What makes sense here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would suggest you place the house proceeds into a trust so that they are not accessible to either son other than for care of the parents.

What I envision - BiL won't see the house proceeds in a trust for his parents' care, but that his brother now has "his half" of the vaca house, even if DH bought it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tell BIL "I'll give you your half when I get my half." And then watch his head explode.

LOL, yes.

I know this is all ridiculous, but some people are illogical and stubborn on certain matters and will argue until the lights go out, night after night, that they are right with all kinds of convoluted "logic" to make their points.

[Anonymous]

Just have the inlaws put the vacation home on the market and sell to a stranger, when the sale of the house is necessary.

[Anonymous]

I would have FIL sell the house ASAP, and keep the money for himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just have the inlaws put the vacation home on the market and sell to a stranger, when the sale of the house is necessary.

They want us to buy the house if it comes to that, they want to keep it in the family. And DH already has an agreement that he will buy out BiL's share if it comes to that - about a decade old agreement. But now circumstances are changing and all that money may need to go to the parents.

[Anonymous]

I think you need to accept that BIL is an assh*t and BIL may lose his relationship with DH if BIL continues to be an assh*t. Choices have consequences. This isn't necessarily fixable by you or your DH.

[Anonymous]

Are you concerned that the parents might give BIL some money right now to shut him up? Bad idea, he'll be back for more.

[Anonymous]

It's about $10K per month per person, OP for quality care. Which means either supplementing private duty care if they are in a large for-profit place like Sunrise, or going with quality care in the home. If your parents have that much in assets, it sounds like they'd be fine until they are over 100. Your BIL might not like it, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's about $10K per month per person, OP for quality care. Which means either supplementing private duty care if they are in a large for-profit place like Sunrise, or going with quality care in the home. If your parents have that much in assets, it sounds like they'd be fine until they are over 100. Your BIL might not like it, though.

Not sure how much longer FiL will hang on, perhaps another year. MiL will probably want to remain at home as long as she can, then pivot to a quality CCRC when she is no longer able to drive but wants to remain social.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DH's parents are entering their mid-80s. One has dementia, fortunately very affable, and lives at home. The other is still quite active. Perhaps not as sharp as they were two years ago, but sharper than probably 95% of people their age. They've had daytime help and now need to move to 24/7 in order for the one with dementia to remain at home.

The round the clock care will become a significant drain on resources. For now they are comfortable, but it will add up over time. In addition to cash/stocks, there is a house and a vacation house. DH has indicated that he will help parents if they run out of cash, including selling their real estate. BiL has made it clear he is banking on an inheritance. DH wonders if he is obligated to pay him out for his share of the vacation house (the current plan is for DH to buy him out if DH chooses to keep vacation house) if they have to sell ALL the real estate to care for their parents.

Basically, if they have to sell EVERYTHING to care for the parents and DH even ends up subsidizing, is DH still on the hook to pay out for vacation house even if all the funds were use to care for parents?

That house doesn't belong to your BIL until his parents have passed. Your husband absolutely should not pay him out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's about $10K per month per person, OP for quality care. Which means either supplementing private duty care if they are in a large for-profit place like Sunrise, or going with quality care in the home. If your parents have that much in assets, it sounds like they'd be fine until they are over 100. Your BIL might not like it, though.

Not sure how much longer FiL will hang on, perhaps another year. MiL will probably want to remain at home as long as she can, then pivot to a quality CCRC when she is no longer able to drive but wants to remain social.

Awe, and MIL doesn't want to tell other son/BIL that the house needs to be used for their care??

This sounds like a problem of avoidance.

MIL needs to sit both sons down and say all assets goes for their then her care, including the sale of the vacation home. Whatever is left is split evenly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) If I am reading correctly, DH wants the vacation house, and is willing to buy it, and BIL wants half of that money, since technically he would be entitled to 1/2 after their parents pass. If this is the scenario, then this will cause a problem. DH definitely should not buy the house now. This will cause complications since neither seem to totally understand how any of this works.

2) Look back period for Medicaid is 5 years. If any asset/s have been transferred to other people during that period of time, Medicaid will claw back the value of those assets.

3) Cognizant parent needs to sit their sons down and explain that ALL assets are to be used for their care. If anything is left, the remaining value of said assets is to be split evenly. If vacation home sale is needed for care, then so be it. BIL is not entitled to half of the house, just half of what is left.

4) Circling back to #1. It will be messy if DH wants the house.

Appreciate the four points. Having been through Medicaid apps, I'm aware of the clawback period. At this time, DH has no intention in applying for Medicaid for his parents, but will follow all the guidelines in case that needs to happen.

Where I see the possible conflict is DH buying the house at FMV when the liquid assets dip below a certain level and he wants his parents to have more cash on hand. I can see BiL asking at that time for "his half" even if their parents may still need money for their care.

Or I could see BiL asking at the end, "well, I was supposed to get half with the sale of the house," and making an issue out of it. Do I think he has any leg to stand on? No. But could I see this? Yes.

OP, I'm the PP you're responding to. I agree with you. BIL either out of lack of comprehension, or out of having learned that to play stupid and right he can get what he wants from people who want to avoid the aggravation, will not this go. I will add, that desperate and/or jealous people can be irrational. They literally can't see the truth, too blinded by that desperation or jealousy. I think you might have to make peace with just waiting to see how the money/care plays out. You also have to decide how much of a breech of the relationship with BIL matters.

Then, as you appear to be doing, let parents' current assets reduce until vacation house HAS to be sold to replenish the well. DH and BIL sit down and talk it through. Both you and SIL should be there if SIL is instigating BIL behind the scenes. DH needs to be able to address the issues in real time, not after BIL gets home and SIL goes crazy. The money from the vacation house will be used to take care of their parent/s. Keep track of every dime spent, updating BIL/SIL regularly so they see how much of each of their inheritance is being spent on care. BIL/SIL have to see that the money is being spent.

I feel for you. We avoided this by FIL stating toward the end, with all of us present, what would be spent how, who had already gotten a portion of their inheritance, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to see a pro financial planner ASAP to understand the Medicaid rules in your state.

I'm sorry that your Bill is so clueless. He needs to hear a reality check from the financial planner that he will likely not be receiving an inheritance because dementia care is so costly.

You need to see a lawyer affiliated with the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA), not a generic “financial planner,) before any transactions, buy outs, etc. This is not a field for dabblers.

OP this is really important. People start rushing to buy and sell and do without understanding all of the options. For example, many elders and their estates are better served by using real estate to generate income. You’ve mentioned your ILs have good LTC insurance, and it’s possible that renting out their properties (maybe Airbnb the vacation home) may generate significant income. It also preserves the estate. That may or may not be a good choice for them, but talk to a professional.

Now BIL can suck a bag if you-know-whats, but many seniors really agonize over spending their assets. They really want ro leave their heirs as much as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to see a pro financial planner ASAP to understand the Medicaid rules in your state.

I'm sorry that your Bill is so clueless. He needs to hear a reality check from the financial planner that he will likely not be receiving an inheritance because dementia care is so costly.

You need to see a lawyer affiliated with the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA), not a generic “financial planner,) before any transactions, buy outs, etc. This is not a field for dabblers.

OP this is really important. People start rushing to buy and sell and do without understanding all of the options. For example, many elders and their estates are better served by using real estate to generate income. You’ve mentioned your ILs have good LTC insurance, and it’s possible that renting out their properties (maybe Airbnb the vacation home) may generate significant income. It also preserves the estate. That may or may not be a good choice for them, but talk to a professional.

Now BIL can suck a bag if you-know-whats, but many seniors really agonize over spending their assets. They really want ro leave their heirs as much as possible.

Thanks. Their vaca home is in an area where they effectively prohibit AirBnB so that’s not really an option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's about $10K per month per person, OP for quality care. Which means either supplementing private duty care if they are in a large for-profit place like Sunrise, or going with quality care in the home. If your parents have that much in assets, it sounds like they'd be fine until they are over 100. Your BIL might not like it, though.

Not sure how much longer FiL will hang on, perhaps another year. MiL will probably want to remain at home as long as she can, then pivot to a quality CCRC when she is no longer able to drive but wants to remain social.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but plenty of dementia patients linger on and on and on. And it sounds like the family wants to keep your FIL at home. You write, "They've had daytime help and now need to move to 24/7 in order for the one with dementia to remain at home." This is going to be your issue. Keeping someone at home is really expensive. If you pay multiple people $25 and hour for 24/7 care that adds up to around $18,000 a month. Except it is hard to find people for 24/7 care so people turn to agencies which charge at least $35 an hour. One month is $25,000. That is $300,000 a year. And that doesn't even include anything else.

OP, was it you who wrote, "Not sure how much longer FiL will hang on, perhaps another year" because earlier you wrote, "For now, there is plenty of money but there is a chance that they could burn through it all if MiL lives a long time". So is it your MIL or FIL because women with dementia live longer than men? And often if you are on a dementia drug you live even longer.

Your main priority right now need to be what measures you want to take to prolong life? Is there an advanced care directive, does the family agree on if and when you will resuscitate. You also have to agree what you are going to do if your in law needs artificial hydration or a feeding tube. Different states allow or do not allow the ability to refuse feeding tubes, hydration, etc.

The matter of the house, the best strategy is to kick the can down the road. Do NOTHING right now. Table the issue and use other assets first. What is going to happen if your husband sells the house is your BIL will only be satisfied if he gets money right away. Then he is going to continue to use the house as if he continued to own half or your in-laws owned the house. You and your husband are going to be furious everytime you think about it. And your kids' cousins are going to think they are entitled to use that house because it was their grandparents house. This will drive the siblings apart. What your husband agreed to 10 years is no longer relevant. Buying out a sibling from a vacation house never really works out well. Do NOT do this even though the parents want the house to stay in the family.