Hi Bob
My response was to Fidel's post not yours.
I have argued in the past that reluctant landlords who themselves pay rent should be allowed to set one against the other.
Fidel's parents get such benefits from the state that they are better off leaving a house empty rather than risk losing those benefits.
A person's house should be treated as means and they should get no state benefits if they own a house and so can afford to pay for their own care.
Brendan
Hi Brendan,
The situation was more complicated. My father scrimped and saved all his life so that he could be looked after when he got old. He moved into sheltered accommodation aged 84, two years ago.
Prior to this he lived independently as a carer for my late mother, but worked extensively in the US, England and all around the country until he retired.
I remember in 2007 when she had a stroke - previously she had heart operations in 1962 & 1993, the HSE called and told him he could receive 30 mins assistance entitlement a week for home help. Then they wrote back to say there was no funding for this.
Anyway as a result of keeping his health insurance and saving every week, the house fell into disrepair. A bill of c 40k to 50k was estimated from survey...beyond his means to repair to make suitable for rent. We also offered it last year to the council, for letting, and they turned us down.
So its vacant now. The 80% of income from rent is used for fair deal assistance.
Its not clear to me if:
You have to pay tax on this, or just the 20% remainder.
Or does the "income" count against medical limits for OAPs ...? h
He gets c 500euro a week from his pensions and superannuations from here, England and the US. Some of this is income is from making additional National Insurance contributions to HMRC in the 70s when Britain was in IMF and you get bonuses OAP levels from additional contributions.
We have applied for fair deal as he juust moved in to a nursing home due to illness. Meanwhile he pays c.4900 per month, until hopefully the forms is processed.
The lesson learnt is he should have enjoyed life more. He should have spent money on fancy new cars, foreign holidays, gifts to grandkids, done up the house nd indulged himself like others do. Meanwhile he did save and act responsibly, to no cost to you or others, pay mortgages at 18% in 80s and live abroad, and his reward is a begrudging system of care for an 86year old, who until 2 years ago cost the system 0.
I hope others can look at themselves before passing judgement about "state benefits"
F.