My children both gave me £80k to buy a 退職 bungalow but they can't be 名簿（に載せる）／表（にあげる）d as 共同の owners ? could their money be taken in care 料金s?

• e-mail

My children have both put £80,000 into the 購入（する） of my 退職 bungalow. I didn't have enough money so they've 投資するd that money in a place for me to live.

We couldn't put it in 共同の 指名するs because I had to be a pensioner to be able to live there. How can I make sure they don't lose their 投資 if for some 推論する／理由 I do have to go into care.

I'm really worried about them losing such a 抱擁する 量 of money.

所有権 窮地: My children both gave me £80k to buy a 退職 bungalow but they can't be 名簿（に載せる）／表（にあげる）d as 共同の owners (在庫／株 image)

Tanya Jefferies, of This is Money, replies: Your children have generously helped you buy a suitable home for your ol d age.

You understandably don't want your 地元の 当局 to 含む their 出資／貢献 in any 財政上の 査定／評価 of your own 資産s should you need care in 未来.

But as things stand, your bungalow is in your 指名する only, by the sound of it because the 退職 開発 you have moved to only 許すs people over a 確かな age to live there.

However, it may be that it has no age 限界 on 所有権, only on 住居 - you should 二塁打 check this.?

We asked a lawyer experienced in social care 事例／患者s to explain your 選択s to 保護（する）／緊急輸入制限 your children's 火刑／賭ける in your 所有物／資産／財産.

Ben Tyer, 私的な （弁護士の）依頼人 solicitor at GLP Solicitors, replies:??As the bungalow is in your 単独の 指名する it will be 扱う／治療するd as belonging to you, so it will be 含むd in any 査定／評価 of your 財政上の means to 支払う／賃金 for care その為に putting you above the £23,250 threshold categorising you as 存在 able to 支払う／賃金 the 十分な cost of care.

Yo u say, though, the reality is that the 合法的な 肩書を与える does not 反映する the true position because your children are the real owners of the bungalow (assuming they 供給するd all of the 購入（する） monies).

Where the 合法的な 所有権 is in one person's 指名する (you) but someone else (your children) enjoys the 利益s of 所有権 such as the proceeds of sale this is called '有益な' 所有権.

In these circumstances the entire value of the bungalow ought not to be taken into account in any 財政上の 査定／評価.

Ben Tyer:?As you are the 単独の 合法的な owner of the bungalow it will be 含むd in any 査定／評価 of your 財政上の means to 支払う／賃金 for care

But unfortunately you have said there is no formal 合法的な 協定 証明するing your children's 利益／興味.?

Producing bank 声明s about the origins of the 購入（する） monies may 簡単に be 扱う／治療するd by the 地元の 当局 as gifts to you from your children, so it will likely still be 含むd in any 財政上の 査定／評価.

What you an d your children may have 手配中の，お尋ね者 is a 合法的な 宣言 about the actual bungalow 所有権.

Typically this is 記録，記録的な／記録するd in a 信用 行為 which 始める，決めるs out that にもかかわらず you 存在 the 合法的な owner of the bungalow your children, having 供給するd the 購入（する） monies, are in fact the underlying 共同の owners.

This 協定 is usually also 反映するd on the '肩書を与える 行為s'.

Although the 購入（する） has already occurred it may still be possible to put this 協定 in place.

Given this will be 'after the event' I recommend 保持するing bank 声明s and 証拠 of the source of the 購入（する） monies and ideally 蓄える／店ing these with the 信用 行為.

This is because in the event you need 地元の 当局 財政上の support for care, the belated change/解明 in 所有権 経由で the 信用 協定 may be 扱う／治療するd as 存在 a gift of the bungalow to your children and an 試みる／企てる to rid yourself of an 資産 so that you do not have to 支払う／賃金 for care.

This is さもなければ known as 審議する／熟考する deprivation of 資産s, the possible result of which is that you will be 扱う／治療するd as still owning the bungalow in spite of the 信用 and 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金d 十分な price accordingly.

一方／合間, you should check the 支配するs at your 退職 開発 carefully, because it may 井戸／弁護士席 be there is no age 限界 for buying the 所有物／資産／財産s there, just living in them.

In any event, it seems improbable that what I have 提案するd would not be 許すd by the 開発 as that would 論理（学）上 be 限界ing the 所有物／資産／財産s to those who have 十分な cash reserves to 購入（する） the 所有物／資産／財産s.

It would be sensible to get 合法的な advice, and you could discuss these 問題／発行するs with the lawyer who 扱うd the 購入（する） of your 所有物／資産／財産 or use the 法律 Society's search 道具 to find another one.