Whats The Point In Buying And Owning A Property?

[renegadefm]

Just recently lost My dad. He worked hard all his life and passed away at 91.

But worked hard to buy the family home. Poor Mum is faced with having to leave the family home as she needs someone with her 24/7 something we are too stretched to provide, as we all got jobs etc ourselves.

So this will mean the family home will have to be sold to pay the care home for my Mum to move into. 

The issue from my point of view, is what was the point of owning a home, for it all to be gone towards a care home?

I'm pretty sure when Dad was younger he would have wanted to pass it onto me or sister to keep it in the family, but sadly now that won't happen. 

The way the system is set up is all wrong because if we knew then what we know now I would have had a mortgage and bought my home, and I'm pretty sure Dad wouldn't have either. 

If you rent a property theres less stress because if something needs fixing you contact the landlord. But I realise there are risks from renting too, for example the landlord might sell, and we could be terfed out. 

But what really is the point of owning a property, something that took a lifetime to purchase, only for it to be taken off you in a situation like we are faced with now? 

[douglas9401]

It's the British way, work until you drop then we'll have it all off you.

[barry1010]

Your parents probably paid off their mortgage years ago and have enjoyed a better standard of living not having rent to pay.  They have had security knowing they weren't going to be evicted by their landlord.

Your mother will have a greater choice of care home as a self-funder, not moved many miles from friends and family.

[renegadefm]

douglas9401, 

Thats basically it yes. 

But if you don't own a property or don't have savings, the government pays for the care home. 

Surely this country is upside down. 

I really can't see the point in ownership of a property, if you can't pass it down to your siblings. 

[renegadefm]

barry1010, 

Dad probably spend most of his adult life paying for the home before the mortgage was finish. 

Plus sister wants Mum to be with her, or in a home near her I she say which is now an hours drive for me, compared to before I could even walk there. 

I'm still struggling to see and positives from this at the moment. 

A property worth nearly 300 thousand, will be sold to fund the care home. Is that right? 

[barry1010]

I wouldn't want to be dependent on the whims of a landlord for my home, nor rely on the council for my care. 

 

[barry1010]

Why should people struggling to get by fund your mother's care when she has assets of £300k plus? You just resent losing any inheritance you may have got.

 

[ToraToraTora]

The main aim for me was so I didn't have to pay any Burton.

[douglas9401]

Oooh! A rush to judgement.

[DDIL]

I believe the care home charges are capped to a certain %.

Not everyone can get a mortgage or have a job that pays enough.

If your parents are lucky enough to own a house why should the government cover her fees so that you get a free home?

[Barmaid]

Well your father could have left it to you subject to your mother having the right to live in it for as long as she wished.   If he only owned half he could have done that with his half.  

The home does not need to be sold straight away since you can enter a deferred payment arrangement in the local authority which will only be enforced on your mother's death.

And why shouldn't your mother pay for her own care?

[barry1010]

If you're lucky your sister will look after her so you can pocket the cash

[Untitled]

renting is much more expensive long term than owning. it's a good example of how having capital can make life cheaper. 
 

i'm sorry for your loss but the benefit your dad got from buying his house was living in it. now hopefully someone else will. 

[ToraToraTora]

The thing is most of us initially either rent the house or rent the money to buy a house. The latter is better as that at least you have control of the place and will own it out right one day. There are many ways to avoid having to sell it for care fees but even if you don't it's a lot cheaper in the long run.

[ladybirder]

I am finding it increasingly hard to look after myself as I live on my own.  Once I no longer have my little dog with me I think I shall want to move into a care home.  So Yes, I would expect to pay for said care home with the money I get from selling my current home.  Why should taxpayers pay when I have money in the bank?

[barry1010]

If your father was born about the same time as me, most mortgages were for 25 years. We paid off our mortgage in our mid 40s so have really benefited from buying our own home.  We would still be paying rent now had we not.

[ToraToraTora]

I know a chap that's about 75 and he's lived in the same house since he was a kid. Rented the whole time he's now paying about 1200pm. He must have bought the drum 10 times over in his life time yet he doesn't own a brick. Ok so he'll probably get free care home but I'd say he's already paid it anyway!

[Old_Geezer]

We have a health service. Care is a health issue. It needs to be included. It's hardly some cosmetic nonsense or a desire, it's about being able to continue.

 

If the present budget isn't enough, either collect more tax, or find savings elsewhere; like no free health tourism, not spending a fortune on illegal immigrant hotel rooms, etc..

[Old_Geezer]

If your 75 yo chap rented he hasn't paid for any of it. He paid for use of it. And if it was council property the likelihood is that it was less than the market rate so has been in reverse gear all that time.

[New Judge]

"...only for it to be taken off you in a situation like we are faced with now?"

Nobody is taking anything off anybody.

Your Mum is selling something she has but doesn't need (the house) to pay for something she needs but doesn't have (her care). Many people have to do that. 

Whilst I understand your point that those who pee their money up the wall (or who simply were not in a position to buy a property) will have their care paid for if they need it, that is a somewhat different argument. What you are suggesting is that your Mum should be allowed to keep the house she no longer needs whilst somebody else (the taxpayer) picks up the bill for the services she does now need. Don't you think that would be equally unfair?

How would you feel if, instead of the house, your Mum had £300,000 in the bank? SHould she be allowed to keep that whilst the taxpayer picks up the bill for her care?

[Old_Geezer]

Why should taxpayers pay ? One could use that argument for anything paid for out of public funds. It's because some things society ought not deny citizens out of simply humanity; so the public community pays into a kitty as insurance for all.