Protecting property if parents go into care

[Abwettar]

Hi, I'm wondering if anyone can give me some insight regarding protecting my parent's home from care home fees?

The current situation is that I am an only child, there is no other family. Aside from the house, there are no other assets. My parents have joint ownership of their house, worth around 100k, and are both currently living there. They are both in poor health, my dad has been diagnosed with terminal cancer and my mam has been diagnosed with dementia - however they both have capacity to understand the situation at the moment. They have always been adamant on me getting the house after they pass.

There are no plans for either of them to go into a care home, I would like for them to stay in the house as long as it's safe to do so, with care from myself and carers going in throughout the day.

I was looking into putting the home into a trust, but I have read some conflicting information on if this would be considered deprivation of assets due to their poor health.

My question is, if both my parents were to make a will and each leave their 50% share of the house to me, would this protect at least part of the house? For instance, if one of my parents passed away, would their half of the house be protected from care home fees, even in the situation that the other parent had to go into a care home?

Any advice on this situation would be greatly appreciated

Thank you

Op I hear you.
Realistically your DMum will end up needing care. Sad but true.
Your Dad might be lucky enough to escape the care home situation or be there a very short period of time.

I'd speak with a lawyer and see if Dad can leave his half of the house to you rather than your Mum.

Well, actually, they scrimped and saved to buy themselves a secure home. If that home no longer meets their needs, then they need to sell it in order to fund what they DO need, which might be a care home - in much the same way as we do in our 30s (or whenever). If your home is too small to raise your family you sell it and buy something that better suits your needs. You don't keep the smaller home (or give it to a family member) and then demand that the state provides you with something different.

So did lots of other people, it doesn't change anything.

I'm not sure anything really works to protect assets. We had to sell my mother's home (she was a widow) for her to go into care. We wanted the best care for her, and as she could afford it we were able to choose and it wasn't left to SS, when it happens you just want the best place possible.

In all, her care cost over £100k over a couple of years. Sadly, she died but we are glad her money was spent on finding the nicer places for her. No of course she (or us) wouldn't have wanted her to go into a home in the first place, but as dementia got worse, we were left with no option.

They bought their house on the assumption that they'd be able to leave it to their descendents. But the goal posts changed and now they won't be able to do that.

If I were them, I'd be angry about it.

Screw the "morality". Care home fees are a disgusting rip-off anyways.

Surely that applies to anything tho?

it’s a sad world that I didn’t get 30 hrs childcare but people now do? Should I be reimbursed for this?

The issue is more likely to be around your mother's care than your father's.

Depending on your circumstances and available back up support, your father’s needs may be manageable at home with cancer support services and hospice care. But don’t underestimate how hard it would be and, no matter what you want to be able to do, you may physically not be able to. He may well be eligible for Attendance Allowance (and you for Carer's Allowance), and his claim could be escalated with a terminal diagnosis. He can use the money for things like extra heating costs and to pay you at the going-rate to carry jobs to support them that they might otherwise outsource, like cleaning the house. Check also their are no life insurance policies that will pay out now, with his diagnosis.

Sadly, it sounds like your father's situation will be short-term, but your mother's could last for many years and it may be difficult to know how she might be after losing your Dad. If she has dementia but is physically fit, strong and unpredictable you may not be able to keep her safe, so your idea of not using a care home may have to change.

There are different types of care and specialist dementia care is more expensive than regular care home care. Whether or not your DF leaves you “his” half of the house, as PP mention, the remaining equity owned by your mother will be eaten by specialist care home fees very quickly, either during her lifetime or by a charge being put on the property for after her death. You alone will know how you will feel having half the value of their property in your bank account whilst your mother receives the more basic level of care described by others for longer than she might otherwise do so.

You need a plan for DM, which will be better if you have taken advice. The most likely scenario is that there will be a crisis - a fall or illness - that then triggers a lot of changes in a short period of time. Citizen's Advice were the most useful help for my family as we approached this situation. We told CB what we needed and they, crucially, told us exactly what that is called in this Local Authority, as it does vary and the social workers didn’t always offer us all the options.

I think the best bet is to put their property as tenants in common and have them each leave their share to you. That way, if only one of them ends up in a care home, you get half the house from the other one.

I do agree with you that they’ve paid in, scrimped and saved, done the right thing and they deserve to be able to leave their property to you.

I actually wonder whether it’s legal for you to essentially issue them with an invoice for your services over the past 4 years - ie they owe you £14ph for 10 hours pw of care for the past 4 years. I don’t know. But it seems disgraceful for the state to just take their property. There’s really no incentive to save - they might as well have had a council property and given money saved to you/bought you stuff with it. And ended up with nothing for the state to take.

They have always been adamant on me getting the house after they pass
Why do you think this would override their need to pay for their own care bills?!

I think the best bet is to put their property as tenants in common and have them each leave their share to you. That way, if only one of them ends up in a care home, you get half the house from the other one.
This.
It's a very common thing to do this. Our solicitors advised us to and I've seen lots of threads on here where people have done the same.
It means they would need to see a solicitor sooner rather than later to get it done as if your mum loses capacity she cannot do it.

Also if your mum does need care, even the total value of the house (£100k) wouldn't last long so she wouldn't be self funded for long anyway.

I guess the best way not to loose everything to care home fees is say in your POA that you don't want to be force fed or treated for UTIs etc in advanced dementia.

So many people who don't know what's going on anymore being kept alive in limbo. I personally don't be kept alive when I no longer recognise my family.

They ideally would have set up POA for you. You might be able to protect their home by moving in and providing care until they die. But your mum might totally change and live on for many years

They can change the house to tenants in common (if it isn't already) and your terminally ill parent can leave their half to you.

I think this would be regarded as deprivation of assets, which is clearly the aim.

Indeed.

I agree.

As someone who had to pay care home fees for my father I am well aware as to how much they are and how they eat into inheritance. But that's just how it is.

My father had been a prisoner of war, fought for his country, paid taxes all his life etc etc. But naturally we had to pay his care home fees.

Can you pay their care home fees? If you are getting the house, can you use what you would have spent on housing to pay for their care?
That way no one takes the house from them, you get the inheritance, and the tax payer isn't on the hook.

I know it's an upsetting situation but this doesn't make sense.

It wouldn't be taking it off them, they wouldn't need it if in a home. It's taking it off you. You want inheritance you haven't worked for.

Plenty of people on benefits (I think a majority?) are also in work. And a huge percentage of the benefits bill is state pension.

It's not what your folks had in mind, but the opposite would be making the state pay for their care just so you can get £100k.

A will governs what happens to the deceased person's estate, i.e. what's left after the deceased person's debts have been paid. If the debts are extensive, there may not be any estate to dispose of. Care home fees can rapidly reduce the value of the estate; that is unfortunate, but if the local authority had to pick up all the fees for every person who ended up in a care home, it would have no money left for anything else, and in fact council tax would probably have to double or triple.

Because they have both probably paid tax and insurance all their working lives, they have paid for care.
Maybe they should both have scrounged off benefits for 50 years and wouldn’t have to pay anything.

Alongside the changing house ownership and wills piece, another way to maximise what goes to children is to give it to them little and often.

Yes, they can’t choose to give bulk of their assets away - but they can choose to ensure you’re never out of pocket for anything you do together. And you then put what might have previously been your share aside. eg. If go out for lunch, they pay not you.

You really think that those who haven’t milked the benefit system for their whole “working” lives are due a payback when it comes to funding their care?

I did look up the tenants in common ruse and the LA can look into this as deprivation of assets.

I understand that your parents want to leave you the house, but that's only possible if they die before needing much care. People often don't get what they want, but I appreciate that it's disappointing.

Ultimately if people end up in care, it needs to be paid for. The state will pay for people's care if they have no assets, but your parents do have an asset.

It's not a disgrace to have to pay for a service that you use. It makes perfect sense.

Their home won't be "taken off them" until they no longer have any use for it anyway. They will lose nothing from their own experience.

Working and paying taxes isn't some sort of heroic endeavour for which you're owed massive payback. It's a basic part of participating in society. If you invest in assets and property, it's a gamble re: inheritance; it may get passed to your heirs or it may get eaten by care needs. Most people win that gamble; a relatively small proportion of people ever occupy a care home, and you have the benefits of a secure home in your lifetime as well. But people who can pay for their care, must and should.