been helping them with various different things and have been to plenty of hospital appointments with both of them.

Me and DH need to move away from where we live at the moment, we can't afford a big enough place here and we want to move further out. My parents want to stay close to us, for the help and also to spend time with our kids.

I said I could only really carry on giving them the level of support I am at the moment if they were really close by - otherwise it's just going to be a nightmare. Someone (I can't honestly remember if it was me, DH or them) suggested me and DH buy a house with an annexe for them to live in.

We have discussed this at length and all set out boundaries etc. We are now weeks away from exchanging on a move to a new house with an annexe. We've put in approx 65% of the cost (mortgage) and my parents are gifting us the rest of the money on the understanding they will have an (unofficial) lifetime interest in the annexe and it's entirely theirs do with as they want. Also, if they need a live-in carer at any point they can have a bedroom in the main house, as the annexe is a one-bed.

My sister and brother both live abroad. Neither of them would want our parents to move in with them in this sort of arrangement. Neither of them currently own a house. One of them doesn't seem bothered about it all, and one of them is furious. Thinks it's entirely unreasonable that my parents aren't gifting them the same sum and they're furious.

My parents have suggested that they give each sibling a sum that represents about 35% of the amount they're giving me, when they buy a house. The angry sibling is somewhat placated, but still angry and thinks they should get exactly the same amount as I'm getting, regardless. They have suggested that when my parents die, they and my other sibling should get any money that hasn't been spent on care fees whereas I think it should be split equally.

Ultimately it doesn't matter what I think because it's my parent's decision - but AIBU? I'm taking on a huge responsibility. We also had to buy a house with an annexe that suited my parents - it isn't the house or the location me and DH would have liked, in an ideal world.

I agree there are a lot of pitfalls with this plan, and it is not something I would do, having been through the ‘mother needing care’ scenario. She has dementia, she had at-home care to begin with, and has now been in a care home for 7 years. I considered a live-in carer but it would have ripped through her money a lot quicker than the care home fees did. With at home care you have to consider not just the cost of the carer, but council tax, heating, food (and in my mother’s case, rent). Her care home room costs £1100 p.w.

The problem is that what happens next with elderly parents is completely unpredictable. They could die within a year or they could live for 10+ years and need years of expensive professional care.

You aren’t doing any actual ‘care’ for them so you don’t need to be on site. Personally I would be looking at them having their own small property nearby (doesn’t have to be a bungalow, could be a flat) with bought-in care as needed whether at-home or care home. Then they get the care they need and everything is transparent.

There is no guarantee that they won't need care. None of us like to think of our parents becoming frail and incapacitated. Just because OP lives there it doesn't mean they won't ever need specialist care such as a hoist to get them out of bed or be able to get them off the floor if they've had a fall or help them walk if they need support.

I definitely can empathise with feeling like you’ve turned into the parent! Living through that exact same thing myself 🤦‍♀️
it’s like having a very big stubborn toddler who wants you to do things their way sometimes!!

It’s likely not going to be simply running errands, though.
People go into care when they become victims of dementia - and pee and poo is not done in lavatories.

Would you be wanting to clean up poo and change pads and wash messy bedding?

It’s far from easy.

Dementia and becoming bed bound is the worst case scenario here.
I witnessed an elderly neighbour have raving dementia- it was very distressing for her, she was hallucinating and screaming-

Poor woman had to go into
care, and her home was indeed sold.

They're gifting me approx 20% of their total estate value, so it's a lot of money, but it's not swallowing the whole estate or anything.

I won't do any personal care for them except in an emergency. I don't want to, they don't want me to. I've always been very upfront about this, and so have they. I'm here to do things like help them with technology things they don't understand or can't do/drive them to appointments and attend with them if they need/want me to/put heavy things away or move them/do some batch cooking.

Based on the care you’ve outlined, there’s no need for them to actually live with you. Everything you listed can be accomplished with them buying their own property (which they can obviously afford) down the street / around the corner from you.

My goodness
Op is getting a crazily good deal here-
NO PERSONAL CARE?😂😂😂
I hope the local authority do come after the DOA as op wants the money with no actual CARE.

I witnessed an elderly neighbour have raving dementia- it was very distressing for her, she was hallucinating and screaming-

Poor woman had to go into
care, and her home was indeed sold.

Thats what happened to my parent, I did 4 years of care but couldn’t keep her safe. The hardest years of my life, they needed to go into a home a lot earlier but my sibling didn’t want that.

The home costs £1650 per week plus they needs one to one care at night which is extra.

I would just say to your siblings that at this point what your parents finally decide to do with any inheritance is not your business.

Whether they increase or decrease any potential money you will get as a result of this is irrelevant as it's their choice and hopefully not one that is impacting the decision you are making to move in together. They may have plans on spending any other money themselves at this point if they haven't said anything it is not your / siblings to argue over. Would you still be happy with the moving arrangement if would reduce your future inheritance?

However your siblings may have a genuine concern regarding your parents finances in the near future as if all of their money is tied up in a house you own on paper then they are not in a very secure position. Siblings living abroad will not stop them having concerns for their parents - it doesn't sound like you will be the carer as you mention a possible live in carer and in this situation you are able to live in a house in an area you can otherwise not afford, and eventually you will end up with the house so possibly your siblings are more concerned that this move is more in your benefit than your parents?

This is fairly shocking! I am sure most people would be happy for their sibling to take a far larger financial share (if not all) in exchange for knowing their parents are well looked after later in life.

OP we did this with my mum and it makes perfect sense to me. She spent her money on building an extension to our house so she has a whole little section of her own, and it suits everyone well, but we still share a kitchen.

I don't care for her or look after her.... but I do all admin and household repairs etc. multiple times a day I fetch things, check an email she doesn't recognise, explain why her iPhone isn't working, answer the phone because she can't hear it, carry her shopping, drive her to appointments, deal with her pension queries, help with her banking and on and on and on. I couldn't do this if she lived miles away.

Sibling is abroad and is delighted that he doesn't have to worry about her. Not at all fussed that she has invested money into our house because he knows we are looking after her in so many ways that he can't.

My only concern is, what happens if I die, but we have worked out that my sibling could take care of her abroad or basically buy her a little flat. Other than that it's really straightforward.

Given that your parents are only giving you 20% of their estate value I would be amazed if DOA is ever an issue as I'm sure their bills will be lower in the annexe so their total spending will go down. It's only 20%.

It's not always easy but it's great having them close by so you can help them instantly if needed.

Really kindly I think you are in cloud cuckoo land. So your mum becomes incontinent, you will let her sit in her own shit, the smell pervading the house until the carer comes for the next visit which could be in three hours?

Tell your (ridiculous) angry sibling to move back to the country and look after your parents if they're not happy. Alternatively, tell them to find carers/an assistant living facility that your parents can afford and likely spend all the angry sibling's expected inheritance on.

I imagine that will shut them up.

In the meantime, draw up a contract/paperwork making it clear that the monies they are contributing is in exchange for the practical support you and your DH are providing to your parents going forward. You are entitled to be compensated for that without having to account for it out of any potential future inheritance.

you are on the "care lite" end of care here. Are you ready to cope if it gets worse? I am not clear what you mean by DOA not being a problem. Are you saying that you think if they need care, they will die before they get to the level of need and funding where SS funding will be an issue?
To be clear....I have seen this work and work well. I have seen it work anywhere from less well to way less well. I have also seen it end up as a train wreck. All I am saying is that anybody who considers it goes in with their eyes open which the OP may not have done as well as she believes she has.

This. If one of my kids pitches in with help as I age and the others don't bother, then I will be making sure the kid doing the work gets amply rewarded. Anything else is deeply unfair.

Honestly this is definitely deprivation of assets and social services around here would definitely pursue this money. They have teams of people who do just this. You already know that your DPS need low level care and you are (in the view of the council) making a load of their assets unavailable for future care. I am concerned you have been given bad legal advice here. We pursue people who have given away a few thousand over the wedding gift limit or bought a load of jewellery let alone given 100,000s to an offspring.

@InheritenceArguments
Read the above very carefully.
You think it won't happen but we had to have a family meeting a couple of years ago as DM's partner was struggling to care for her..,,,,this had been going on for some time but he'd kept it quite.
None of the siblings could care her due to work or distance , or both.
Very quickly things had got very bad (incontinent , house stunk , kitchen / bathroom filthy)
Dm totally in denial.
It was a horrible time for everyone.
But if you're not prepare to pick up the slack you may find the financial implications high.

Have you ever had to care for someone else other than your own children OP? You are putting yourself in the position where you will become the solution to every problem. With elderly parents it can take over your whole life to the point you will disappear. Have a read of the elderly parents Mumsnet board to see the kind of things that people have to deal with. I get on fine with my mum but after caring for her at a distance for several years there is no way on gods green earth that I would move her into my house. It really is like looking after an adult sized and strength toddler, who is losing skills and cognitive powers, not gaining them. Some cultures/families manage it, but imho you world need a household of several adults all pulling in the same direction to make it work. It’s not compatible with modern UK family life where the adults are working full time, usually outside the home. There are very very few circumstances in which I’d say it was the right thing to do.

This. It’s not that easy to avoid care costs.

This. Everyone I know that's gone down this road has ended up on antidepressants.
Your parents are really going to do this to you?! In the prime of your lives?

"TisButThyName · Yesterday 22:17

Because if her parents required a care home then the council would put a charge on the house to pay for it then on the death of her parents would expect the house to be sold to pay back the money.

If her parents die within 7 years of gifting this money and run up big care bills then there could also still be a risk of deprivation of assets and money owed."

This is a mixup of two things. the 7 year limit is about Inheritance tax. If you are given a gift, the giver has to stay alive for 7 years for the receiver to avoid inheritance tax. The amount of tax that is required reduces every year that the person stays alive until it gets to zero at 7 years.

The deliberate deprivation thing has NO LIMIT on how far a council can go back. Seriously NO LIMIT. Obvs the longer ago the money was spent, the less likely they are to decide that it was deliberate deprivation but seriously I say again there is NO LIMIT to how far back they can go.

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs40_deprivation_of_assets_in_social_care_fcs.pdf

this can be helpful too. https://www.independentliving.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Deprivation-of-capital.pdf

While I absolutely agree the parents money is theirs to spend as they like - I disagree that discussing what happens once people die is grim. It is entirely sensible.

the three children would normally expect to inherit in equal measure. The parents in this scenario need to be clear that they have entered this arrangement to suit their own needs and they are receiving benefit by being close to OP. They also need to clarify that the other two children should not expect to inherit a share of OP’s home.

OP’s angry sibling is being entirely unreasonable. His or her parents need to tell them that.

I think twenty percent is actually quite reasonable . If they have alot left then it doesn’t sound so worrying. I would try to stay on good terms with siblings though ,living abroad doesn’t mean you aren’t involved or don’t care, they can still come back regularly to give you support /respite if needed and help with things that can be done from a distance.

20% now and then 1/3 of the remainder is about 47%, leaving the other two around 26.5% each.
Added to that the Op has said she won't be doing care, so there is a not unreasonable chance that the remainder will be eaten into leaving the others with nothing/little and the Op with a bigger house, which may have increased in value further.

But also I note:
either a carer will have a bedroom in our house or they'll have to build an extension with an extra bedroom for a carer. It depends on how long we think a live-in carer will be required.
So her house has a spare bedroom in case a carer needs it, but if the carer is going to be long term, they're going to get the parents to extend their house further with their money, depleting anything left further and increasing her share.

As someone who has seen the effort going into caring, it does look like the Op is getting an awful lot of advantages and minimising the disadvantages to herself. I would be concerned as a sibling that the parents are going to find themselves doing more and more for "their" (read "her") house, not because I would see it as inheritance going, but more that the further they get into it the easier it is for the Op to "need this otherwise we can't...."

The amount of care you're prepared to give does not necessitate them living with you. Yes it makes it easier for you but they don't need to live with you.
I think this will be classed as deprivation of assets too