Person going into care home thinks they have avoided selling their house to pay fees?

[LindorDoubleChoc]

A distant relative has just sadly gone into care (dementia). He is not married but has a long-term partner with whom he has two adult children.

His family seem to think he won't have to sell his property to pay for the fees because "he has put his house in his son's name". I'm trying to think what this means and surely if it were that simple everyone would do it?

Are they misunderstanding the system? Or how could they have achieved this? They are in England.

If the house is now in the sons name, I believe he's right; they can't make the son sell the house BUT.....

If the LA decide that the elderly man now needs to be in a home, they can investigate as far back as necessary and if they decide that he deliberately deprived himself of his assets IN ORDER to not have to sell the house to pay for his care, then they can refuse to make any payment at all towards the care home costs, until they deem that the money which he should have received from the sale of the house ( or deemed to be what it would have been if he didn't actually sell it) has been used up to the savings level when you don't need to pay

So someone is going to have to pay those costs if the LA won't

However, the first thing to note is the reason for the home 'being put' in the sons name. IF there was a different good reason for doing that, then the LA may very well decide that it was an acceptable reason and still pay the care home fees. ( There is case law about this aspect and there CAN be good reasons)

Secondly, as others have said, how long ago was this done? The LA will look at all the circumstances surrounding the handing the house over to the son when making a decision. If it was done when your relative was perfectly fit and healthy at the time, and the reason it was done makes sense AND it was a number of years ago, then it may all be fine. If done after he was already unwell and it looked like he might need to go into a care home, they will probably decide that it was a deliberate attempt to avoid paying and they will act accordingly....

I'm in Northern Ireland, not sure about English rules, but surely if his partner lives permanently in this house it cannot be considered an asset? If she is over sixty or disabled the house cannot be sold to fund care. This was the situation with my uncle and aunt. They were married but I think it also applies to common law partners.

Does anyone know anyone personally who has been found to have intentionally deprived assets? Because I see it come up a lot on here and whilst I know of a few people who have gifted homes (mainly to avoid the inheritance tax) I don't know anyone who has been found to have intentionally deprived!

You really don’t want to end up in the council care home if you can possibly avoid it. They are beyond awful from what I saw as an OT. Surely paying for a home of your choice is one of the reasons why people save up?

I should have said above that I was referring to Scottish Law

Yes I’m a lawyer and in my line of work I see it ALL the time, not to mention children with power of attorney being taken to court by the OPG for similar behaviour. Most of them thought they’d get away with it - they don’t.

DM (who owns a house with DF) is in a care home.

When the financial assessment is done all DMs assets are taken into account, and as long as DF is living in the house it's value is excluded from the financial assessment. So as DMs assets are under £23,500 she receives funding.

Should DM outlive DF and house therefore be empty, another financial assessment would be done and DMs half of the house would be taken into account, so she then have to pay for her care until her money ran out.

As others have said giving a house to a child would be seen as a deprivation of assets, and it doesn't sound like the relatives partner jointly owns the property, so them continuing to live there shouldn't exclude it from the assessment.

Seems a bit fishy to me - but it's their lookout

I'd much rather my parents could afford decent care than I inherited the house.

You must be mad. Honestly, I can't think of anything more frightening than losing control of your own life like that.

Of all the things to not want to spend your money on! Why don't you sell up and go and live under a bridge down by the docks right now? That would be another saving.

People tend to think this is a very clever way to "get round the system", what it means is you end up in a council funded care home. This does not necessarily equate to a home where the care itself is any less however if you are used to a certain level of living it may not live up to your expectations. I would not recommend it.
Each local authority take a different approach to the financial assessment process although all work to a similar framework, some take a harder line than others. They can look back as far as they like.

What I don't understand is..(and my own wonderful Mum has been in a care home for a year) is that if they have no money then they'll go to a local authority care home where the standards/outings/daily activities etc might not be as good..(I'm trying to be very careful here and I totally understand these council run homes are doing their best with the funding they receive.. and I have worked myself in a few..) but my mum's home is private and she pays £1750 a week and I can see where the money goes.. from the food to the personal laundry...to the cinema room to the hairdresser..it smells nice and is clean. Wine with every meal if the residents want.. beautiful gardens..
What I'm getting at is that some people don't want their 'hard earned money being taken by the government' but are then horrified when they end up in a home that smells of pee and cabbages! Or if they are too far gone in their dementia/Alzheimer's journey their family is horrified..
When we as a family realized that our wonderful mother was going to need this type of secure unit care we were grateful that she had a house to sell to pay for it... even tho they'll be nothing for us to inherit after our parents told us all our lives that we'd be alright when they went.. knowing that our DM has the best care money can buy has enabled all of us to come to terms with 'losing' a life changing sum of money..

My uncle did this then had no say in the care home he went to, he lost all control and agency. He railed against it and moaned but it was his choice, he gave away the control over his own life!

@Marylou62 jeez that's 7 grand a month I'd expect more than a bit if plonk with my dinners.

I think it would be mad to give away your biggest finiancial asset to your child. What if the son or daughter evicted the parent once they owned the property? What if the child got a divorce and the ex spouse claimed half? Mad.

Exactly! I want my parents to have the best care they can afford, even if it means I won't inherit a bean.

He must really hate his partner leaving her in such a precarious position

It's £250 a night or £10.41 per hour for round the clock care including all meals and bills, pretty good value for money if you ask me

You can gift a house but you have to live at least seven years.

Not all LA's dig deep enough but some will go as far as to go further back than seven years to prove you've deliberately got rid of assets.

The thing to do once you're mortgage free is to set up a trust and let the trust own the property, not the people.

It’s going to depend on the situation. Did he put the house in a trust alongside his son and if so how long ago? If he very recently just signed the house over then it’s obviously depravation of assets.

It does work !
Depends on how long ago though , it was 7 years.

Does his partner live in the property as her only home? If so the house cannot be sold unless she dies first.

I got this info from Age Concern and one of their many information leaflets you can download from their website, number 39 I think it was but not sure if exact number

I do not understand the resentment and disgust from some people that elderly people's homes may have to be sold to pay for their care. By the time they are at that point, they can not live in their home independently anyway so they will need to live elsewhere. And as has been explained. the house is not taken into account if their spouse is living in the house.

Care is expensive and who else is supposed to pay for it? You can't expect the state to pay for everyone, and those who do get funding from the state are often put in homes they really would not choose to be in. Beggars can't be choosers.

If you are at the state of needing to be in a home you don't have long left, and you can't take money with you. You may as well use what you have to be in a decent home.

Adult children who care about their parents would rather they were in a comfortable place than worried about their dwindling inheritance. Inheritance is not a right, it is not an entitlement. Until a person has actually died, their assets belong to them and must be used to fund their care.

My step dad has done this with his parents house. I knew it wasn't as straight forward as he made out because he then put his and my mums house in his brothers name and paid off the mortgage. My mum believes everything he tells her and thinks she won't have to pay anything if he was to end up in a care home and she can keep the house. I've tried to tell her a million times it's not that easy if it was everyone would be doing it to avoid fees but..

Financial advisors seem very keen at the moment to get people in their 60s to put properties in trust to avoid care fees. I don't entirely follow it but feel distrustful

The 7 years doesn't apply. They can go back as far as they want.

I think the 7 years applies to gifts of money given away before a person's death, when calculating inheritance tax.