Inheritance & Paying for Care

[Tryingtomakeitthroughtheweek]

DH's Nan is now on palliative care and isn't expected to live much longer (we suspect she's hanging on for Christmas)

DH's father (the nans only child) has just come home after a hospital stay and they need to arrange for a carer to come in at least once a day as DMiL cant get him out of bed etc. FiL has Parkinson's but could well live for a few years yet.

In laws own a property but their savings are below the threshold to pay for care.

DH's Nan owns a property and has some savings, her will at the moment is roughly:
GGrandchildren (3) - 10%
Grandchildren (2) - 20%
Child (DH's father) - 70%

Once DFiL receives the inheritance this will take them over the threshold and they will need to pay for his care and its likely the whole inheritance will be used until they are back under the threshold again. DH's Nan (she is completely in sound mind) has suggested changing her will so a large portion goes to the Grandchildren as FiL has always said that they intended to gift most of it to them anyway.

Is it really that simple? Surely its a common situation and everyone would just be disinheriting anyone who would need to pay for their care? I've tried to suggest getting some legal advice but everyone seems to think its just a matter of getting the solicitor out and changing the will?

TBH most people aren't still inheriting from their parents at an age when they need care. Yes I'd agree, she should change her will.

im baffled there are still people who think “I am jaaaynius” and have thought a way around this no one else ever has

you are complete right OP and it must be so frustrating. If you can get them to look at this which explains it all very clearly

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/care/paying-for-care/paying-for-a-care-home/deprivation-of-assets/

But he’s not automatically entitled to his DM’s estate, she can leave it to wherever she wants. He’s not depriving himself of anything by her changing her will.

It won’t count as deprivation of assets if DH’s nan changes her will and it goes direct to her grandchildren.

The only thing to be aware of is that by privately paying for care you get a choice, rather than whichever the council chooses and is (the cheapest) and pretty basic.

If she can get it changed in time, that is.

I think as the money is not FILs there is no deprivation of assets to consider. The will can be changed.

Just be aware that if FIL has parkinsons there is a high chance that he will be at home with 4 carers a day long after either he wants to be or family can cope with. The LA will only pay for a care home once he is really unsafe at home with 4 care visits a day regardless of how lonely or bored he is. And they won't cover maintaining the property/garden, finances, admin etc. That will have to be bought in or covered by family. Have a think about how that would work for your family before any decisions are made. It will work for some but not for others it can be a nightmare.

Thank you, so in theory if he doesn't receive the inheritance in the first place he's not depriving himself of it but if he received then tries to give it away he is?

Thank you some good points; MiL is very well for her age just struggles to get him out of the bed at the moment. They are arranging for a stair lift to be fitted at the moment and they already have a gardener and are thankfully open arranging more help as the need arises.

That's my understanding, yes,

And changing the will to skip DFIL doesn't mean that the money can't be used for care - the money still exists and your DH could use some or all of it for care for his FIL if he chooses. It just gives you some flexibility.

Not your question but has he been assessed for continuing health care (if not probably a good idea) as he may not need to pay for some /all of his care.
I'd do this alongside looking into his mother's will as it will take sometime.

If your nan is of sound of mine then yes updating her will so it goes to the grandchildren Is the best way

as long as the will is change before her death and you don’t do a deed of variation after she has passed you will be fine

Ive known it to be done when say one person is on benefits / and unlikely to work again
so rather than them inheriting it bypasses them and goes to grandkids

Thank you, the assessments seem to be happening at the moment as they are having various visits, getting mobility aids fitted etc.

X

Yes. It really is as simple as grandmother changing he will. There is no deliberate deprivation of assets provide grandmother is of sound mind.
if she dies before she can change her will then any attempt to change inheritance share is deprivation of assets.
if she wants to make sure her will still benefit without losing his benefits she can put his share in a discretionary trust. Provided the trust is discretionary and he has no absolute entitlement he can still benefit without losing out. She may want him, for example, to have little extras.
any decent step lawyer will sort that out.

Glad you edited your post as it was completely wrong, in fact I thought it was a wind-up.

Ohh I missed this?

Happy to share. I misread the original post. My bad.
My post started that it could be seen as deliberate deprivation of assets. Then a I realised that the plan was to skip a generation and give to the grandchildren to avoid paying for care.
I am also happy to put my hand up and say I feel it is morally wrong.

If she's in England she should be entitled to up to 6 weeks of free care at home on discharge from hospital anyway. That's what late MIL had. You really have to fight SS for it though.

I very much doubt nobody has ever thought of not willing their assets to someone who'd be obliged to use them on care costs. Seeing as how it's very much a 'way round this'.

The pp who said it's probably not that common for a parent to change their will to disinherit a child in this situation is likely right, for obvious reasons. But it must be common enough with spouses who have any separate assets.

It makes total sense financially to skip a generation and leave to grandchildren/great grandchildren if their dad isn't expected to live many more years. It wouldn’t be deprivation of asset's as nothing would be inherited by her son.
The grandchildren could pay for any/some of the care or equipment that their father may benefit from in due course, if they wish.
It’s not morally wrong to do your best to keep your assets within your family, its what we work hard for, to see the next generation benefit, not the government coffers!

DGM can leave her money to whomever she chooses. Coercing her either way would be morally wrong

However, it may be inadvisable to give all the money to the next generation.

Self-funding care gives control to your DFIL over what he gets and when. LA funded care is likely to be insufficient and inflexible. If I was in your husband’s DGMs shoes I’d want my son to have the best care possible.

This is true. While DGM can do this, there are cons as well as pros.

One visit a day is likely already covered by the disability benefits he is likely getting surely without needing to eat into any future inheritance ? Also if a largish amount of money was received it could be invested to provide some interest also. I would also think about impact that passing inheritance on to grandkids could have on them. You don't say how old they are but if they have young families and are claiming UC even for help towards childcare costs etc it could impact their benefits significantly. Just something to bear in mind.

Really no problem at all, thats why I was posting as I was worried that would be what they were doing. Im asking for a legal advise on internet forum, I know I'll get a variety of answers