84 year old RAF veteran being forced to flog house

TheIronDuke

ADC
Book Reviewer
#1
I cant find too much to say about this one. I've written to my MP and local Councilors for all the good it'll do. Stick this on e-Goats if they arent onto it already maybe?

A PENSIONER who fought for his country and worked for more than 50 years is being forced to sell his home to pay for his care.



Robert Kidd faces parting with the family house of more than 40 years in Cochrane Park, Newcastle, as he cannot afford to pay the bills to go into care.

The 84-year-old must make the traumatic decision over his future as he recovers from major surgery in Walkergate Hospital, Newcastle.

Having worked his way up to running the investigation branch of the Post Office in a career spanning 50 years and having served in the RAF during the Second World War, Mr Kidd is paid two pensions which give him a total of £1,400 each month.
*Clicky*
 
#2
The myth of home ownership was one of the cruelest con-tricks ever played out to a British public. The equity of redemption in the home is little more than a 'piggy bank' for the state and the financial services industry.

The 'home-owning democracy' swallowed by the public, along with the 'demonisation' of public sector housing is for a specific economic and social purpose.

If you want to bring or defend an action in the court, for example, the equity of redemption in your home is the asset through which it is funded. If you fall into debt with your credit card provider, you may lose the equity of redemption in settlement of the debt. If you, like this gentleman live long enough to require care, then the equity of redemption in your home is the means by which it is funded. There are many specific statutory examples under which a statutory charge may be placed upon the home.

Mortgages and mortgage debt lead to a disciplined and malliable workforce which, once the mortgage is redemed, allows the holder of the fee simple in land to enjoy the property for the few years remaining to him before he loses it.
 
#3
I wouldn't worry about bills if I were him, the MRSA or C Diff or more likely a combination of both will probably finish him anyway.

The culling of the old and infirm continues unabated in our New labour workers paradise.
 
#4
The way i got around that i bought my mothers house in her name, but she bought it by a loan from me, stops the ba stards getting there hands on it if they have to go into care (mind that is in scottish law)
 
#5
The myth of home ownership was one of the cruelest con-tricks ever played out to a British public. The equity of redemption in the home is little more than a 'piggy bank' for the state and the financial services industry.

The 'home-owning democracy' swallowed by the public, along with the 'demonisation' of public sector housing is for a specific economic and social purpose.

If you want to bring or defend an action in the court, for example, the equity of redemption in your home is the asset through which it is funded. If you fall into debt with your credit card provider, you may lose the equity of redemption in settlement of the debt. If you, like this gentleman live long enough to require care, then the equity of redemption in your home is the means by which it is funded. There are many specific statutory examples under which a statutory charge may be placed upon the home.

Mortgages and mortgage debt lead to a disciplined and malliable workforce which, once the mortgage is redemed, allows the holder of the fee simple in land to enjoy the property for the few years remaining to him before he loses it.
Wow! I thought I was the only one that thought slavery still existed. Only difference is conditions are better!
 
#6
jaybee2786 said:
The way i got around that i bought my mothers house in her name, but she bought it by a loan from me, stops the ba stards getting there hands on it if they have to go into care (mind that is in scottish law)
Scottish law is, in many respects, rather more humane than that which exists in England and Wales.

Here, such transactions would allow the local authority to apply to the court to have the transaction set aside as a 'sham transaction' requiring you to give up the purchaser money to the state. Such applications are quite common.

This treatment by the state is but one example of what I have referred to in previous posts as 'social violence'.
 
#7
Iolis said:
The 'home-owning democracy' swallowed by the public, along with the 'demonisation' of public sector housing is for a specific economic and social purpose.
.........agreed, and I could add that the selling off of public housing under the 'Right To Buy' scheme, whether it was an intended consequence or not, immensely strengthened the hand of Government and immensely weakened the unions. When you live in council housing, with a sympathetic left-wing council, non-payment of rent can be ignored - no such luxury from the mortgage-provider however, and prolonged strike action = defaults and repossession.

Furthermore, there is an infatuation with home ownership in this country, quite unlike that of other areas of Europe. If you want a home merely as somewhere to live what sense does it make to tie up all your capital in this way. Far better to rent (long-term similar to the Continental model) and use your income to enjoy life.
 
#8
I would agree with that Pomsen. It is difficult to slap a charging order on a rented house. It is difficult to sue an individual 'man of straw' if he has no property for you to apply to have him and his family made homeless for the purchase money to provide for your costs or damages. In many respects the man in the rented accommodation is more secure than he who is said to 'own' his own home.

No one in this country has been able to 'own' land since the Autumn of 1066. The most he can own is a period of time in it known as 'an estate' since an estate in land is a time in the land, or the land for a time and there are as many diversities of estate as there is diversity in time.

Much political vigour has been invested in the assertion of owner-occupation as a superior form of tenure to that available in the rented sector. The policy of encouraging home ownership has effectively stigmatised rented housing as the preserve of the second class citizen. The renter, instead of enjoying the status of part-owner of housing stock, has often been made the subjected of invidious comparisons between the 'owner' and the 'tenant'. The fact that the public sector tenant has been given a statutory right to improve his lot by buying (ie, borrowing on mortgage) and therefore 'owning' his own home further underlines the negative discrimination against the renter which has so conduced, in recent years, to the running down of the rented sector.
 
#9
Unfortunatly this sorry story again shows how honest hard working people who until retirement payed their taxes and did not sponge off the state are shafted.

Compare this with some idle chav families who never work,are always in trouble with the police and breed illegitamate kids like rabbits and who are showered with every benefit.

Makes you proud to be British.Not.

No real suprise given the O2 theives we have "running"the country.
 
#10
A bloody disgrace.
I've worked all my life from the age of 15, i'm in the secure position of having a decent company pension scheme and own my house.

My brother in law ,a lazy pillock with not a days work in his body, takes the p*** and says we will have adjoining beds in a nursing home. His paid by the state mine funded by selling my house.

Unfortunately the b*****d is right, i hate him and his ilke.

I finished work at the age of 57 and like an idiot i enquired at my local council about a rate rebate, a very nice lady told me to forget that idea when i told her my pension and lump sum payoff. I did not get a thing till i reached 60 and then got a free eye test, and free prescriptions if needed.

Ok some would say i'm lucky to be in the position i'm in, but no bugger give me anything its all down to the work my wife and i did over many years.
 
#11
I believe if either New Liarbour or the Tories undertook to take care of the elderly, without their needing to sell their houses or part with all their savings, they would waltz into power.

If God spares me I shall spend my savings down to the last penny and have 'disposed' of my flat before I'm taken away to be killed by MRSA and C Difficile.
 
#12
Disgrace. Nuff said.
 
#13
lsquared said:
I believe if either New Liarbour or the Tories undertook to take care of the elderly, without their needing to sell their houses or part with all their savings, they would waltz into power.

If God spares me I shall spend my savings down to the last penny and have 'disposed' of my flat before I'm taken away to be killed by MRSA and C Difficile.
thought You were becoming an immigrant 'somewhere else' :roll:
 
#14
They are just an easy group to pick on. Why don't they charge people with aids for their care as most have them have caught the disease since the first publicity campaign telling them how to avoid it.
 
#15
lsquared said:
I believe if either New Liarbour or the Tories undertook to take care of the elderly, without their needing to sell their houses or part with all their savings, they would waltz into power.

If God spares me I shall spend my savings down to the last penny and have 'disposed' of my flat before I'm taken away to be killed by MRSA and C Difficile.
You can either dispose of it by setting fire to it or selling it to defeat the claim by the local authority. If it is the latter, that transaction will be set aside and the local authority will be provided with the proceeds of sale.

Apart from real property such as your home, a similar situation obtains in respect of personal property such as money, shares stock and so on distributed to others if the local authority feels (as all of them do) that such gifts are intended to defeat their entitlement to claim it as part of the care cost.

Not something the exponents of the 'property owning democracy' actually took the trouble to explain to anyone when home ownership was sold to the public as a pretty neat idea when it, rather than a manufacturing base became the principal engine upon which the economy now runs.
 
#16
disgraceful and in Scotland, Free Home care is funded by OUR taxes yet we can't get the same treatment in England.

Im voting Tory
 
#17
I assume the lady to his right is his daughter? If so, they might be very happy that they are not having to deal with this problem here in Germany!

Should you need to go into care, over here the system is especially brutal. As in GB, the first thing question the local authorities ask is - "What assets do you have available to cover/offset the costs?" Note well: the question is about assets, so savings, investments, property, basically anything that can be turned into cash, is fair game for "take over" and disposal.

But the percentage of locals who are property owners is considerably less than it is in GB - from memory, somewhat less than 50 %. For a few of the elderly locals three things may be available with which to make a contribution - their property (if they own it), whatever might be left over from the savings/life insurance payout they contributed to for all of their lives and their pension(s).

For the greater majority however, it will be just a pension (singular). They have always lived in rented accommodation, never having had the funds or opportunity to buy a property, and, if they did have moderate savings/receive an inconsequential pay-out from a life insurance scheme, it will more often than not have all been spent - cruises and such like whilst still relatively fit and able to enjoy them.

But the local authority would still like to see some money, from someone. Now, I don`t want to give anyone over there any silly ideas, but it is something that may yet be brought under consideration by your official vultures.

The sons and daughters of the person concerned are then checked out to see how much THEY can contribute. Yup, you read that correctly. If one or both of your parents need to be taken into care and there is not enough money available from them to cover the full costs, then you - as a son or daughter with a regular and sufficient income - will be invited to contribute towards it.

My wife had the forms to fill in a few years ago for her mother - and they were rather long and detailed. No problem at all, she was well below the threshold - but a fair few aren`t. So there you are, forging ahead in the career that may only have been made possible by additional parental sacrifices, and perhaps with a growing family, when from one day to the next your future financial plans (or at least those for the next few years) suddenly disappear down the drain! Sort of puts the mockers on raking out of a warm bed on a cold January morning!

So why did these old folks pay state insurance contributions over so many years? Is the attitude of government now one of, "You are legally obliged to contribute to our fund, but don`t really expect to receive by right any compensation or benefit from it at an indeterminate future date. (In an undertone) Especially not if you were stupid enough to make provisions for your own future well-being."
 
#18
That's an absolute disgrace. I am ashamed to be British. Luckily I don't live in the UK & my parents gave me the deeds to their house and pay a peppercorn rent back to me to ensure that the family assets go to the grandchildren. NuLabour are the biggest crypto taxation unit we ever had the misfortune to serve under. I would urge folk to go and see a tax specialist to move ownership to the younger ones and cook the books. We are only fighting thick as pig$hit civil servants so a a few £ spent early will stop Gordon Brown et al taking away family property.
 

Similar threads

Top