Page 5 | Inheritance and care home fees

Hateam · 2024-08-17T10:59:30+00:00

Hello! My mother-in-law is in a care home. My wife, her daughter, is also in a care home for medical - non age related- issues. My council are paying for my wife's care as we have under £24500 in savings. When my MIL dies (she's 94) my wife will inherit about £180,000. We don't want this money going to Essex CC. Is there anything we can? Could my MIL's will be changed to remove my wife and replace her with me? She is still of sound mind. Could the money go into an account in my sole name? I am aware of the concept of deprivation of assets.

ThinWomansBrain · 17/08/2024 13:09

If your MiL lives in a care home, then the inheritance could end up being a lot less than you anticipate.
It's not 'giving' the money to the council, its paying for services that your wife needs - or you defrauding the council.
If you are so determined not to pay for the services, why not encourage MiL to change her will in favour of a charity - a local hospice maybe.

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:10

Hateam · 17/08/2024 12:27

Thank you for the replies.

I understand the tone of many of the replies.

However , if you were in my position I doubt many of you would be eager to give the council all of the money!

Your MiL will be a self funder, so if she lives long enough there will be no inheritance. All she will be left with is the lower threshold of £14,500 in assets. The law on deprivation of assets is clear. If you have reasonable expectation of needing full time care at the time you give away your assets, the LA will assess you as still having them and will refuse to fund care.

Being of sound mind is irrelevant - if MiL willed assets to yourself or your wife now, the LA would still regard it as deprivation of assets because she had a reasonable expectation of needing care at the time she made the will - she was already in care. So she would be treated as still having those assets and the LA wouldn’t fund care. The only way around this is to plan in advance with trust funds etc, and it’s too late for that now. The only other circumstance which would apply is if MiL owned a property in which an immediate relative who was either over age 60 or disabled was resident. The LA wouldn’t be able to count the property towards the care fees while that person was still resident in it. Since that doesn’t apply, there’s no alternative but to do what the rest of us mere mortals do - suck it up.

Iwasafool · 17/08/2024 13:10

BIossomtoes · 17/08/2024 13:06

I’m pretty much reconciled to paying for my care as my parents did before me. I think you’re grasping and greedy. Why should taxpayers pay when the person needing care can afford to pay for it?

Show quote history

She can only pay for it in a theoretical way as she hasn't inherited anything and might not.

Owl55 · 17/08/2024 13:10

As you will have to go to probate with that amount of inheritance the council will have access to the content of the will and could charge you with fraud if your are depriving council of care home fees when you have the money to pay them . Now everything is computerized it’s impossible to hide as all government departments pensions /benefits/poll tax, probate are all linked .

2Old2Tango · 17/08/2024 13:11

How come MIL's money isn't earmarked to pay for her own care?

Wheresthebeach · 17/08/2024 13:11

If the inheritance is all in the OP's name then he can do what he wants with it. There is no guarantee that he'll use it for his wife's benefit over time. What if he choses to divorce? You don't need 180k for days out.

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:11

ThinWomansBrain · 17/08/2024 13:09

If your MiL lives in a care home, then the inheritance could end up being a lot less than you anticipate.
It's not 'giving' the money to the council, its paying for services that your wife needs - or you defrauding the council.
If you are so determined not to pay for the services, why not encourage MiL to change her will in favour of a charity - a local hospice maybe.

It would still be deprivation of assets and the LA wouldn’t fund care. MiL is already in a care home as a self funder so the ‘expectation of care at the time you give away your assets’ is clear.

Erdinger · 17/08/2024 13:12

Hateam · 17/08/2024 12:27

Thank you for the replies.

I understand the tone of many of the replies.

However , if you were in my position I doubt many of you would be eager to give the council all of the money!

I think most of us aren’t happy that you are trying to get the taxpayer to fund your wife’s care in the event that she inherits from her mother . Let’s just emphasise it’s her mother therefore her inheritance

I8toys · 17/08/2024 13:13

I understand I really do. MIL is in a dementia home and receiving excellent care at the princely sum of £2,000 a week.

Its hard to see their carefully saved money being used for this when those without funds get it paid for free in the same home. Of course everyone should get care but those paying are funding those who aren't. Quality of care should be equal.

Its pointless saving anything. Its an absolutely rubbish system, a contribution yes of course but not everything they own and have saved for their entire life.

user98265567843 · 17/08/2024 13:13

Tax planning is what anyone with any assets should be doing, unless they actively want the government of the time to take more than necessary from their heirs.
In this situation, if I was the MIL I’d be leaving everything to any grandchildren. I’m not sure how it’d work leaving to her SIL, ask a solicitor is your best bet.

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:13

2Old2Tango · 17/08/2024 13:11

How come MIL's money isn't earmarked to pay for her own care?

If she’s a self funder it will be. Unless they’ve lied to the LA about assets/funds they have. Which is pretty unlikely as the LA is very thorough. I think the problem here is that OP is watching those funds deplete and sees it as a waste of money when in actual fact it’s paying for MiL’s care. He seems to think it’s fine to trouser the money and leave the tax payer to fund her.

Iwasafool · 17/08/2024 13:13

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:10

Your MiL will be a self funder, so if she lives long enough there will be no inheritance. All she will be left with is the lower threshold of £14,500 in assets. The law on deprivation of assets is clear. If you have reasonable expectation of needing full time care at the time you give away your assets, the LA will assess you as still having them and will refuse to fund care.

Being of sound mind is irrelevant - if MiL willed assets to yourself or your wife now, the LA would still regard it as deprivation of assets because she had a reasonable expectation of needing care at the time she made the will - she was already in care. So she would be treated as still having those assets and the LA wouldn’t fund care. The only way around this is to plan in advance with trust funds etc, and it’s too late for that now. The only other circumstance which would apply is if MiL owned a property in which an immediate relative who was either over age 60 or disabled was resident. The LA wouldn’t be able to count the property towards the care fees while that person was still resident in it. Since that doesn’t apply, there’s no alternative but to do what the rest of us mere mortals do - suck it up.

Show quote history

The MIL can leave the money to anyone she likes, she can change her will every week if she wants. Essex CC might not like it but they can't say that MIL has to leave the money to her daughter. Once the daughter has inherited the money it is different and the daughter can't just give it away. MIL is still alive so perfectly possible for her make decisions about her own will.

Workhardcryharder · 17/08/2024 13:13

These comments are incredibly narrow minded.

If I was trying to live on a single income with no chance of that doubling any time soon, and you have the chance to get a bit of money to assist bringing up the children, why wouldn’t I try and safeguard it? This could be the difference between being stable and being homeless.

Think maybe some need to step down from their very high horses

jellycatandkittens · 17/08/2024 13:15

CoffeeCakeAndALattePlease · 17/08/2024 13:08

None of us know the OPs individual circumstances so I don’t think it’s fair to judge him for asking a question.

For all we know, he’s gone from a 2 income household to a 1 income household after his wife fell ill and now he’s got a massive mortgage to cover on a reduced income. Or maybe they have kids or adult children he needs to support.

I mean, maybe he just doesn’t want to pay, but I don’t think it should be assumed. Many people have nuanced and complex financial issues.

Social services take household expenses into account when they do their financial assessment. They won't leave the OP without ebough money to fund his mortgage.

HooverTheRoof · 17/08/2024 13:15

viques · 17/08/2024 13:01

Because the welfare state was never funded to do this. Like state pensions it was funded on the premise that most people would die long before they needed social care. I believe the age for working men was averaged out at 60. Clearly people are living longer, and are therefore more prey to the illnesses of old age like cancer , osteoporosis, heart disease, strokes, various dementias. We can just about cope with funding these medical needs, but social care needs for an increasingly elderly population is outside the scope of the current system unless the way it is paid for is re organised. I believe in some countries an extra layer of income tax is both levied and ringfenced to cover social care needs.

Until then people with funds available will be expected to pay for their social care.

Show quote history

That does make sense, I'm just surprised at the amount of anger here. I live in Essex and am more than happy for my taxes to pay for her care. She's obviously gone into a home very young and I feel for her. The suggestion from a pp that it should go into an account for her and she should receive a monthly payment from it is a good one. It definitely shouldn't be going to op.

Iwasafool · 17/08/2024 13:15

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:13

If she’s a self funder it will be. Unless they’ve lied to the LA about assets/funds they have. Which is pretty unlikely as the LA is very thorough. I think the problem here is that OP is watching those funds deplete and sees it as a waste of money when in actual fact it’s paying for MiL’s care. He seems to think it’s fine to trouser the money and leave the tax payer to fund her.

Edited

Show quote history

No he's talking about the money the MIL will leave as an inheritance. The OP hasn't said anything about MIL paying her own fees is a waste.

punnedout · 17/08/2024 13:15

HooverTheRoof · 17/08/2024 12:51

But we let rich people use the NHS for free? Why is the care ops wife needs different?

‘Rich people’ fund the majority of the NHS, FFS. Why shouldn’t they use it???

Oldermum84 · 17/08/2024 13:16

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:10

Your MiL will be a self funder, so if she lives long enough there will be no inheritance. All she will be left with is the lower threshold of £14,500 in assets. The law on deprivation of assets is clear. If you have reasonable expectation of needing full time care at the time you give away your assets, the LA will assess you as still having them and will refuse to fund care.

Being of sound mind is irrelevant - if MiL willed assets to yourself or your wife now, the LA would still regard it as deprivation of assets because she had a reasonable expectation of needing care at the time she made the will - she was already in care. So she would be treated as still having those assets and the LA wouldn’t fund care. The only way around this is to plan in advance with trust funds etc, and it’s too late for that now. The only other circumstance which would apply is if MiL owned a property in which an immediate relative who was either over age 60 or disabled was resident. The LA wouldn’t be able to count the property towards the care fees while that person was still resident in it. Since that doesn’t apply, there’s no alternative but to do what the rest of us mere mortals do - suck it up.

Show quote history

He means for his MIL to pass the inheritance to him, rather than his wife, when MIL dies. Therefore there is no deprivation of assets. Being of sound mind is relevant as is necessary for her being able to change her will

BIossomtoes · 17/08/2024 13:16

Iwasafool · 17/08/2024 13:10

She can only pay for it in a theoretical way as she hasn't inherited anything and might not.

Show quote history

I was talking generally hence “the person needing care”.

ThisFunHedgehog · 17/08/2024 13:17

YABU.But I do sympathise with you.

Do you have any DC? Could your MIL change her will so that the grandchildren can inherit some money ? Could she transfer money to grandchildren now ?

Iwasafool · 17/08/2024 13:20

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:11

It would still be deprivation of assets and the LA wouldn’t fund care. MiL is already in a care home as a self funder so the ‘expectation of care at the time you give away your assets’ is clear.

Show quote history

This isn't about her giving the money away while she is receiving care, it is about changing her will so she can decide who her money will go to when she is dead. She can leave it to her DD and be happy it will pay for her care for a few years, she can leave it to her SIL, her GC or the RSPCA. Nothing to do with deprivation of assets as she will be dead.

ChickenTikkaKebabs · 17/08/2024 13:20

Ginmonkeyagain · 17/08/2024 13:08

The OP would have got more sympathetic responses if they had posted "my wife is in a care home due to a degenerative illness that affects her abilty to care for herself. She may be due a large inheritance from her mother, given my wife may lack capacity in the future how can we best arrange things to ensure this gives her an income to meet her needs in the future."

But instead they posted bullshit about not wanting the council to get their hands on it. Which got people's backs up as the money councils have is money from all of us.

Unless people have experienced care homes and funding, they are unaware of the circumstances.

The real issue here is that there is no joined-up care policy between the NHS and Social Services.

It's an issue that all governments have failed to sort out.

There is a divide between needing care due to frailty and ageing, and needing to be in hospital for medical reasons.

Some people have their care and nursing funded by the state, others don't and it's not always clear where the difference lies.

Where someone is in a care home due to old age, they self fund.

But other people who have severe and long term medical conditions (not related to age) can get their care paid for.

The last government was going to rule (October 25) that there was an £86K limit on care home contributions. Whether this will be honoured now is unclear.

@Hateam I hope you have had proper legal advice to make sure that your wife doesn't qualify at all for free/ subsidised care regardless of your savings.

Wheresthebeach · 17/08/2024 13:20

My fathers money went on his care, so will my MIL's. Do I wish that I'd inherited it? Do I wish DH could inherit? Yep...absolutely. But it's there money and it needs to go on their care.

HooverTheRoof · 17/08/2024 13:20

punnedout · 17/08/2024 13:15

‘Rich people’ fund the majority of the NHS, FFS. Why shouldn’t they use it???

Show quote history

I think you missed my point....I'm not saying they shouldn't, I'm just trying to understand why people see care homes as vastly different to nhs care. There's obviously a sense that we should pay for one out of our own pocket but not the other.

Rosscameasdoody · 17/08/2024 13:21

Iwasafool · 17/08/2024 13:13

The MIL can leave the money to anyone she likes, she can change her will every week if she wants. Essex CC might not like it but they can't say that MIL has to leave the money to her daughter. Once the daughter has inherited the money it is different and the daughter can't just give it away. MIL is still alive so perfectly possible for her make decisions about her own will.

Show quote history

I’m not saying it’s not possible for MiL to make decisions about who she wills the money to. I’m saying that the LA will treat it as deprivation of assets. If MiL makes her will now and leaves everything to her daughter, once she runs out of money the LA will refuse to fund her care because as far as they are concerned she had a reasonable expectation of needing care when she made the will. She can’t escape that because she’s already in care !!