Donate SIGN UP

Hiding Assets

Avatar Image
kirstybeebee | 20:13 Wed 26th Jul 2017 | Law
44 Answers
There was recently a post about whether you could sell your home to children to later avoid having to pay care home fees. Well putting the house aside, I wondered about protecting your assets. As far as I am aware, if you have a stash of cash, you somehow need to get it out of the banking system otherwise the authorities can quite easily find it. putting it into the stock market or buying premium bonds won't keep it hidden because they can find money that has been invested like that.

So to get cash out of the banking system and away from the authorities, it would hardly be recommended to take the cash out of the bank and Stuff it under a mattress, so what about buying something valuable like jewelry or antiques maybe then keep them in a safety deposit box? Is there any way the authorities could get hold of something like that and claim it back towards paying care costs?
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 44rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by kirstybeebee. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Aah, I see! All the more reason for refusing to disclose assets mentioned in Wills to the local authorities. They do not have the power to insist that this information is disclosed. The sentimental value of items left to children in Wills often far exceeds monetary value and Councils do not have the authority to insist that family heirlooms are sold to reimburse funding no matter how insistent they are that they can do so.

You and your siblings remain the only source of information regarding your parents assests as far as the local authority is concerned. They can only work on the information you and your siblings provide them with when assessing the fees due. Left too their own devices, they will strip you all of every penny they think they can lay their hands on. Please don't be fooled or overwhelmed by their powers.
Question Author
That's interesting information MTbowles, particularly the point you mention about "the sentimental value of items left to children in Wills often far exceeds monetary value and Councils do not have the authority to insist that family heirlooms are sold to reimburse".

Just going back to the original question I asked which was about maybe buying something valuable to then pass on that the authority can't touch rather than just having a stash of cash that will be taken to pay for care, as in my parents case!
MTBowels, that is nonsense.

Firstly a Will once Probate is granted is a public document.

Secondly, any creditor of the deceased can compel the executors to liquidate any assets to pay a debt that has accrued in the deceased's lifetime.

Faiure to disclose assets in order to obtain funding would be fraud.
kirstbeebee- it is only the residual value of the estate that can be paid out to beneficiaries in a will. Debts to creditors have to be paid first and the council is a creditor will try to claim the money back. That is how things are.
The sooner we have legalised euthanasia the better. Then there's no need to go into a care home if you're worried about the fees ...
Question Author
That's interesting Barmaid. We started paying for the care my parents received even before they went into a care home as they had carers visiting their own home every day until this just became unmanageable.

Once they went into the home as residents we continued to pay, I'm not sure how it all worked as my brother handled everything as he was given power of attourney. He knew we would have to pay as my parents owned their home and that they had savings. Whilst they were in the home my brother put the house up for sale and it was sold.

When my parents died, we had paid for everything so I assume that the authorities didn't come looking at the will as they had no need to.
Well if all the fees had been paid, the LA wouldnt have had any interest at all.

Th key document when looking at charging is "Charging for Residential Accommodation Guidance" (CRAG). It sets out in detail when charges can be levied and what assets are taken into account.
The answer here is 'spend it' don't try to save. Spend every penny on decent holidays in luxury hotels , good food in top restaurants, a top of the range car. You have earned it so take advantage of it.
And that, Eddie, is the best and most sensible bit of advice I have seen on this thread..........(well apart from the luxury car). Yes - spend it!!!!
Yes don't bother with a car take taxis everywhere,once it's gone no one can take it back, you get the same care and you will have enjoyed the fruits of your lifetimes work.
Question Author
'spend it' don't try to save. That was the view my father in law took. I remember him saying on numerous occasions "I might as well spend it as I can't take it with me". He certainly enjoyed a good life!
Barmaid, I suggest you read my my previous posts with some assiduousness before telling me I'm talking nonsense.

Before you start discussing fraud and suchlike, I'd refer you to my earlier comment regarding a discussion I had with the local authority when I said I wished to take up the deferred payment route. My experience having spoken to others in a similar position is that local authorities are reluctant to disclose that they can offer the next-of-kin a deferred payment agreement if they request it. Yes, it is amongst the legalese present on the document that the next-of-kin has to sign following the admission of their relative to a home, but they prefer not to inform the relatives simply because of the cost to them of administering such an agreement.

In my case, I was initially told that the local authority did not operate such a scheme and all payments had to made monthly from income received by the resident. Given that the cost of residency is anything between £500 and £1000 per week, the impracticality of settling the fees by this route soon becomes apparent when the resident has no capital and relies on state income. I'm sure you'll agree with this.

I'm grateful for you comments regarding creditors forcing executors to liquidate any assets, however once again, you've misunderstood. I had an agreement in place to defer the costs until after my mum's death. Due to the agreement, the local authority had to wait for payment in the weeks following that sad occassion. I had informed them that the only capital assets were in the form of my mother's home and they would have to wait until it was sold.

My Solicitor advised me that the local authority could jump up and down as much as they wished, but they could NOT force me to sell my mum's home. I do appreciate your opinion appears to give the contrary view.

The Will had absolutely nothing to do with these events and our solicitor advised me to seek a POA quite early on after my mum had been put into residential care to protect her assets. Throughout the time she was in the home, around three years, I was harrassed at least monthly by the council team responsible for the collection of the fees despite the deferred payment agreement having been in place since around the third month following her admission. They even phoned me one day to tell me they would liquidate my own assets and officially rescind the POA.

how on earth can a council tell you you that they are going to rescind a POA?
utter carp from the council imo
I instructed an estate agent/auctioneer to sell my mum's house one month after her death. The intervening period had been used to clear the property contents. The auctioneer had the property up for auction online after a further two months and the property was sold six months following her death.

The point is that I made only nominal initial payments to the local authority for the first few months and they were forced to wait for full payment until around 44 months after her admission (The three years she was in care, the six months it took to sell the property and two months before the money was released to me by the solicitor). As I said, my solicitors advised me that the local authority had no means of forcing me to expediate the process and it turns out, he was correct.
MT
Barmaid is a chancery QC and so by definition is always right

s/o has to say it - this time it is me
I know alberqerty. To be honest, I was waiting for them to threaten to take my first born as well as send the plague of locusts! It just goes to show how threatening these people can be when they claim that they are protecting public funding.

At one point, I was in tears listening to these threats and asked the woman if she would like to be treated in this manner if her nearest and dearest was in a home. She had the gall to tell me she would find it acceptable.
The Council can't force a sale while the resident is alive but if the person in the care home has sufficient savings the Care Home/Council will expect the payments to be mad efrom savings rathe rthan waiting until the resident dies and the house can be sold
I was not challenging opinion Peter. I leave that to Barmaid and her colleagues within or outside Court. I merely discussed what I had been told, which was proved correct in my case.
There were no savings fiction-factory. The only asset was the property.
I think that Mother Theresa tried to address this anomaly Kirsty, but was ambushed by the BBC during the election campaign.

21 to 40 of 44rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Hiding Assets

Answer Question >>