Starmer's vision quest
- Thread starter mjr
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Also, (personal view) better in society for reward to be based on what an individual achieves rather than on what others have achieved. Motivate and reward people for own hard work, good ideas, etc. not just because of accident of birth.
Ian
AuroraSaab
Shaman
The thought of providing for your children is a great motivator though. Probably best to dish it out while you can see them enjoy it rather than want to provide for them after you've gone.
Something that brought out the cynic in me was the way so often parents putting their houses into trusts for their children would include clauses where parents retain rights and control for the remainder of their lives. So they'd "give it away" but with a "just in case" retention of control.
(nb I'm not any sort of Financial Adviser, just I've been involved in paperwork for such matters).
Ian
BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Not something I have done personally, but, without trying very hard I can think of two immediate reasons to “”maintain control”:
1. Unless you are financially (and emotionally) able to vacate the property, you need somewhere to live until the Care Home or grim reaper comes calling.
2. Just because your offspring are playing happy families with their partner now, does not mean it will stay that way. Why risk having to vacate and sell to give a “cut” to a departing son/daughter-in-law?
In one situation I wasn't directly involved in on the invocation of a power of attorney of relative's a parent-in-law a relative was immediately dispatched to negotiate a pay-off deal with an "in-law" of the deceased.
Just that somehow parents want to pass on their assets to their children but ... there's a well, maybe not or maybe not fully or maybe not 100% trust right now ie reservations. And that brings out the cynic in me; maybe Gordon Brown's retrospective tax rule changes were not such a bad idea (constraints that resulted in some trusts being disbanded).
Ian
AuroraSaab
Shaman
Yes, I think that's a big reason. The parental contribution is ring fenced so it's only a 50/50 split of the rest of the value of the property. The parental contribution returns to the trust, or whatever the set up is. My friend did similar when she bought a house with a partner as she was putting a larger % in.
Also, it takes some of pressure off the child. If the parents have insisted on it the finances after a split are taken out of the child's hands and they can't be guilted or coerced into a more substantial pay off.
