Home joint ownership

Discussion in 'Just Talk' started by Ryluer, Oct 31, 2014.

  1. Wry, there was a case a few months back where a mum gave all her money to charity and it was successfully challenged after her death by her daughter (try a surf for this as it's interesting).

    I have to say, my gut feelings were with the mum in that case as she was apparently quite sane and her daughter a bit of a 'waster' (forgive me if I got that wrong), and her decision was based on that she didn't believe her daughter deserved anything and would only continue her wasteful life with her money. But the judge still ruled that the daughter was entitled to the money as she was in dire straights and sort of 'needed' the money to live on.

    Wry, I would suggest - pretty categorically - that your dad is entitled to a goodly amount, perhaps half or perhaps it all. Certainly the fact she's gifted it all to charity should be easily challenged as it should be fairly easy to prove she wasn't 'corpus mentis'. This would be easier to prove if your dad had kept any record of how she treated him - has he? What could help here is if you could show - with good certainty - that your dad had called for your help on specific dates 'cos she was making his life intolerable.

    Based on your tale in this thread, I would say you have a pretty solid case. But you will need a decent solicitor.

    One fly in t'ointment is that her 'two wild sons' - who will also want her money, and who's testimony could be very useful to your dad in showing she was 'nuts' - will likely be hard to manage.

    If they are sensible, they will be able to come to some arrangement with your dad (I mean, your dad's solicitors) to agree what to do - eg: 50% to your dad (as he was the rightful spouse) and 25% each to them. As an example. But I fear they will want it all - and end up losing it all.

    Wry, from what you say, your dad is 'entitled'. But it needs handling carefully - with professional advice. Just because the witch has signed it all over to charity doesn't mean it will go there.

    However, there is another issue - a moral one - here; What does your dad actually need now? I would suggest it's chust enough to keep him looked after until his demise. No more.

    What do this "woman's" sons deserve? F'all. Really, nothing. People need to get it into their heads that they are not 'entitled' to their parent's money.

    The parent's money belongs to the parents. To look after them. They 'earned' it - they can spend it. No-one else is actually entitled to it.

    Except - the remaining partner of that couple should be able to live the rest of their lives - as far as possible - the way they lived it as a couple.

    After that, now't.

    It is no-one else's money.
  2. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    What about the tax man? Is a share not his money? His entitlement?
    She forked out £100k to the tax man last year. He went back 20 years on her. I reckon she got off light. So far anyrode!
    I would have thought, had she given more money away to her children then the tax man would be getting less?
  3. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    Why work all your life and pay taxes and at the same time save up, just too have all those savings used up to cater for your welfare?
    I thought the taxes you paid through out your life catered for your welfare in ole age?
  4. Coloumb

    Coloumb Well-Known Member

    Huh? It's his Dad not him?
  5. Ok, then - 'based on Wry's tale in this thread, his dad has a pretty solid case.'.

    Happy now? Yea pedantic twit :)

    As far as Wry himself is concerned, he is owed nothing. Like every other offspring in this wonderful world.

    Happy New Year.
    Coloumb likes this.
  6. The taxes you pay are for 'running' this wonderful country. (And it is. And we are very lucky.)

    The NI you pay is to provide you with the basic/minimum level of pension and/or care in your retirement.

    If 'you' want guaranteed quality of care, then 'you' need to add to that amount. If that requires selling 'your' house, for example, then so be it; it is 'your' house, and 'your' house only.

    It is not 'your' offspring's entitlement. It is not inheritance. It is not for passing on to 'your' future generations.

    It is no-one's house but 'yours'. So 'you' need to sell it if 'you' need the money to live comfortably.

    From what you say in your posts above, your dad should have no issue whatsoever in getting more than enough money to enable him to live out the rest of his life in supreme comfort.

    He was married to this witch, er, lady. He is entitled. (Unless someone can prove he was a scam artist only in the marriage for the money.)

    If he (or you) doesn't want to pursue this very simple and obvious course of action, then why should anyone else help to pay for keeping him in care, over and above what he is entitled to from the State?
  7. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    How can you live comfortably by selling your home? You mean live on the street?
    A person who spends their life on welfare and pays rent provided by welfare payments and has nothing will receive the same level of care of someone who has had their home stolen by the government to pay for their care.
    So who is more entitled to a persons estate when they go into a care home?

    Well imo its the nearest and dearest family. Not a corrupt government that has opened the borders to all and sundry and cannot even provide flood defences for their own people.

    This situation where the government can now steal a persons home to pay for their care has been brought about in recent years by left wing socialist liberals.
    If its one thing I will ensure, it is that my farmland and property will be signed over to my family and taxpayers will pick up the tab for any care that I need, just the same as they pick up the tab for the lifetime welfare spongers and foreign nationals who enter this country to milk the corrupt system.

    All my dads estate was signed over years ago to avoid someone like cruella fleecing him.
    The irony now is that if he did go into a care home taxpayers will pick up the tab. As they should.
  8. And this is where Wry and I part...

    You are happy to cite a tiny minority of 'scrounging immigrants' or 'welfare layabouts' or whatever, when that is all they are - a teeny tiny minority. But, hey, use that to try and justify all your own personal tax-evasion and manipulation.

    And then you also have the audacity to admit that your dad signed over all his possessions so's a manipulative woman couldn't get her (rightful) hands on it, whilst bemoaning that this is exactly what's now being done to him...

    Couldn't make it up.

    Good luck, Wry, with whatever you try.

    You great big christian, you... :rolleyes:
  9. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    So a woman that my dad marries has more right to his estate than I do. LMAO.

    I mean who says so? Who decrees such nonsense?
  10. Yes.

    The marriage partner has rights to t'other's estate. It's what marriage is all about.

    It's also so that, should a couple break up, each partner should be able to continue in the manner to which they were accustomed.

    Up to a point.

    That's why there's solicitors and judges and all sorts to try and work out if one partner was trying it on or anyfink else. Or if the balance is reasonable.

    Y'know - the very laws that will hopefully help your own dad sort out his current dilemma.

    These are laws for a good reason.

    A completely different matter is the self-sufficient offspring. Ie - the grown-ups who have left home. Y'know, adults. Like you.

    They have no, none, zero, zitchy-zitch rights to their parent's money.

    Absobludylootely none.

    How dare you think for a second you have any rights to your dad's estate? Over than the rights of the woman he married?
  11. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    Well you see, heres the thing you see.. I do. No matter what U or any else says. My Dads estate was all farmland. And no one, absolute no else could have it. Even if a judge in a court of law decreed so.
  12. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    When my Dad put up one of his farms for sale my brother stopped the sale. Simples.
    He now owns it. A catholic was trying to buy it which didn't help either. Blood is spilled over land.
    You don't have a clue mate.
  13. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    No they don't.
  14. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    Marriage is a mugs game. And there's no shortage of mugs around.
  15. joinerjohn1

    joinerjohn1 Screwfix Select

    My dad bought his bungalow in 1968 for £4000. He paid the mortgage, gave me food and shelter till 1979. Mum died in 1981 and some years later dad re-married. I was genuinely happy for him. (even though other family members could see "their inheritance" slipping through their greedy fingers) He sold the house a few years ago and bought a 2 bedroom bungalow. (downsized and at least he's not as far from me now) If he passes before my stepmum, I firmly believe I'm owed nothing. He worked for what he's got, I didn't work for what my dad has, so have no reasonable claim to anything of his.

    When I was working in a nursing home, many relatives accepted that they had to sell their parent's home to pay for their care (having struggled for far too long looking after them) Bloody sad situation. We had one resident come to stay and she had two visitors every day. I thought these visitors were her son/daughter (wife/husband) It transpired however that these visitors were in fact , her next door neighbours, who had power of attorney over her financial affairs. They complained about almost everything. Trying to overrule doctors decisions at every step of the way. They kept saying she'd be better looked after in hospital. At one meeting with the manager they said that her care was costing them a fortune. :eek:Manager quickly reminded them that "Her care isn't costing you anything as the lady in question is self funding." Went down like a lead balloon.... Transpired that the lady had left everything (including her 4 bed house, contents and car to the neighbours, as she had no other relatives at all... Greedy b'stards couldn't wait for her to die. We did get in touch with the Office of Public Guardianship raising our concerns, as did Social Services, but they couldn't over-ride the will, once the lady had passed away.
    I must say if I saw this couple in the street, I think I'd go out of my way to punch them both firmly in the face. Utter b'stards the pair of them.
  16. Farmland is different, Wry. Priority is in keeping it as working farmland if there is still a call for it.

    Everything else you said is barlocks.

  17. Thank you for that, JJ. You have summed it all up absolutely perfectly.

    Your parent's 'job' is to bring you up as best they can so you will be as successful and as happy as you can be in life. That's it. Some manage this, some not so well.

    My own parents are long gorn, but my wife's parents are still alive and well - and fretting over how to pass on their house and wee bit of cash to their two daughters. At the same time, we're trying to tell them to go on bludy cruises and have a good time - all they own is theirs and no-one else's.

    The only way either my wife or her sis would have a 'moral' entitlement to their parent's house is if they personally look after them in their old age. And only because they'd want to do this - not to gain an extra house. As soon as they go in to a 'home', their savings - and house should be sold to make their remaining days as comfy as possible - if that money allows them to afford a better private home, so be it.

    If my wife or sis didn't want this caring responsibility (and I wouldn't condemn anybody who honestly said "Sorry - my life is too busy, I don't have the time or will to do this") then they need to accept that the house their parents own should be sold and the proceeds used to make the rest of their lives as pleasant and comfy as possible.

    IT IS THEIR MONEY - no-one else's.

    JJ, that's a sad - but all too typical - case regarding that old lady in the home. Power of Attorney is meant to involve more than one person who knows the lady well, so that her best interests are met. It is very serious (a crime, I believe) if anyone acts obviously to their own potential benefit instead. That should be reported.

    I bet that neighbouring couple would happily call themselves 'christians'... :rolleyes:
  18. Ryluer

    Ryluer Well-Known Member

    Why not "muslims" or hindus or God forbid atheists?
    Are Christians the only greedy people on earth?

    OOh yeah I nearly forgot, silly me. Christians are easy targets for the atheist left wing rabble to attack.
  19. FatHands

    FatHands Well-Known Member

    JJ - must be hard for you to see that in your job mate. Pair of barstewards as you say. It reminds me of a street my aunty used to live in where apparently a gardener/handyman had befriended old dears all of which had left everything to him in their will and apparently had several houses left to him.

  20. 'Silly you' indeed, Wry.

    Why do I pick on christians? 'Cos they're the ones I know best, and they count you amongst their flock...


    And I know many to be quite hypocritical in their daily dealings; The first to condemn. The most punitive. The most two-faced. The least sympathetic to their fellow humans.

    Not all, of course. Not at all. In fact, CofE adherents are amongst the most easy-going and gentle folk in the mainstream religions.

    But, catholics? Jeepers.

    And you full well know my views on muslims - a giant step worse than catholicism.

    So, let's have less of the "Why pick on me?!" whining, eh? 'Cos you neatly exemplify most of the reasons why I despise religious faith.

Share This Page