Ombudsman Acts Against Slipshod Council

27th December 2018 By Arman Khosravi

When people need to go into care, the local councils that end up supporting the care costs are well known for their doggedness in attempting to ensure that the person being cared for supplies as much of the funding as possible.

This will often involve a review of how they managed their finances prior to their need for care and, in particular, whether they acted in a way that was intended to remove assets from their estate or control so that the council would pick up a greater proportion of the total care cost than would otherwise have been the case.

Where such ‘deliberate deprivation’ is alleged to have occurred, the council will seek recompense based on the capital that has been given away. Accordingly, if you intend to make substantial gifts of capital to family members or others, this should be considered early – preferably well before any residential care need arises. Additionally, a gift that is made more than seven years before death will normally not be considered to be within your estate when the eventual Inheritance Tax liability is calculated.

In a recent case, a family was successful in overturning a decision by a local council that deliberate deprivation was behind an elderly couple’s gift of funds to one of their children in order for her to buy a house. The couple had, since the 1980s, given help to three of their children to buy homes. The husband, who suffers from dementia and Parkinson’s disease, was placed in a nursing home soon after he and his wife had given financial support to their fourth child to buy a property with her husband.

The council decided, without providing the wife with ‘a properly reasoned decision showing the evidence it has considered in accordance with statutory guidance’, that the couple should carry the full cost of the husband’s care.

The family complained to the Local Authority Ombudsman, who upheld their complaint that the council had not taken all relevant facts into account, including the couple’s desire to be fair to all their children as evidenced by their prior course of action over some time, or provided the couple with the reasons for its decision. The council was ordered to apologise and pay the wife £250 for her distress.

Source: Concious

Latest News

Award That Requires Borrowing Made Into Court Order

17th May, 2024 By

Disagreements between separating couples all too often result in litigation that substantially reduces the assets available to them, as was illustrated by a case that recently reached the High Court. At issue was whether awards made by arbitrators in financial remedy proceedings can be made into court orders even if that would require one of the parties to borrow money. The couple had previously had a relationship lasting a few years before resuming their relationship in 2015. They had two children before separating again in 2019. Following their separation, the...

Inheritance Disputes – Costs Risks Can Be Reduced

15th May, 2024 By

Arguments about what someone promised before their death can lead to significant legal costs. However, if faced with a claim against the estate, there may be steps the beneficiaries or executors can take to reduce the risks, as a recent High Court case illustrated. A man had left a farmhouse and agricultural land in Cornwall to his wife, with whom he had also jointly owned a neighbouring area of land. After his death, one of the couple's daughters and her husband claimed that he had told them he wanted them...

Share Rounding Error Does Not Prevent CGT Relief

13th May, 2024 By

There are often very specific rules that must be complied with in order to claim tax reliefs, but if a small mistake arises, the courts may be able to provide assistance. In a recent case, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) found that an investor was entitled to Entrepreneurs' Relief on the disposal of his shares in a company, despite owning one share fewer than he needed to qualify for it. The investor had agreed to purchase 5 per cent of the shares in the company for £500,000. He wished to own...

Wife Entitled to Maintenance Until Sale of Family Home

10th May, 2024 By

When divorcing couples disagree on how assets should be divided, the courts will seek to arrive at a fair outcome for both parties. In deciding how the proceeds of sale of a former couple's home should be apportioned, the Family Court agreed with the wife that she should receive maintenance payments until the sale took place. The couple had married in 2006. Following a brief separation, they had reconciled for two years before finally separating in 2022. The husband and wife both contended that they should be entitled to about...