Fair Deal changes might actually happen but...

Flinty997

The fact reminds these houses will remain in legal limbo a long time. They will not be available to rent.

The state will not be able to clear out a house in legal limbo and refurbish it to their required standards and rent it. There's a massive amount of obstacles to that. It's not viable.

Even the changes to Fair Deal only enable people to sell. It does nothing to help the rental supply.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118827654#Comment_118827654

Maybe if the house was put up for sale, a superhero landlord could swoop in and buy that already existing house and solve the country's housing problem by using their expertise to figure out how to put it on daft.ie. Rental stock up by one.

What is your issue with my proposal anyway? It would not be compulsory and only provides an incentive to those who want to, or are able, to rent the houses out. If you didn't want to avail of it you wouldn't have to. You haven't actually given me a good reason against it in principle - except for the fact that you yourself would not want to be involved in it. Not everything revolves around you though.

FYI, the house is not in legal limbo. It's title will be fully owned by the person in care while they are alive.

whippet

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118827586#Comment_118827586

yet again - you fail to even understand the very basics of Ward of Court - when this is awarded you do not have control - the courts do. So any decision which is made is made by the court - you can petition but you do not have a choice. So again - you are talking pure nonsense.

As for 'making a contribution' ... .my mother is making more than a contribution - I've outlined the actual figures - you choose to ignore these type of posts.

Also - where is the equity - someone who doesn't work a day in their life, living on social welfare and in a social house will have the state contribute 100% to their nursing home care. But when someone pays for their own you want the state to be able to also milk their assets which have been paid for.

Your argument is nonsense and at this stage you are just trolling

whippet

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118827654#Comment_118827654

He doesn't do reality !!!

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118827731#Comment_118827731

Please clarify who this "you" is when you refer to Ward of court.

Are you referring to the incapacitated person or the "relative"?

If it is the former, they are incapacitated. So I presume you mean the latter. If it is the latter then it is legally nothing to do with them

The sick persons assets can provide for their care. That is what they are for. Expectant beneficiaries may prefer that they only took 20% or 10% rather than the 22.5% for example, but that is irrelevant. They are the property of the sick person and theirs alone.

L1011

This thread is a mess. I don't have time to review it now, but I intend to do so later.

L1011

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118826786#Comment_118826786

You need to significantly de-personalise your posts.