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.

Why people keep focusing on pensioners. This tax is for people who need care from a young age.

Not all pensioners need to move from their houses and most prefer to die in their properties. Care homes are horror stories I know I would rather kill myself than to go to one.

Why people feels so entitled to other people things in this country? It really says something about the culture of envy and resentment. Taxes are shit but why do not we focus on pressuring for higher wages so that people do not struggle.

@Islamorada so if a person becomes made redundant through no fault of their own, they shouldn’t have to sell their house and relocate their kids to cover the costs? The public should?

I'd rather this kind of thing was stamped out!!

The heirs of the late sixth Duke of Westminster paid no inheritance tax on the bulk of his £8.3bn family fortune following his death in 2016. Probate records show that Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor, who died aged 64 in August 2016, left a personal estate of £616,418,184 after payment of debts and liabilities.

£8 point fucking 3 billion family fortune
£8,300,000,000!!!

In official UK statistics the term is now used to denote 1 thousand million – 1,000,000,000.

Historically, however, in the UK the term billion meant 1 million million – 1,000,000,000,000 -

@CaptainMarvelous

I work in Adult Safeguarding. At least once a month we get a referral where an elderly person is not receiving adequate care at home and it becomes clear that the family are trying to save as much money as possible in order to protect inheritance.

I think we need a culture shift, with people accepting that they need to be prepared to pay for social care when it's required. It should become part of our retirement planning.

However that's a long term thing and it's clear something needs to be done in the short and medium term. But increasing taxes for the poorest in society is not it.

@CaptainMarvelous I work with elderly people in the community and I completely agree. It's amazing how many people can't cope and need help etc but when they are told there is a financial assessment they don't want it or need it! It's not always from the relative though from my experience. I've known a lot of older people actively struggle to avoid paying for any home care so they can leave as much inheritance as possible. The families don't always appreciate it either as it's actually a huge responsibility and burden to them to pick up the flack that would be done by home care. It's although wrong, that we now believe we have to leave something, and the idea that we are entitled/expectation we are receiving something 🤷🏼‍♀️

@Dinkydonk55

I work in this field and just today had a family member quite aggressive saying why should my father have to sell his home, so he shouldn’t have worked all his life then and saved should he, he should’ve been a council tenant and then you’d pay. Or something along those lines. I think people can see their inheritance slip away. And sadly with the cost of care homes being what it is, for many people all the money is used up.

I can see both sides. It does seem massively unfair that for example because my grandparents were all lucky enough not to get dementia and didn’t require years of care, there is a lot more ‘family money’.

I think this is mine, and many peoples issue. That some people are “lucky” to live healthy old age and then die relatively suddenly, whilst others can develop diseases that mean they can need care for years. Whilst we know some of the factors influencing dementia there isn’t a lot you can do to minimise your risk for instance. Right now it is little better than luck of the draw. IMHO, the best way is to get everyone to pay based on an “insurance” type scheme. Everyone spreads the risk and we all pay less than if the burden fell onto us alone. That is same principle as all NHS, Social security etc and what NI was originally set up for. However, costs have spiralled as we live longer. After the report, the government wanted to do this risk spread and get private insurers to set schemes up- they wouldn’t touch it as they felt no one would take it up if voluntary. Hence the delays and deadlock on how to resolve the issue. I quite frankly don’t understand why they didn’t just raise income tax so we all shared the load whether working or retired. However, there were other ways that could have been looked at and they just don’t seem to have really thought outside the box. One scheme touted but not pursued was to get all retirees to pay into a government backed insurance scheme based on value of property, that when sold after death would be due ( sort of like a death tax which is what the issue was). Everyone would pay who had property or assets over a certain amount irrespective of whether they needed care- and therefore overall bill would be lower than current if you needed that care. I actually do think that was a good idea.

@Unfashionable

I work in this field and just today had a family member quite aggressive saying why should my father have to sell his home, so he shouldn’t have worked all his life then and saved should he, he should’ve been a council tenant and then you’d pay.

My parents make the same argument. They stared with nothing, worked very hard, scrimped, saved & went without to buy their own home, paid off their mortgage and now own it outright. They know plenty of people who lived in council houses but drove better cars & had better holidays than they did. If those people needed care, the state would pay. If my parents needed it, they would have to pay themselves. 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?

That's how I see it too

@TheYearOfSmallThings

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.

Exactly

I'm wondering what all the bashing of old people who own homes is about. Of course they own their own homes! They've been working and been paying tax and NI for 60 odd years!

Just another scapegoat for people to vent at.

@bluejelly

The argument about "people having to work hard all their lives" to own a house doesn't convince me. They got to live in the home - it wasn't an abstract savings scheme.

Exactly @bluejelly I have a home and it affords me security of knowing it's mine and a landlord cannot come and turf me out. It's in a location we chose for schools etc and if a landlord wanted to turf us out who knows if I could get something quickly and within budget in this area. I'm also hoping to have gifted my children some 'inheritance' not in the form of inheritance (if they get it then great, if not the so be it) by saving now to help them in future with uni, getting onto the property ladder, driving etc. It's alright being one track minded and thinking about the inheritance but as the average age of death is over 80 most inheritance is given to people nearing 60... so they likely have made their own way in life with homes, studies, pensions

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

I just don't agree with this. I worked in psychogeriatric nursing homes through university, and although money may pay for a nicer room, the standard of nursing care etc was the same. I am willing to sacrifice to save for my DS's future, but if all it gets me is a single room when I am in no shape to enjoy it? I will spend it now.

I have watched a lot of elderly relatives in their final years. My observation is that money buys nothing that would be of value to me at that stage, so if I can't pass it on after my death I should do so while I am alive.

@doublemonkey

I'm wondering what all the bashing of old people who own homes is about. Of course they own their own homes! They've been working and been paying tax and NI for 60 odd years!

Just another scapegoat for people to vent at.

No one has ever paid NI for 60 odd years.

That's one of the things that's wrong with this. Even people with substantial incomes don't pay NI after state pension age

@Unfashionable

I work in this field and just today had a family member quite aggressive saying why should my father have to sell his home, so he shouldn’t have worked all his life then and saved should he, he should’ve been a council tenant and then you’d pay.

My parents make the same argument. They stared with nothing, worked very hard, scrimped, saved & went without to buy their own home, paid off their mortgage and now own it outright. They know plenty of people who lived in council houses but drove better cars & had better holidays than they did. If those people needed care, the state would pay. If my parents needed it, they would have to pay themselves. 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?

My parents feel exactly the same. We were very poor when I was growing up but both my parents worked multiple jobs throughout and were able to buy a house (albeit a small one) and worked hard throughout. We never had any holidays at all (except to go camping once) and it makes my dad very angry that the parents of primary school friends of mine who lived off benefits throughout their lives will get looked after when they get old and yet my parents will have to fund everything themselves.

They're both late 60s now and still work as their pensions aren't really enough to live off and enjoy holidays etc. They don't have a lot but the unfairness of what they do have being taken from them when they've been so careful throughout their lives really stings when they could have sat back and taken from the State for years instead.

Sometimes when one spouse has dementia and can no longer live at home the other spouse still wishes to live in their home. They don't want to have to move.

@caringcarer

Sometimes when one spouse has dementia and can no longer live at home the other spouse still wishes to live in their home. They don't want to have to move.

And they don't

@LegendaryReady, what's your point?

• I'm wondering what all the bashing of old people who own homes is about. Of course they own their own homes! They've been working and been paying tax and NI for 60 odd years!

Just another scapegoat for people to vent at.*

For me people bashing pensioners over this are much worse than the tories. It really says a lot about them.

What about all high earners that have to pay taxes for NHS, schools and benefits that they do not use? Should they say the same? Why should I pay for that?

@Dinkydonk55

I work in this field and just today had a family member quite aggressive saying why should my father have to sell his home, so he shouldn’t have worked all his life then and saved should he, he should’ve been a council tenant and then you’d pay. Or something along those lines. I think people can see their inheritance slip away. And sadly with the cost of care homes being what it is, for many people all the money is used up.

I can see both sides. It does seem massively unfair that for example because my grandparents were all lucky enough not to get dementia and didn’t require years of care, there is a lot more ‘family money’.

Yes it's this.

It's the perceived injustice of people working their whole lives to own their house/have some savings and leave something for their families and then by bad luck it all gets taken as they happen to need care. And then on top of that you've got a lot of people who don't pay anything for the same exact care because they are council tenants.

I can see why people are upset by it, but equally I guess it's like anything else in life where if you have the money, you pay. It does seem unfair to tax younger people who have no assets in order to preserve those of older people.

[quote doublemonkey]@LegendaryReady, what's your point?[/quote]
Which one? The last one? No one's home is sold to pay for care while their spouse is still living in it.

@caringcarer

Sometimes when one spouse has dementia and can no longer live at home the other spouse still wishes to live in their home. They don't want to have to move.

I don't think you have to sell the house if someone is still living there.

My elderly in laws have a substantial property which they want to give to their children when they die.

Their three children though would have no problem with the home being sold if their parents needed care. Their parents have worked hard all their lives and if they need long term care in the future then that property will support this and we are happy for it to do so.

Sadly not all people will think the same way.

@LegendaryReady, this comment..
No one has ever paid NI for 60 odd years.

That's one of the things that's wrong with this. Even people with substantial incomes don't pay NI after state pension age

[quote doublemonkey]@LegendaryReady, this comment..
No one has ever paid NI for 60 odd years.

That's one of the things that's wrong with this. Even people with substantial incomes don't pay NI after state pension age[/quote]
PP said people having to pay for their own care have paid tax and NI for 60 odd years, they haven't.

If you need to increase tax to pay for improved care, why would you exempt comfortably off people over 66 or the wealthy who benefit from an unearned income?

@LegendaryReady - people pay tax on their pensions.