Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Original poster

DM is homeless and penniless

578 replies

Pottlee · 31/12/2023 13:29

I don’t know where to post this really, so apologies if it’s the wrong place.

My mum has been carer for her mum for maybe 5 years. Grandmother has now sadly passed away. Inheritance wise she has left a small amount behind, which is split between her two 60 ish year old ‘children’ (my mum and my uncle) - around £5-10k each. Mum and her brother have a fractured relationship but showed themselves to get on for the sake of their mum. Not sure it’s going to be as hunkydory now their mother has passed.

Now to the main point - my mum has nothing, like nothing to her name. She has no home (lived with her mum as carer), no money (other than the small inheritance) and no income at all. She has never worked so had made no contributions. She also had never claimed any benefits. The home she lived in with her mother will be sold and that money will go to an equity release company and to pay off a load of other debts.
What on earth happens to her now?
My uncle says she’s my responsibility now, but I would hate for that to be the case in that I don’t have room for her to live at my house, and harsh as it sounds I don’t want to become responsible for her for the rest of her life - hats off to everyone who can do it, but the idea of me having to care for her the way that she cared for her mum is just a no I’m afraid. We are close in a way but don’t get on in another. I couldn’t live with her. It would make my life unbearable and no doubt spell the end of my marriage because my DH couldn’t tolerate her daily either. My 2 DC love her but daily it would be disastrous. She is very lazy, judgemental, negative and nasty. And as I said would be able to make very little/no financial contribution.

So 1. Is she really regarded my responsibility now? 2. What should she do with regards of somewhere to live (she has no money for that) and income for the rest of her life? Is she not entitled to anything as she’s made no contributions or claimed anything at any point?

I’m aware I may come across as heartless because I don’t want to take her on so to speak, but I do want to help her set herself up somehow if she can. I’m just not in a position to be able to offer a place to live or financially.

please if anyone can advise who she can speak to or what she can do. Thank you.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
PringPring · 31/12/2023 18:33

Taking her in yourself she'd be less likely to be housed herself as she'd have a roof. You'd never get her out op so don't do it. Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind.

Lots of local authorities and housing associations do over 55s housing.

I'd look up your local council and housing associations. I'd also look up any local support organisations for carers. The carers related organisations probably see these sorts of situations a lot with family carers when one passes away sadly. And will likely be able to support your mum and signpost her etc.

I'm baffled at her having no bank account. It sounds like your grandma has been supporting your mum financially since she came back from being abroad?!

She should be under the savings threshold to claim UC, and that's simple enough to do but she will need a bank account!

How is the will money being given to her if no bank account?! If her brother was planning to hand her the cash (?!) Then I'd suggest to him that he tells her he needs to pay it into a bank account in her name.

Don't feel you need to "do" for her op. She's a grown adult and doesn't need enabling, that will just continue things as they are.

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 31/12/2023 18:34

The mother is 60. Where on earth are posters getting the idea that women of that age are/ were expected to SAHM?

The same place they get the idea that a MIL who could easily be in her early 50s was the generation that lived through the war (comment on another thread).

greengreengrass25 · 31/12/2023 18:35

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 31/12/2023 18:34

The mother is 60. Where on earth are posters getting the idea that women of that age are/ were expected to SAHM?

The same place they get the idea that a MIL who could easily be in her early 50s was the generation that lived through the war (comment on another thread).

😂

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 31/12/2023 18:36

JennyJone · 31/12/2023 18:30

She needs legal advice regarding challenging the mother's will. She was effectively financially dependant on her mother so may be able to argue a greater / different split of will due to said financial/ housing dependency etc.

Challenging a will is very expensive.

Mirrormeback · 31/12/2023 18:38

She can get a job as a carer in a care home or apply to be a HCA in the NHS

Your DM is absolutely not your responsibility in the slightest

Luddite26 · 31/12/2023 18:46

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 31/12/2023 17:17

I'm not being judgemental your mum came from a time when it was more expected to be a sahm

Cobblers. If DM is 60 then she was born in 1963. In the mid 1980s she'd have been in her early 20s and a bit younger than me and I can tell you that a lot of women worked and a lot of them were mothers.

More expected are the words I used..

Tracker1234 · 31/12/2023 18:46

I am the same age and have a private and state pension coming. Why do people who chose to make poor decisions be my issue to resolve and fund? As others said she could apply to be a carer but somehow I don’t think she could be arsed….

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 18:47

Most of the younger posters here (who think women didn't work way back then) were probably being taught at school by female teachers, in the 70s and 80s!

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 18:48

@Luddite26 It was never 'more expected'.

I'm wondering how old you are?

LaurieStrode · 31/12/2023 18:48

Mirrormeback · 31/12/2023 18:38

She can get a job as a carer in a care home or apply to be a HCA in the NHS

Your DM is absolutely not your responsibility in the slightest

Then why do we as a society spend so much money and other resources propping up "families" ? If, when it counts, families have no obligation to support one another? Why shouldn't we use those resources on programs that help everyone, not just the childed, if there is no down-line obligation to spare the taxpayer by helping one's family members?

It's so tiresome, this "heads I win, tails you lose" attitude that beneficiaries have.

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 18:50

@LaurieStrode Why do some women never do a day's work in their lives, yet expect the tax payer to bail them out when things don't turn out as they hope?

You are very, very out of order suggesting (if you are) that the OP has some moral obligation to house her mother, who's never done a thing to support herself.

Milkandnosugarplease · 31/12/2023 18:51

Ffs the bloody woman needs to get a job!

Uncle definitely has not helped the situation in any way. If he had enabled this to happen he is an idiot as well

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 18:53

Surely the uncle (her Mum's brother) was complicit in all of this for years and years. Or at least 5 years.

He's got a bloody nerve! Why doesn't HE offer her a home? He won't have young children living with him, is likely to be mortgage free, and maybe even retired.

Through it back at him, OP.

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 18:54

*throw

LaurieStrode · 31/12/2023 19:03

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 18:50

@LaurieStrode Why do some women never do a day's work in their lives, yet expect the tax payer to bail them out when things don't turn out as they hope?

You are very, very out of order suggesting (if you are) that the OP has some moral obligation to house her mother, who's never done a thing to support herself.

I think the mother sounds like a lazy mooching leech. And I don't think she should be bailed out, I think she should get a job or multiple jobs if that's what it takes. She is reaping the results of 45 years of idleness.

But I don't see why families alway think the first resort is to put out the paw to the taxpayers instead of taking care of their own. Isn't that why we support, or try to, the stability of young families with myriad benefits that only are available to reproducers, but payable by us all? And yet when those families are asked to do their share, it's once again "oh let the taxpayer bail her out." So why bother spending billions "supporting families" in the first place?

SutWytTi · 31/12/2023 19:05

RainyDaysSundays · 31/12/2023 17:52

Goodness the young 'uns on this thread are really showing their age @Luddite26

Women who are 60s today were very much working in the 1970s and 1980s. All my friends who went to uni in the 1970s worked and mostly full time, then maybe p/t when their DCs were young, then went back to work full time.

Not everyone will be like your own social circle! Of course many of those who went to uni went on to work. But that was a very small percentage of women in the 1970s.

Just 29% of women worked full time in 1985, according to the key findings of this IFS report: https://ifs.org.uk/publications/rise-and-rise-womens-employment-uk

Many women had part time jobs, I guess, but not the OP's mum.

Riapia · 31/12/2023 19:05

MN rule 1.
You owe your parents nothing. They may have cared and provided for you as a child. They may have wiped your tears, your nose and your arse but that was their duty.
Time to go NC.
The government (taxpayers) will have to step in.
2024 tomorrow.
What a sad world.
Hope I never get old.

MrsTerryPratchett · 31/12/2023 19:10

But I don't see why families alway think the first resort is to put out the paw to the taxpayers instead of taking care of their own. Isn't that why we support, or try to, the stability of young families with myriad benefits that only are available to reproducers, but payable by us all? And yet when those families are asked to do their share, it's once again "oh let the taxpayer bail her out." So why bother spending billions "supporting families" in the first place?

"Reproducers"? That's a small step away from "breeders", isn't it?

The reason we support families is twofold. One, because letting little children suffer and starve is frowned upon in most human societies and two, because getting more taxpayers is important. Us breeders are producing the next set of taxpayers. You do know parents also pay taxes, right? Because you sound like you don't.

If we want families to support aging parents, there are ways of incentivising that. Singapore does it, so do other countries. Offering housing for generational arrangements at a massively discounted rate is the best way.

CanImakethisbetter · 31/12/2023 19:14

LaurieStrode · 31/12/2023 19:03

I think the mother sounds like a lazy mooching leech. And I don't think she should be bailed out, I think she should get a job or multiple jobs if that's what it takes. She is reaping the results of 45 years of idleness.

But I don't see why families alway think the first resort is to put out the paw to the taxpayers instead of taking care of their own. Isn't that why we support, or try to, the stability of young families with myriad benefits that only are available to reproducers, but payable by us all? And yet when those families are asked to do their share, it's once again "oh let the taxpayer bail her out." So why bother spending billions "supporting families" in the first place?

Show quote history

What do mean ‘families’?

Do you the vast majority of people? Most people have families of some description.

Even non ‘reproducers’ have some sort of family more often than not.

CleansUpButWouldPreferNotTo · 31/12/2023 19:16

safetyfreak · 31/12/2023 17:17

It is a shame the mother did the equity release knowing she has a daughter with no income or assets.

Show quote history

Perhaps the mother was trying to give her daughter a push towards usefulness?

MrsDanversGlidesAgain · 31/12/2023 19:17

But I don't see why families alway think the first resort is to put out the paw to the taxpayers instead of taking care of their own.

Because society has recognised that life has become increasingly complex and that some families (by which of course you mean women) aren't in a position to house, care for and be responsible for every member of their family who falls on hard times, even assuming that they want to. It has also recognised that some of us don't have the families to do that and for people in either of those situations society has devised some sort of safety net.

I assume that when you're sick you 'put out the paw' to the taxpayer funded NHS instead of turning to any home remedies your family might have lying around, don't you?

Scarletttulips · 31/12/2023 19:20

But I don't see why families alway think the first resort is to put out the paw to the taxpayers instead of taking care of their own

Because we choose to care for those who can not (or will not) care for themselves.

LaurieStrode · 31/12/2023 19:23

I still say that people claiming "you have zero responsibility for your mother!" are defying the social contract.

Families are only too happy to rake in the benefits, but don't want to hold up their end by having the family unit, rather than the taxpayer funded safety net, be the point of first resort. Just point them toward the council!

Anonymouseposter · 31/12/2023 19:26

OP - do you trust your uncle? Could there be more money left than he is saying? Do you trust your mother? Could she have taken financial advantage? Have you seen evidence of the equity release etc.? I still think that Age UK, CAB and the local housing department homelessness department is the way to go and your biggest mistake would be to accommodate your Mum.

mathanxiety · 31/12/2023 19:30

CanImakethisbetter · 31/12/2023 18:28

Why would you think it’s the Uncle?

Show quote history

Because he's so quick to hand her over to the OP and insistent that she needs to house and care for the mother now. He's too quick to dump her and occupy the OP's mind with practical problems.

Also because it is unlikely that a woman who has clearly given no thought to finances for her own future would have the cunning necessary to pull off an equity related heist, whereas the uncle has managed to persuade the OP that her mother is now her responsibility. He comes across as glib and selfish, and I would suspect cunning too. Equity related financing of an unpaid carer (the OP's mother) in the family home would have been far less costly than years in a nursing home. I'd wonder if he had managed repairs to the house, upkeep of the garden, etc, and maintained a petty cash account for those purposes from which he helped himself.

I'd want to know who is the executor, who signed the equity documents, what is in the will, and what the debts are, especially credit card debts - and find out who used the card if there was one, and for what. I'd also want to know if the property had been used as security for other debts (of the brother). Does he have a business? Lots of questions...

Swipe left for the next trending thread