Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Care Home Fees - Hiding Assets Is Widespread


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 juvenal

juvenal

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,438 posts
  • Location:Dorset coast

Posted 26 February 2012 - 12:01 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-17147047

Only 16 out of 121 Councils make any check on the assets of people going into taxpayer funded care. Meanwhile the wealthy get Mum's assets out of sight with impunity, so they can inherit later.

What the **** is up with local councils?. Cutting jobs and services, and leaving this source of revenue untapped?

Surrey Council recovered the biggest sum, recouping more than 250,000 since 2009.


What a result in four years!!! Less than the price of one house!!!

And they were the most effective council!

5 Live Investigates Tonight at 9pm.
'And while I live, no fool or noble knave
Shall walk this world, in credit, to his grave..'

'The pension system has been a very nice gravy train for all of those involved except for those paying into it.'

'Let's see if we can get it for the asking price..' Kirstie Allsop

"Be under no illusion. You will not escape the net..." S'rAlan Sugar

Sex, drugs and sausage rolls...

The House of Lords: 'The Ermine Vermin....'

#2 MRMX9

MRMX9

    HPC Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,510 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 01:41 PM

As Leona Helmsley might put it 'We don't pay home care fees - only the little people pay home care fees'. I have a colleague at work whose elderly parents ended up incurring 250,000 in care fees before they died - all they owned was a modest house in south London which just about covered the costs when they died.

The 'squeezed middle' have to cough up as you cannot hide a modest terraced house - probably their only big 'asset'. However if you have millions in cash, shares, investments etc its much more difficult for councils to track it down. Westminster took nearly a decade just to track down Lady Porter's assets - and she owed them 15million!

But of course we cannot levy a mansion tax cos it might it all those destitute widows in 2m houses (you must have been pretty rich to buy a house worth that now in the first place!). Whereas in practice the vast majority paying it would be cash rich - many indeed foreign owners who pay little or no tax at all here.

Not sure what is to be done about it - but Cameron and Osborne won't do anything about it. Home care fees are a bit of pin money to their families.

#3 JJJ

JJJ

    HPC Regular

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 740 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 02:25 PM

Inheritance tax should be 100%, perhaps minus "items of little value in pounds that are of particular sentimental value to family". That'd sort this all right out and create a far better society.

Of course, the people who would have to implement this are those who benefit the most from inheritance, so it's juts a pipe-dream.

#4 Mrs Bear

Mrs Bear

    HPC Senior Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,661 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 05:08 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17147047

Only 16 out of 121 Councils make any check on the assets of people going into taxpayer funded care. Meanwhile the wealthy get Mum's assets out of sight with impunity, so they can inherit later.

What the **** is up with local councils?. Cutting jobs and services, and leaving this source of revenue untapped?

Surrey Council recovered the biggest sum, recouping more than 250,000 since 2009.


What a result in four years!!! Less than the price of one house!!!

And they were the most effective council!

5 Live Investigates Tonight at 9pm.


I'm sure this does happen, but how widespread is it really?

The great advantage of being self-funding is that you choose the care home, and you can choose the time. Social Services will just shove them anywhere that has a room available and will often only do this at all after some real crisis point has been reached, e.g. someone with dementia setting fire to the kitchen or the police have been called more than once because someone is wandering the streets in their nightie at two in the morning.

Not sure how many people who could afford to pay would let things get to crisis point before going down the CH route, just so they can plead relative poverty and let the state fund the bill.
It can be unbelievably stressful, esp. if dementia is involved. Unless you've had to cope with it, you simply can't imagine how hard it can be.

Personally I was very glad we had the 'luxury' of that choice and didn't have to rely on SS in their wisdom deciding when we had reached a point where we simply couldn't cope any more.
And that's twice now, mother and father in law.

#5 FrozenOut

FrozenOut

    HPC Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 938 posts
  • Location:Watford, Hertfordshire

Posted 26 February 2012 - 05:19 PM

Inheritance tax should be 100%, perhaps minus "items of little value in pounds that are of particular sentimental value to family". That'd sort this all right out and create a far better society.

Of course, the people who would have to implement this are those who benefit the most from inheritance, so it's juts a pipe-dream.


And I'm sure you'd hold this view if you had/have parents who were very well off / still alive and very well off
Dear Lord, Jesus, Buddah, Allah or can I just call you Joe?
I've got a lot of things to tell you and some things I gotta know,
I'm tired of hearing talk about this world's about to end,
If we can die together then why can't we all be friends?
I gotta know!
Hey, I gotta know!
So Mister can you tell me, gotta know!
Baby can you tell me, gotta know!
Whoooooooa oh oh I gotta know!
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, I gotta know!
Baby can you help me, gotta know!
I gotta know!

#6 M'lud

M'lud

    HPC Poster

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 05:31 PM

Inheritance tax should be 100%, perhaps minus "items of little value in pounds that are of particular sentimental value to family". That'd sort this all right out and create a far better society.

Of course, the people who would have to implement this are those who benefit the most from inheritance, so it's juts a pipe-dream.

Hear, hear, because giving more money to the state is a good idea isn't it?

#7 JJJ

JJJ

    HPC Regular

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 740 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 05:58 PM

And I'm sure you'd hold this view if you had/have parents who were very well off / still alive and very well off

One of them is, and has far, far more than I ever expect to have. I have principles. I don't base everything on personal greed. I am as surprised by this as everyone else appears to be.

Hear, hear, because giving more money to the state is a good idea isn't it?

I'd rather that than it go to people who didn't earn it. If you want to give something to someone else, you should have to actually hand it over.

Edited by JJJ, 26 February 2012 - 06:19 PM.


#8 Errol

Errol

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,433 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 06:03 PM

Inheritance tax should be 100%, perhaps minus "items of little value in pounds that are of particular sentimental value to family". That'd sort this all right out and create a far better society.

Of course, the people who would have to implement this are those who benefit the most from inheritance, so it's juts a pipe-dream.


Really? What would be the point of working?

Want to get paid for polls? Try YouGov


#9 JJJ

JJJ

    HPC Regular

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 740 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 06:05 PM

Really? What would be the point of working?


To buy food? To buy clothes? To buy shelter? To buy anything?

#10 M'lud

M'lud

    HPC Poster

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 06:56 PM

One of them is, and has far, far more than I ever expect to have. I have principles. I don't base everything on personal greed. I am as surprised by this as everyone else appears to be.


I'd rather that than it go to people who didn't earn it. If you want to give something to someone else, you should have to actually hand it over.

Not possible under the 7 years gift rule of the inland revenue. Anyway, why can't i choose the manner in which i give something away, why are you telling me how to give stuff away?

#11 Errol

Errol

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,433 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 07:43 PM

To buy food? To buy clothes? To buy shelter? To buy anything?


Not what motivates most people.

Want to get paid for polls? Try YouGov


#12 thombleached

thombleached

    HPC Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 694 posts
  • Location:Lichfield

Posted 26 February 2012 - 08:04 PM

Not what motivates most people.

I can see injin now chomping at the bit to post a response and leave his 40k legacy in tatters

#13 erranta

erranta

    Knows he doesn't know

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,716 posts
  • Location:Norwich
  • About Me:Too old for another mortgage

    - fighting slavery and serfdom by despotic 'false' leaders of mock-democracy, their mega-corps and corporatism for the next ignorant generation

Posted 26 February 2012 - 08:06 PM

Inheritance tax should be 100%, perhaps minus "items of little value in pounds that are of particular sentimental value to family". That'd sort this all right out and create a far better society.

Of course, the people who would have to implement this are those who benefit the most from inheritance, so it's juts a pipe-dream.


The Rich off-shore all their land holdings and Stately Mansions in bogus Ltd Companies in Caymans Belize Virgin Islands etc

The fekkers have manipulated the law so they don't even have to declare the owner when they buy and sell huge estates in England Scotland avoiding Hundreds of millions in tax a year (all death duties cos their Mansions are owned off shore in "Trusts" & "they ONLY reside in them" whilst alive)

Ditto Multi-Million Mansions in London
No owner declared = no council tax paid or buying selling CGT taxes etc

Even Royal family members ALL have off-shore tax haven accounts

"The rich man's wealth is his strong city, and as an high wall in his own conceit." Proverbs Ch18 v.11

Whistle Blow!
You know 'IT' makes sense!

Exploitation & corrupt Government / Elite Rule? They have nowhere to hide if we all EXPOSE their corruption!


"Most propaganda is NOT designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give MORAL COWARDS an excuse not to think at all!"


#14 JJJ

JJJ

    HPC Regular

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 740 posts

Posted 26 February 2012 - 08:06 PM

Not what motivates most people.

Really? Freaky stuff. The only reason I go to work is to be able to buy things. If I had everything I wanted for free, I'd be unemployed forever.

Anyway, why can't i choose the manner in which i give something away, why are you telling me how to give stuff away?

Society runs on rules. Some rules we'll like, some we won't. I say we should be able to give away whatever we like to whomever we like when we're alive; when we're dead, we're not giving anything away. We're dead; anything we owned when we died now has no owner. The only question is what to do with all the stuff we used to own.

#15 interestrateripoff

interestrateripoff

    Carry on banking.....

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 46,109 posts
  • Location:Ponzi Land

Posted 26 February 2012 - 08:11 PM

Not possible under the 7 years gift rule of the inland revenue. Anyway, why can't i choose the manner in which i give something away, why are you telling me how to give stuff away?


Yep you need to play the rich at their own game and sign away the asset, then the house cannot be sold.

The proles have to try and hide assets like the rich.
Proof that Brown had repeated IMF / OECD / BIS warnings over house prices and did nothing!!!
Looting: The Economic Underworld Of Bankruptcy For Profit
The exponential growth of debt and the unsustainability of debt
The logic of HPI @ 10% YoY means your 100k house would be worth 1.38bn in 100 years
Paying down my mortgage with money found on the street

It's time to sue the Bank of England / Federal Reserve for GROSS NEGLIGENCE
If DEBT is the problem REPAYMENT is the solution or you default

"Northern unemployment is an acceptable price to pay for curbing southern inflation" Eddie George former Governor of the Bank of England

New digest on the credit crisis and economy Part2 Part 3

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users