What's Boiling Your Pi$$ Today?

Scrappy

Legendary Knight
My mother following her fall a couple of weeks ago, now needs to be looked after in a care home. She owns her own home, so we came up with a plan to get the maximum from her assets, so as to provide care for as many years as possible. This plan involved releasing some equity out of her house, and then renting the house out to generate an income. However I've just found out that you can't release equity from a property if you are not living in it, even if it is to provide for care 🤬 - What an absolute disgrace, the system fucking you over again, to strip you of your assets as quickly as possible :mad:
 

Sarky B’stard

Legendary Knight
My mother following her fall a couple of weeks ago, now needs to be looked after in a care home. She owns her own home, so we came up with a plan to get the maximum from her assets, so as to provide care for as many years as possible. This plan involved releasing some equity out of her house, and then renting the house out to generate an income. However I've just found out that you can't release equity from a property if you are not living in it, even if it is to provide for care 🤬 - What an absolute disgrace, the system fucking you over again, to strip you of your assets as quickly as possible :mad:
Take a deep breath.... it's not 'the system' so much as rational protection. A property with a sitting tenant with rights of occupation/security of tenure is worth less than one with vacant possession. You can usually repossess your own home to re-occupy it but otherwise there needs to be a breach of tenancy.

So why lend on a property you can't necessarily recover your money from? It's as much financial sense as 'the system'.

Have you run through your options with an IFA? And ask who/how much commission he gets on each deal!
 

Scrappy

Legendary Knight
Take a deep breath.... it's not 'the system' so much as rational protection. A property with a sitting tenant with rights of occupation/security of tenure is worth less than one with vacant possession. You can usually repossess your own home to re-occupy it but otherwise there needs to be a breach of tenancy.

So why lend on a property you can't necessarily recover your money from? It's as much financial sense as 'the system'.

Have you run through your options with an IFA? And ask who/how much commission he gets on each deal!

But you can borrow money for buy to let, or rent out your own mortgaged home (with agreement), only obviously because of my mothers age this is not a possibility. This seems to me to be a government imposed restriction, specifically relating to equity release and care homes, from the little I have read so far. 🤔 You would think there would be more help for people who are not sponging off the state and providing for themselves. Typical scenario, if you have no assets the government pays, but if you have more than about £23,000 in assets then there is no help whatsoever, and they force you to sell any assets you do have, so much for working hard and saving. :mad:
 

Sarky B’stard

Legendary Knight
Sounds like the snag is 'who owns' because your Mum will never re-occupy. You may be able to leverage the equity if it goes to her kids and there may be tax advantages too in an 'inter vivos disposition'. Presumably the Financial Conduct Authority have set rules to prevent the possibility of any negative equity arising?

There's an underlying principle in much English law that property is treated as cash and any investment is a temporary vehicle pending its re-conversion to cash..... certainly applies to joint ownership ..... It's why I suggest an IFA . There may be a mechanism to avoid having to sell while generating income but it begs the question whether you want the house itself or the value wrapped up in it. And I don't discount your mother's feelings or desire to maximise inheritance.

Sometimes it comes down to what you actually want rather than what you think you want. I know with my own parents it wasn't quite we first thought.
 

Scrappy

Legendary Knight
Sounds like the snag is 'who owns' because your Mum will never re-occupy. You may be able to leverage the equity if it goes to her kids and there may be tax advantages too in an 'inter vivos disposition'. Presumably the Financial Conduct Authority have set rules to prevent the possibility of any negative equity arising?

There's an underlying principle in much English law that property is treated as cash and any investment is a temporary vehicle pending its re-conversion to cash..... certainly applies to joint ownership ..... It's why I suggest an IFA . There may be a mechanism to avoid having to sell while generating income but it begs the question whether you want the house itself or the value wrapped up in it. And I don't discount your mother's feelings or desire to maximise inheritance.

Sometimes it comes down to what you actually want rather than what you think you want. I know with my own parents it wasn't quite we first thought.

All her assets were previously in a trust, that we only recently managed to get out of, literally weeks before the solicitors managing it went bust, some poor souls had been trying to get their relations assets back for a couple of years even before they went pop. The solicitors were McClures in Glasgow, if you want to read some horror stories check them out.

Victims of McClures solicitors

 
Last edited:

Sarky B’stard

Legendary Knight
All her assets were previously in a trust, that we only recently managed to get out of, literally weeks before the solicitors managing it went bust, some poor soles had been trying to get their relations assets back for a couple of years even before they went pop. The solicitors were McClures on Glasgow, if you want to read some horror stories check them out.

It's probably the lot that fired Sturgeon! They went into admin a year ago?

Family Protection Trusts in Scotland have been reviewed but the SNP shower still haven't yet fully enacted the suggested reforms. It's a specialist area but blame Westminster! This is where we still are:

 
Top