[Kizzy]

They don't know that, nothing is set in stone.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

If you are a well off pensioner you are expected to pay for your own nursing home care, if you ever need it and lets face it, none of us know if we are going to get dementia and need years of nursing home care.

What is considered 'well off'? Is it owning their own home and therefore having releasable assets? Is it having a £100k savings? is it millionaires? what's the figure?

Private nursing homes are often over £1K a week, so that's £56K a year without any extras.

The current situation with this seems to be that they will take every penny that is considered "yours". My wife's grandmother is in a care home now, as of January this year. Her grandad had something like £300k savings and they own their house and basically what happens is, half of that is considered hers and half his, and they will expect all of her grandmother's half to be used before the state will pay for care. So £150k. The house is exempt because her grandfather still lives in it, and they can't touch "his half" of the savings pot they have.

However if it's a single old person and there's no living spouse, they will take the lot. All of the savings, sell off the house and use the money from that, every last penny before state help is available.

The short story is...... ... If you want to leave your house and savings to your children, gift those assets to them long before it becomes an issue. Past 70 start transferring everything you can out of your name and into theirs.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The current situation with this seems to be that they will take every penny that is considered "yours". My wife's grandmother is in a care home now, as of January this year. Her grandad had something like £300k savings and they own their house and basically what happens is, half of that is considered hers and half his, and they will expect all of her grandmother's half to be used before the state will pay for care. So £150k. The house is exempt because her grandfather still lives in it, and they can't touch "his half" of the savings pot they have.

However if it's a single old person and there's no living spouse, they will take the lot. All of the savings, sell off the house and use the money from that, every last penny before state help is available.

The short story is...... ... If you want to leave your house and savings to your children, gift those assets to them long before it becomes an issue. Past 70 start transferring everything you can out of your name and into theirs.

Regarding your last paragraph I completely agree. This is somrthing all my family plan to do. Gift, gift, gift as far in advance as you can.

[Tom4784]

It's a terrible and needless policy that's only amplified in it's terribleness by how vague it is.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Thatcher was a saint compared to this lot. The problem is, those who did well under Thatcher, the ones who bought their council houses for a pittance and sold them years later for a kings ransom, will always be nostalgic about the Tory party.

My problem with Thatcher is that she honestly never cared that she treated the North like ****.

I don't live up North, and hell I wasn't even born when Thatcher was in charge, but I honestly can't get over that she basically allowed those Mining Strikes to go on knowing that the workers were starving and tired because they was being mistreated, and people honestly think that Labour or Lib Dems are worse than this cold hearted party? But I'll agree with you that the current Tory party is worse as I'm currently living through their period and they're effecting me.

[Kazanne]

Well the queen is a wealthy pensioner, she needs it doesn't she ? people did say ALL pensioners should get it regardless.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Well the queen is a wealthy pensioner, she needs it doesn't she ? people did say ALL pensioners should get it regardless.

Good Tory logic there

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Withano

Good Tory logic there

It's true

[DemolitionRed]

NOW it makes sense! ‘Dementia tax’ is an INSURANCE SCAM

This was written by Trish Cambell and published in Vox Political http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/0...nsurance-scam/

“The Conservatives will attempt to soften the blow by promising that pensioners will not have to sell their homes to pay for their care costs while they or a surviving partner are alive. Instead, ‘products will be available’ allowing the elderly to pay by extracting equity from their homes, which will be recovered at a later date when they die or sell their residence.

“I have just seen this post online:

“‘People need to read the small print associated with this because its a lot nastier than it looks.

“I work in the City. The insurance industry was approached by the Government several months ago with the aim of creating a new market for a new product.

“This arrangement is a culmination of those discussions. You wont have to sell your house PROVIDED that you purchase an insurance product to cover your social care. The “premiums” would be recovered from the equity after the house has been sold and the Insurance company will have a lien on the house and can force a sale if it wants to. So your offspring cant keep it on the market for long in order to get the best price.

“The real kicker in this is that in order to encourage the industry to market these products the government guaranteed that there would be no cap on the premiums.

“This was in some ways “atonement” for Osborne’s destruction of the highly lucrative annuities market. This means that the premiums could be up to (and including) the entire remaining equity in the property after the government has taken its cut. Companies will be falling over themselves to get their snouts in this trough.

“In short your offspring and relatives could get absolutely nothing from your estate.

“If you buy one of these products you need to read the small print very very carefully indeed because there will be some real dogs on the market.

“I suspect that this is another financial scandal waiting to happen, but by the time it does May will be long gone.'”

[Cherie]

Work hard buy your home, then we will relieve you of it so your kids will have to work even harde

[smudgie]

So pensioners in care homes now can only keep £23k, but they will be entitled to keep over 4 times as much in future. Good thing.
The difference now is that home care can be deducted from property as well, not so good.
I suppose it depends how much care and for how long you need it.
I can see this losing the Tories plenty of support.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by smudgie

So pensioners in care homes now can only keep £23k, but they will be entitled to keep over 4 times as much in future. Good thing.
The difference now is that home care can be deducted from property as well, not so good.
I suppose it depends how much care and for how long you need it.
I can see this losing the Tories plenty of support.

Do you honestly think they are going to pay for you if you have 100k in the bank, that will gradually be reduced to 0 mark my words, the state aren't going to pay a penny more than they need to...100k is the sweetener, it's not set in stone and even if it were just like the triple lock is easily reversed

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Cherie

May hasn't decreed what exactly constitutes a "better off" pensioner though has she, at what level of income do you think they should lose this benefit as a matter of interest? And when she does reveal it AFTER she is elected we will see how close you were just for fun of course

Any ideas of a figure yet Parm?

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Work hard buy your home, then we will relieve you of it so your kids will have to work even harde

I have never agreed with this policy. One of the pleasures in life is knowing we can pass on an inheritance to our children to makes their lives easier. It's a big part of owning your own home. I bet the politicians won't deny themselves and their own children this right.

People work hard to save a deposit, pay their mortgage and their taxes, whilst some others don't and perhaps spend it on other things instead, only to have to pay for their care whilst those that don't get it free. It should come out of their taxes.

For those that don't bother saving though - they should beware they will undoubtedly end up in a right dump. The cheap local authority homes are not good. I have seen some of them - awful places.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have never agreed with this policy. One of the pleasures in life is knowing we can pass on an inheritance to our children to makes their lives easier. It's a big part of owning your own home. I bet the politicians won't deny themselves and their own children this right.

People work hard to save a deposit, pay their mortgage and their taxes, whilst some others don't and perhaps spend it on other things instead, only to have to pay for their care whilst those that don't get it free. It should come out of their taxes.

For those that don't bother saving though - they should beware they will undoubtedly end up in a right dump. The cheap local authority homes are not good. I have seen some of them - awful places.

It's literally awful, where's the incentive for anyone to get on the property ladder

[Kizzy]

How does this fit in with the free at the point of use concept?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have never agreed with this policy. One of the pleasures in life is knowing we can pass on an inheritance to our children to makes their lives easier. It's a big part of owning your own home. I bet the politicians won't deny themselves and their own children this right.

People work hard to save a deposit, pay their mortgage and their taxes, whilst some others don't and perhaps spend it on other things instead, only to have to pay for their care whilst those that don't get it free. It should come out of their taxes.

For those that don't bother saving though - they should beware they will undoubtedly end up in a right dump. The cheap local authority homes are not good. I have seen some of them - awful places.

It wouldn't surprise me that when the money runs out people will be moved to cheaper homes

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

How does this fit in with the free at the point of use concept?

It doesn't apply to care for the elderly unless they have no money.

[Cherie]

So they have literally covered all bases, hand over property early to your kids you will end up in a ****hole, spend spend spend...ditto...hang on to your home if you are unlucky enough to live beyond your savings/house value...you're moving into the ****hole ...what a way to treat the elderly

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

It doesn't apply to care for the elderly unless they have no money.

They will lay claim to their home should they have one... Is this how they get around the 'free at the point of use'... it only cost you when you die, then they will seize your property, as in your families inheritance that you worked all you life for with your TAXED income?

[waterhog]

thinking you are right - we need a cashless society as they get it all anyway

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I have never agreed with this policy. One of the pleasures in life is knowing we can pass on an inheritance to our children to makes their lives easier. It's a big part of owning your own home. I bet the politicians won't deny themselves and their own children this right.

People work hard to save a deposit, pay their mortgage and their taxes, whilst some others don't and perhaps spend it on other things instead, only to have to pay for their care whilst those that don't get it free. It should come out of their taxes.

For those that don't bother saving though - they should beware they will undoubtedly end up in a right dump. The cheap local authority homes are not good. I have seen some of them - awful places.

As someone already pointed out ,just gift your house to your kids earlier on, then no one can touch it ,as it's not yours.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

As someone already pointed out ,just gift your house to your kids earlier on, then no one can touch it ,as it's not yours.

It's not that simple Kazanne. At the moment you have to have done that several years ago or they can still take it.

I have no doubt they will increase that time to something ridiculous like 20/30 years and probably stop people doing it altogether somehow.

I plan to do this but just hope they don't increase that time limit too far.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

It's not that simple Kazanne. At the moment you have to have done that several years ago or they can still take it.

I have no doubt they will increase that time to something ridiculous like 20/30 years and probably stop people doing it altogether somehow.

I plan to do this but just hope they don't increase that time limit too far.

Oh right,shows how much I know

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

It's not that simple Kazanne. At the moment you have to have done that several years ago or they can still take it.

I have no doubt they will increase that time to something ridiculous like 20/30 years and probably stop people doing it altogether somehow.

I plan to do this but just hope they don't increase that time limit too far.

The obvious workaround, if you have the funds, is to actually SELL your property to a child as soon as they are responsible adults... but give them the money to buy it (so effectively buying it from yourself, but in their name) so that it's not just signed over but actually sold.

The other option, if you're not sentimentally attached to the property, is to actually sell it and use the funds to buy non-traceable assets like bearer bonds / gold / rare coins / art / other collectibles or I guess, these days, bitcoin? And give those to your offspring with no papertrail.