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.

I would a million times over want my parents to have a decent level of care than inherit their house. As it stands they're both in great health in their mid 70s and are currently on a cruise but they know my thoughts

I know someone who gave the house to their son, he mortgaged it, then didn't pay the interest, so it was repossessed.

And another who sold to son, he then charged them market rent...

I had dinner with friends this evening. We are all in our 50's. 2 of the party have parents in care homes (1 dementia, 1 not) at a similar figure each per week. London & South east.

For the record, my MIL's council run home was infinitely better than my mum's BUPA owned care home. I mean, stratospherically better.

I'd go into my MILs care home like a shot if I needed it. Clean, and bright with staff who'd all worked there for many years, loved their residents, and were warm, friendly and caring.
Not a single one of those qualities applied to my mum's home or carers.

why's everyone talking about local authority care homes (bad apparently) versus private (good apparently)

there's hardly any local authority homes left - they all got sold off to private providers and were a damn site better when in local authority hands than private. Private doesn't means better or more exclusive - it means they're profit driven businesses

you then have the people paying g privately over the odds to subsidise the poor rates the council will offer adding more unfairness to the system

the real problem here is private providers creaming off huge profits without reinvesting in the home. -

sure some homes look amazing but scratch the surface of most and you'll still find the same fundamental issues but tied up nicely with a bow

My brother-in-law is a Fraud officer with our local Council and it's mind-blowing what the assessment staff have access to. Far more sophisticated than a lot of people would imagine,

They regularly data match with HMRC/DWP/NS&I records for example, to find out the tax on savings interest to work out estimated savings, ISA's are linked to National Insurance numbers etc (National Fraud Initiative website is a fascinating read).

The processing staff have a huge amount of data available at the click of a finger, all benefits, tax credits, maybe not actual bank accounts and investments instantly but any suspicion and they can gather that via the Fraud legislation and force all banks to declare all savings.

They might not spot the Fraud straight away but it won't take that long to catch up with person and they'll end up with a charge going on the property incase it's ever sold.

Whatever folks come up with thinking they're being clever has been tried before.

Personally I would rather pick my own care home if and when the time comes rather than end up in the cheapest of council run homes god know where in the county which will still have amazing carers but none of the nice life enriching extras.

The finance team at the LA will be able to do a search at the Land Registry to see who owns the property. They also require 6 months of bank statements for the financial assessments. The search will show that his house is in his son’s name. From that they will be able to find out when it was handed over to his son. If he had been more savvy, he could have put the house in both his and his partner’s name as tenants in common. That way, the house could not legally have to be sold. As it stands, if his partner is over 60 she may well be able to remain in the house but the LA will likely put a charge against it.

I think it's immoral that people would put their house into their DC's name to avoid paying care home fees in the future, that's the rest of us who will subbing them all!

My mum recently moved into a care home and we have sold her house to fund it. My siblings and I agree that her money should be spent on her care. We would never dream of trying to do something dodgy to benefit ourselves and compromise her care to do it.

Surely the long term partner counts as a dependent and if she is living in the house it is not counted as an asset to be used to pay care home fees? Especially if she is a co owner.

This isn't inheritance so entirely irrelevant what is in the will.

The council can see that the elderly person owned the house they are living in and it is now owned by their child. I could search records and find this out, so of course the council can.

@OnGoldenPond she does not co own.

What about the people who spent their money on fancy cars, spas and luxuries rather than savings? We're subbing them too. They just blew their money instead of planning for their future.

My late husband and I were big savers. We saved hard for our retirements, but he never got to see his.
I wish we'd spent more now, because if I need care all that money will disappear, just as my mum's and MILs did. For nothing that gives me any pleasure. And my husband missed out on what that money could have bought him.

I don’t know what the rules are where you are, but just having been through this myself it depends how it was done. This has to be planned 5 (or possibly 10 years) before going into care. If he has just transferred the house into someone else’s name then gone into care the council can and will do a search and he will be expected to pay. Otherwise no one would pay for their care. So he has probably just wasted money transferring the house.

Elderly relative went into a lovely care home, but as soon as his £120,000 was spent, LA took over and moved him to what they considered a more suitable home (cheaper). He had no say and had much fewer visitors as we couldn't get to it so easily (6 hour round trip instead of less than 4)

I can't imagine having no say over where I live.

why's everyone talking about local authority care homes (bad apparently) versus private (good apparently)

Private doesn't means better or more exclusive - it means they're profit driven businesses

I think most people are talking about having more choice, if you're funding yourself, not that all private ones are automatically great. But you must have a better chance of finding somewhere you like if you're the one choosing it.

I too would prefer my parents home to go for good care if they need it. But I guess the huge rise in house prices relative to wages is a big factor in intensifying this issue. A modest house can now be worth a huge amount and may be DCs only chance of owning a home.

As others have said, it depends when it was done.

My Dad put his flat in the names of my sister and I when he was only in his 60s (he effectively gifted it to us though we never lived there). If he ended up in a care home, that would not be counted as deprivation of assets as it happened long before he was vulnerable.

My in laws on the other hand gave their daughter one of their two properties in their 80s and I think they could be on dodgy ground as it is conceivable they could need to go into a care home in the next couple of years. Though I also wonder how the authorities would know if no one mentions it.

Friends father put house in trust to his daughter and his wife outlived him.when she needed to go into care the LA ended up forcing the sale of the house after huge wrangling and threats of court.the whole thing was incredibly stressful for the whole family. They ended up with huge amounts to pay off from sale of house.The father had been advised by a solicitor who seemed completely incompetent years and years ago and not fit to practice by the time they were being threatened with court proceedings.Daughter had no idea her dad had arranged this and the mum was too confused to help

If I have dementia and euthanasia is still not lehal, I definitely don't want my money wasted on an expensive care home. I have seen plenty of expensive care homes and really ... it all depends on the staff. And they are still paid minimum wage. The profits are higher in the expensive places.
I'd rather pay £££ for daily care at home while able (that does give you more control) then nothing at all once dementia takes hold.
By 90, who cares about the 'comforts' of an expensive care home. It's all about how nice the staff are.

Best care home I ever saw was council run. That's actually not surprising. Why would private be better?

As an ex district nurse in and out of many many care homes over the years, the best care was definitely not always provided by the private care home with its potted plants and new carpet. Surprisingly, quite often the opposite.

Absolutely this. If I ever need care, I want the best care, not funded by the LA.

What would happen in a situation where an older person sells a larger family home, downsizes (still living independently) and passes on the difference in value in cash to their children to eg help them with a house deposit/ uni costs for grandchildren etc ? Is that still deprivation of assets when later down the line they might go into care?

Better hope he doesn’t fall out with his brother, then, or they will be homeless.

Probably fine if they were healthy at the time with no expectation of needing care eg didn't have a diagnosis of something that would likely require care later on