AIBU to wonder why a pensioner struggling financially would not use housing equity?

[Powerbungalow]

I'm not being unsympathetic

Theres a lady on the news at the moment, saying how times are tough and shes only cooking one meal a week - imagine she's eating cold food.

One thing that stood out though "I own my own house and it costs in maintenance" Depending on where she is, would you not get a life time mortgage or sell and rent? She has a big asset, why not use it to have a better life? I know I would.

She may be holding on to it for inheritance, but she didn't say - if so, then can her family help. It just seems totally crazy

That still doesn’t answer my question.

What is the difference between an 18 year old working 16 hours a week and a parent working 16 hours a week? Both are work. Both are liable for the same rate of NI and taxes. Both will pay in to the system at the same rate. So what’s the difference? Is one more valuable or important than the other? Because I can’t see it.

I havent really seen much talk of avacodos or who has it harder until the end here.

just a few people concerned about equity release as it used to have a bad reputation, people saying people leave it too late, people having memories, or people not convinced downsizing will actually release enough equity to make a financial difference. Its very predicated on having a big house to downsize from and the difference being at least more any service charge.

Im very glad my mum downsized, she's very concerned about her grandchildren place in the world. Im slightly baffled my parents in law wont, but they arent cold and hungry yet. I think it comes from a fear that once the asset is sold, its gone. They dont trust stocks, shares and savings. I dont think they feel owed a standard of living just they dont know how to release the equity and feel safe. It feels like a one shot thing and they want to leave it as late as possible. My pil lost a lot of pension in some crash.

And you’re wrong on your figures by the way, here you go from the DWP on the cohort born 1937-1946 and their working patterns (table 2a): https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/life-courses-and-pension-saving-patterns/life-courses-and-pension-saving-patterns?utm_source=chatgpt.com

So you are no / barely better off & may as well have stayed put!

I was 'working' at 12. It was a paper round. Had a Saturday job at 15 but didn't count that as work either.

No they weren't what?

You view having an extra £100k of ready cash plus an additional income of circa £3k/year as being barely better off? We see the world very differently.

So you wouldn’t count a parent who has a Saturday job as proper work? How many hours does a person need to work in a week for it to count as proper work in your view?

That makes no sense. Some people on means tested benefits own their homes. If you class the home they live in as an asset, the would have to sell their home and then rent and claim more UC.
You can't eat bricks.

No, they can sell and downsize/buy somewhere cheaper. Just like working people would have to if they were living beyond their means.

Why are you assuming they are rattling around in big houses?
The people I know on UC that own their homes are not under occupying.

Also, UC claimants who own homes are not costing the tax payer in terms of rent etc. It makes no sense to consider the home they live in as an asset and therefore park of their capital.

I’m not assuming anything. I’m stating facts.

In the same way that council tenants now have to pay for under occupancy then so can any pensioner who wants benefits beyond the basic state pension. So if the people you know are living in housing appropriate to their occupancy then they would be fine, wouldn’t they?

Whereas if a pensioned couple is living in a four bed and wants additional benefits, they won’t be entitled to them. They can downsize/move somewhere cheaper, use their equity to supplement their income and then when they are below the threshold they can apply for additional benefits. Why is that so controversial? It’s basically what happens to working people.

I do know someone (late 70s) who’s taken equity release, since her income is very small. But she has no children and owns two properties outright - one bought for relative peanuts in the late 60s, the other inherited from a parent.

I'm talking about a Saturday job for a teenager. I thought that was obvious but clearly not to you.

@StealMySunshining I am genuinely sorry that at some point in your life you clearly feel someone stole your sunshine.

May I please ask why yiu were so skint as a post grad? When DS did his PhD, he was fully funded and had 6hpw of VL work. He swiftly converted his PhD to a 4* monograph and got a job on the back of it prior to publication.

I am truly sorry that you are so unhappy. Bitterness never goes well in life.

You still haven’t answered my question: what is the threshold by which you class work as “proper” or “real”? Is it based on age? Number of hours? Type of job?

You said that you think homes should be classed as an asset for the purposes of means tested benefits... so it would not matter if someone on UC owns their grotty studio flat... if it is worth more than £16k, then they wont be able to claim a penny and therefore not be able to afford to live... so they would have to sell up and then claim UC in the form of rent.

DM lives alone in a 3 bed council house. She pays what a 3 bed costs... she is not paying extra on account of living there alone.

Oh look, the personal insults begin. I can almost set my watch by them. Nothing useful to say? Nothing constructive to add to the discussion to move it along?

Touche darling.

I’m not a liar, I know what life has been like for us, and many other older people. I’ve lived it. I’m only slightly younger than your grandparents. There was no child benefit/family allowance for first children when DH and I had our first child. It was phased in after 1975. I’m an only, born just after WWII, my parents didn’t get any for me either. We get no means tested benefits in retirement, and jointly we manage fine on what could be considered a low income. I even meet friends for coffee!

Not every baby boomer had the job for life, bought their council house through Right to Buy, or had a final salary gold plated pension. We both worked, bought a house, and moved a bit up the housing ladder. I worked full time for many years, but DHs ill health meant we had to sell up and move back down, but that’s life! We also both worked, part time, after retirement, DH finally stopping at 67. Glad to say our 50something DCs are way better off than we ever were. The DGC (who are all teens) are growing up in much more affluent circumstances and will get help to get on the property ladder. The older ones (at uni) already work part time, not because they need to, but because they have been taught that a work ethic is important.

One thing that seems to be forgotten, as our generation, a big cohort of home owners, dies off, there will be inheritances coming down the line to so many families.

Yes, I did indeed say they should be means tested. However, I did not say they should be means tested under the current system. There are thousands of ways of doing these things.

YABVU

After all the blood sweat and tears to have a beautiful and warm comfortable home, I would rather starve than be ripped off by an equity release company or sell up and pay ridiculous amounts in rent.

Do you actually know anyone that’s done it? Because I do, and it was definitely not a happy way out for them.

Nobody's ever answered your questions (demands) have they? How.many times.have you posted that? Guess what ? I'm not answering it either. If you can't grasp what I meant then that's your problem.

Because you do not have a viable response to a pretty simple question.

So what would be the cut off in terms of the value of someone's house before they could claim benefits?