General Chat

My disabled B-i-L has been living with us for a few years but has developed Alzheimer's and has had to go into a care home.
We had a financial assessment by the council yesterday to determine what his contribution to the fees will be and were intially told that because he had been living here we had to prove that we had not added him to the house deeds as part owner. (Why would we do that, for goodness sake ! )

However, it was only when in conversation my OH mentioned that she was retired that te assessor said that as we were over retirement age we did not have to prove that he had an interest in the property.

As we have been here for so long our title is not on the Land Registry so the ownership was not immediately available.

SO: if your property is not registered and there is a possibility of being assessed for care home fees then be aware that the question is likely to come up.

As some people would put a relative on the Deeds to try to avoid inheritance tax, its well worth mentioning.

Are you going to talk to someone about having your home added to the Land Registry? It might make life easier for your heirs, or if you need to sell up at some point.

How odd..........

and possibly worrying....

Make sure your property - be it house or land - IS registered!!
You may have the deeds etc, but a short while back the Government moved the goalposts - they now want everything digitised.
My ex and his brother have some land that was bought by their grandfather over 150 years ago, and handed down.
However, they had to re-register to get it digitised to ensure the person using the land didn't get it digitally registered in their name :-(

The government have not moved any goal posts, they have actually made things better but you need to register to gain the benefit.

The Land Registration Act 2002 set out more precise rules of protection for so called 'Adverse Possession' making it harder for long term occupants to gain ownership. But only for registered land.

If the land is not registered then your rights haven't changed, but you would be well advised to register to gain increased protection.

Digitisation is irrelevant.

You can't just 'Put a relative on the deeds'

In order to transfer an interest you either have to specify a consideration of money or make a deed of gift, or be an administrator of a will etc. and to do that there has to be a document setting that out and indeed a new 'deed'. Transfer of property title since 1990 will require registration at the Land Registry to be effective.

Gifts of major assets made within 7 years can however be challenged when it comes to tax or assessment purposes, so this is more likely to be what the assessor was looking for.

Unless the Law has changed since 2003, you don't need to "specify a consideration of money...(etc)" to have an additional person's name added to the deeds.

The only 'consideration' that occured in a family situation was the solicitors legal fees and one for the land registry.

Okay - so ex and his brother weren't on the database as owners of the land (handed down through wills). How long before actually holding the deeds becomes defunct, and being on the database is the 'real' proof?

I'd also like to point out that, until recently, I actually had the deeds.
Had I been of a different character, what could I have done with those - bearing in mind, I still use my married surname - ie same as ex's?

I don't have deeds. We bought the new build in 1967 on a twenty year variable mortgage . When it was paid off I sent all the paperwork to the nearest land registry and received back a folder with the land registry number on it

I rang them and asked where are the deeds and was told there's no deeds anymore you are registered as the owners of the land so anything built on it belongs to you

When hubby passed away in oct 2015 I did his probate but the land registry didn't need the grant of probate just his death cert with a form I downloaded and filled in to take his name off the record leaving me as the sole owner .They sent the cert back with a confirmation that the alteration had been done

We were tenants in common but it wasn't any hassle to get it changed over

Soooo even if you have deeds you need to get the plot registered on the Land Registry


As a footnote .we were glad we were tenants in common as if hubby had to continue to have carers at home we would have had to pay . As a tenant in common we both owned half the property so if needed they could only put a lean against his share of the house

His savings were just over the threshold but would have slowly decreased as the costs came out .

IGP - "Gifts of major assets made within 7 years can however be challenged when it comes to tax or assessment purposes, so this is more likely to be what the assessor was looking for."

Agreed, but IHT was not an issue, only his assets.
And why only ask us, in theory his elder brother (or anyone else with his interests at heart) could have added him to THEIR deeds.

Anyway, as it turned out there was not a problem in the end, but we will get our property onto the Land Registry ASAP.

I could be on the wrong track here but I was wondering how the name of a landowner would not be shown in Land Registry records except in really ancient cases where it has proved difficult to trace owners. I know of cases where notices have been issued when someone wants to take over the land where no owner can be found.

If a home is erected on freehold land, the records would show one name. If a home is erected on leasehold land, the landowner's name would be in the records but I am not sure whether the homeowner's name would be there - perhaps as having an interest? It would be easy to check that.

The land registry have their own ref number of the plot

Would think if you haven't been advised of the number then there's a possibility you only have deeds

Not an expert on it so the best thing if in doubt would be to contact them

Athouugh I live in Kent I had to contact Cardiff land registry office

When I pop off my home & my assets go to our daughter

She is now aware of inheritance tax etc and is a bit why should the assets my parents worked for now be taxed

She has suggested I make over the house to her with the legal stipulation I live in it till I pass . But I have explained to her they may still class it as an asset of my estate that I was trying to evade IHT on

I really don't understand why the IHT should penalise what we both worked for and we both paid paye on our earnings

I have been spending on the home to make life comfy for me . Why give the government more in IHT . We worked for our pension and had lean times when we first bought the house and we both needed to work to tick over

At the moment the threshold is £325 000 then 40% tax on the rest.

The Land Registry came into being in 1925 but registration only became compulsory after WWII, and then only for certain areas of the country, until 1990 when it was extended to the entire country.

maggiewinchester asks "How long before actually holding the deeds becomes defunct, and being on the database is the 'real' proof?"

Well the answer is since 1990 when you must register all land or property with Land Registry if you’ve:

bought it
been given it
inherited it
received it in exchange for other property or land
mortgaged the property

Once registered then the deeds become defunct.

Since 2002, the Land Registry no longer issues a paper Land Certificate as the register is now fully electronic. You can (for a fee!) obtain an official copy of the register.

The rules in IHT can be complicated to it is best to get advice, and there are changes coming into force this April too.

Changes mean that the total inheritance tax (IHT) threshold for those who own a family home will increase from 6th April 2017 until it reaches £500,000 by 2020. This means that married couples and civil partners will be able to pass on assets worth up to £1m, including a family home, completely free of Inheritance Tax from April 2020.

http://thetimebank.co.uk/blog/2015/12/2017-iht-rule-changes/

I agree, IGP, legal advice ought to be a given, in my opinion too.

I also agree with you, Shirley. I have seen someone, who had gone without during her children's childhood in order to buy a house to pass something on to her children, enter a care home at the same time as someone who spent every penny having a good time. They were not treated equally because the local authority paid the fees of one of them but the other had to pay her own until the money from her house had almost been used in fees.

There is disparity in treatment obviously. I believe it is an inequality that needs to be dealt with.

I am aware that some sort of action was mooted but it did not come to fruition but I am surprised that government has not been taken to task over this because other inequalities (racism, ageism, gender etc) have been dealt with already.

It may take a threatened inequality case to focus minds.

When hubby came home from hospital he got six weeks free care package . After that it would be means tested . If your savings and assets were over £24000 then you paid the full cost. After that as your assets decreased then the proportion share came in

But if you had never worked and bought your home but lived in rented and had smaller savings or been on benefits then you got it free .

My beef is we both worked so as to buy our home and stand on our own feet and paid paye and nat ins but we would be penalised when care was needed in the case of sickness

I still had the house to run and bills to pay :-(

Off my soapbox now :-|

Shirley, I am right alongside you on the soapbox. :-)

I think it is discriminatory of local authorities to pay the fees for one person and not for another.

I am waiting for the first court case to point out this act of discrimination.