What's wrong with selling a house you don't live in?

[Kendodd]

On the back of the NI increase.
If an elderly person living alone moves into a care home, well, why wouldn't they sell their house anyway? They're not going to be going back to live there, the house would be sitting empty and we don't have enough houses for people to live in. The elderly person would then also have a huge amount of money to supplement their income in their last few years. As far as I can see the benefits for everyone far outweigh any reasons for keeping the house.

For what it's worth, I don't think there should have been an NI rise or people paying a fortune for their own care. I think inheritance tax should have been increased instead. I don't get the outrage about selling houses nobody lives in though.

I agree OP and I'm one who stands to inherit.

No earthly reason why my inheritance should be protected by increasing the burden on the working poor.

What I really dont get though is doing it through NI, so comfortably off pensioners and the wealthy with unearned income don't contribute at all.

This is why we do have to start taxing young people, because the current system isn't fair. It was reasonably fair until the housing market got so inflated.
Increasing inheritance tax too would make it seem fairer. So that people across all ages and incomes were asked to pay towards care in their old age.
Increasing the amount you could gift tax free by a small proportion might enable better planning for sharing wealth across generations without resentment and hiding assets.
My MIL has been in a care home for 2 years. She was a very high earner during her life and always worked full time. Her pension and careful financial planning has enabled her to cover the cost of her care. DH is currently buying a flat with her savings as a let to generate income as savings have such poor returns at the moment.
She's at one end of the spectrum in terms of wealth, but has planned for retirement. Anyone without her level of education and achievement would struggle to do the same.
My Mum also worked really hard during her life, got shafted by divorce and ended up being financially supported by me. Worked as hard as MIL but did not have the same opportunities.
Which is why we need to help pay for care for the elderly both through income taxation (which they both paid) and a reasonable tax on wealth.
I don't think we should penalise the wealthy (and we won't with a Tory Government) but a bit more from each would be good..

And this is why I hope I'm dead before I need to go into a care home. It fills me with utter dread to be " looked after" and live a pointless existence.

@AuntieMarys

And this is why I hope I'm dead before I need to go into a care home. It fills me with utter dread to be " looked after" and live a pointless existence.

That's really quite offensive. DH was "looked after" for the last year of his life, completely dependent on other for all his personal care but it was only the last few days that his life was "pointless". He was able to contribute tremendously to the lives of his friends and family, particularly his children despite being bedbound.

We’ve just moved into a rented property, owned by an elderly couple. One died and the other has advanced dementia and is in a care home. I’m not sure why they have rented out the house rather than selling as they are never going to live in it again. I suspect the children are hoping the house will increase in value even more (boom area within an hours train of London). They’re awful landlords who refuse to fix things in the house because it eats into their inheritance apparently

@Twilightstarbright

We’ve just moved into a rented property, owned by an elderly couple. One died and the other has advanced dementia and is in a care home. I’m not sure why they have rented out the house rather than selling as they are never going to live in it again. I suspect the children are hoping the house will increase in value even more (boom area within an hours train of London). They’re awful landlords who refuse to fix things in the house because it eats into their inheritance apparently

Probably to provide an income to cover the fees? And yes, to protect the inheritance.

It is not just about inheritance. It is about how people live, work, save, and provide for themselves and their families.

If working and saving and buying a house and maintaining the house only means that house is then sold to pay care home fees...why bother? Why not spend all your money or actually, why work so hard if it's going to be taken from you anyway.

People make choices based on what will benefit them. Everyone. Including the ones whining about boomers because they themselves want to buy a nice house now. Including the ones plotting to pass their assets on to their children. Including the ones who want the council to give them a bigger house because they have 4 children now and it's not their problem who pays for the house. Including the Tories, who want to get re-elected. Again.

I'm a labour voter and even I can see this one.

My FIL has just gone into a home. He is paying to maintain his home (Gardner, annual boiler check, heating on low in the winter to stop pipes bursting , etc) and then the house will be sold when he dies.
What a waste, sell it now and someone can live in it, and he won’t be spending money on a house he will never return to.

I completely agree.
My mums house is hers until she doesn’t need it and if she needs the money from it to fund her care then it should be sold.
I have no expectations of inheriting it, if I do it will be a bonus.

Both my mum and MIL are in care facilities and everything they had, savings and houses is gone.

I'd be fine with that if they'd simply been paying for their own care. But they haven't. They've been also paying to subsidise others in the same homes.
The care fees for self funders are sky high. But the fees charged to the council for the care of those peoole who have no savings or home to sell, is a fraction of that amount.

When my mum finally ran out of money and the council took over, I was appalled to find that they only paid the home less than two thirds of what my mum had paid per month.
Basically the cost to the care home of caring for someone at that place was less than she was paying, (say £1,000 for simplicity), but the council only paid £600 which meant self funders paid £1,400 in order to make up the difference.

This is normal, and it's keep very very quiet. It infuriates me and yet there is absolutely no publicity about it, nor is anyone fighting it.

@whatthejiggeries

I'm torn on this one. On the one hand I agree that if people have assets they should pay for care. On the other hand if people have worked hard all their lives for those assetts why should they have to pay for care when others do not? Why should everyone who gets inheritance have to pay regardless of whether or not they use it? I think everyone should be forced to have insurance for their own care which they pay starting from the day they turn 18. Out of all the options mentioned on here though I think NI is the fairest

Our home cost £8k to buy new in the 60s. We bought it for almost 100 times that. The huge rise in value wasn't the result of the owner's 'hard work' - just luck and an insane housing market.

It's a total myth that many people in this country with valuable properties have worked hard for what they have. Lots of them were just in the right place at the right time.

Why should I pay for their care so they can pass that inequality on? If you need care, and have the assets to pay for it, you should pay for it.

The profligate & irresponsible who ‘pissed their money up the wall’ would be rewarded. The thrifty & prudent who did the right thing would be punished. How is that fair?

So people who live in social housing are profligate and irresponsible. If that's your parents argument they sound like a right pair of twats.

Your lovely parents have had a lifetime of owning their own home with all the security that comes with that. They're incredibly privileged to have had jobs which have allowed them to do that. My grandparents lived in a council house their whole lives. You'd never have met two more hard working people but they didn't have the opportunity to gain a good education. Profligate and irresponsible. Sure.

Turns my stomach a bit when rich people are jealous of poor people.

I agree with you OP. I knew that if my father had needed long term care I would not inherit his house. My sister thought otherwise and actually wanted part of her share, his car that he could no longer drive, while he was still alive. When I helped him sell it so he could use the money himself she accused me of stealing it from her.

I agree with you! I think the level of retained wealth should be increased (currently (£23k) but why someone with a £1m house (or more) should get to keep their money is beyond me. Most housing equity is unearned, especially in the SE

If working and saving and buying a house and maintaining the house only means that house is then sold to pay care home fees...why bother? Why not spend all your money or actually, why work so hard if it's going to be taken from you anyway.

-Because you've had the benefit of all those things through your entire life.

-Because having assets and savings gives you choices and security that others don't have

-Because the cost of care is a cost of living like any other. That's like saying why work if it's going to be "taken" in rent and food.

-Because (and this is a big one) paying for your own care gives you choices about what that care looks like

My MIL is self funded. The home she is in now is nice, near us and I think the fees are reasonable. I don't think we pay more than others. However, we moved her from a much more expensive area where she was in respite and being charged £300 a week more than the Council funded places (and it was grim)
I can't see the point of leaving properties empty though. That's just a waste.

And those with severe need already get free care - nhs continuing care is not means tested. I applied and got it for a relative with dementia

The older generation have paid tax and NI in their working days - this funded the younger generations health care, education and social care, while I agree it was easier with no university fees (although less people went to university in the past) and easier to get on the housing ladder - it’s a circle, I wonder how many complaining now will change their minds when it’s their turn to need care. It’s not the rich who need this help they have inheritance planning so would never lose “everything”
it’s the middle income people who have saved and bought their own home - I don’t feel that it’s too much to ask - we pay a little extra now and we will benefit in the future.

@Puddstalk

The older generation have paid tax and NI in their working days - this funded the younger generations health care, education and social care, while I agree it was easier with no university fees (although less people went to university in the past) and easier to get on the housing ladder - it’s a circle, I wonder how many complaining now will change their minds when it’s their turn to need care. It’s not the rich who need this help they have inheritance planning so would never lose “everything” it’s the middle income people who have saved and bought their own home - I don’t feel that it’s too much to ask - we pay a little extra now and we will benefit in the future.

This argument is ridiculous though because in the vast majority of cases the asset people are really talking about is a house that has increased many times over in value and no tax at all has been paid on that gain.

@gogohm

And those with severe need already get free care - nhs continuing care is not means tested. I applied and got it for a relative with dementia

Continuing care is almost impossible to get. And unheard of for dementia. How on earth did you manage that?

My mum is entirely disabled by a stroke. She needs everything done for her. She only has the use of her right hand to feed herself with or drink from a sippy cup as use the tv remote. Every single other element of her day takes carers (usually two) to do it for her and involves hoists and a specialist bed and electric wheelchair.

She does not qualify for continuing care. We applied, we appealed, but no. And this is entirely usual. Unless someone needs hospital level medical care, they don't qualify.

Those with severe needs DO NOT get free care.

@thecognoscenti oooh dear that old chestnut. In the 60s the average salary was less than 900 quid a year. That house was ten times the average salary. The deposits were 40-50 percent. It was much easier than it is now to get a council property so to buy privately was a big effort. Credit wasn't so readily available - it was a struggle to buy furniture and interest rates were six percent.
The point is regardless of how much it's worth now those people made a choice to not take the easy route. Why should they be penalised

[quote whatthejiggeries]@thecognoscenti oooh dear that old chestnut. In the 60s the average salary was less than 900 quid a year. That house was ten times the average salary. The deposits were 40-50 percent. It was much easier than it is now to get a council property so to buy privately was a big effort. Credit wasn't so readily available - it was a struggle to buy furniture and interest rates were six percent.
The point is regardless of how much it's worth now those people made a choice to not take the easy route. Why should they be penalised [/quote]
Paying your own expenses isn't being penalised! Turn it around: why shouldn't the people who can afford it, pay for it, so there's proper funding available for the poorest?

I'm a social worker and the house conversation is my least favourite.

People will refuse the care the need to avoid having to sell the house and put themselves at risk.

However the system is far from fair. The amount of families I encounter whose house is now in the kids names - totally legal if done before they needed any care, or in trust etc. Plus all the people who sell up/ equity release and give the money to family or fritter it on holidays etc to avoid having to later pay for care. Again, totally legal if there were no care needs at the time. The LA would have to prove someone gave away assets or money with the intention of avoiding care fees which is impossible when it's done prior to needs presenting.

There are many people who will never own a home and always rent due to their financial situation but there's as many people who chose not to save or buy and 'fritter' their whole lives who then don't have to pay either.

What worries me is not my elder care but what if I had a stroke next week and needed social care - that would wave goodbye to the money I've saved for the kids for uni etc as it would be counted towards my care.

Social care is needed as a result of someone health deteriorating (old age included) or a disability- it's a lottery and to me it's unfair that it's something an individual has to pay for when it's just bad luck that they got a health condition when someone else never does and therefore keeps all their assets.

@gogohm

And those with severe need already get free care - nhs continuing care is not means tested. I applied and got it for a relative with dementia

That is very unusual because it is only for those that need a huge amount of medical care ie pretty much constant (my fil had end stage cirrhosis of the liver, too ill to be considered for a liver transplant and they said he probably wouldn't qualify for continuing care as once they stabilised him as much as possible he would be able to live elsewhere and just go in to be drained although he could suddenly get an infection and die at any point - he died shortly after). My uncle has a genetic disability that leaves him completely bedbound - also doesn't qualify. Dementia is normally only considered as requiring social care so not funded.

My mother had dementia and had to go into a care home. At first her needs were considered 'social' - keeping her clean (she didn't care about soiling herself wherever she was), encouraging her to eat etc., dealing with her violent moods. At that time my Dad had to contribute towards her care. When she deteriorated further her needs were considered 'medical' and were funded. I can't remember what the turning point was.