I have been my parents care giver for well over 10 years. I quit my job in order to care for them. Only my mother is left and once she goes, my siblings plan to sell the house from under me and I will have no place to go because I only get a very small Social Security check. Can I sue my siblings to ensure that I get to live in the house until I pass away even after Mom passes?
23 Answers
Helpful Newest
First Oldest
First
Are you living in the US or another country?
ADVERTISEMENT
This is the reason posters on this board tend to mightily discourage anyone from quitting their jobs to be caretakers. And why there's tons of advice on putting a contract in place if one expects to be paid.
Letter of promise vs. a living Will under contract, which one will be on top? ,
https://www.agingcare.com/questions/which-one-letter-of-promise-vs-a-living-will-184673.htm
Losi's situation involves a lot of complex issues involving law and possible misrepresentation.
Then I would sit down and put everything and ALL you have done in said time you helped her detailing everything... yes, I mean everything. Submit a bill for all hours of service you provided to her "Estate" along with certified copies of your bill ( and note Auntie had drawn up) to whomever ... more than likely your bill for caregiving far outweighs the worth of the house. You really must be vigilant about this.... and please know, you do not have to leave in that 30 days notice.... do your homework!
Option number one will be to hire more workers to avoid paying overtime. In California, because we have a daily and a weekly maximum on regular hours, there is no way to avoid some overtime liability because the employer can only deduct for sleep time if the employee works a 24-hour shift. Under the DWBR, the minimum an employer could pay an employee for a 24-hour shift would be $156.00 per day ($8.00/hour x 9 regular hours + $12.00/hour x 7 overtime hours, with no compensation for 8 hours of sleep time). The family would have to hire at least two workers to avoid the 45-hour weekly overtime cap. The workers would also have to have a separate place to reside and pay for their own meals on their non-working days.
That means instead of one worker earning $896.00 per week, and receiving room and board to boot, one employee will receive $780.00 per week and another employee will receive $312.00 per week. The employer will pay $1,092.00 per week. That’s about a 20% increase for the family, and a 15% decrease for the worker, excluding the loss of room and board.
The only way to eliminate any overtime liability at all under the DWBR for 24-7 care would be to hire 6 different workers, each working no more than 9 hours a day or 45 hours a week.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
3 yrs 8 months - 2 months hospitalized = 3yrs 6 mo.
188 weeks @ $1,764 per week = $331.642 @ 12 hr days
188 weeks @ $2,212 per week = $415,856 @ 24 hr days -8
M T W T F S S Total
Total 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 84 hrs X $8 = $672
Reg Hrs 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 63 hrs X $12 = $756
OT Hrs 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 21 hrs X $16 = $336
-----
$1,764
$448
-------------------------------------------------------
$2,212
$2,212 x 52 weeks = $115,024
$115,024 x 3.6yrs = $414,086
24hr - 8 hr deduction = + 4 hr OT per 12 hr day above.
4 x 7 = 28 hrs..........28hrs x $16 = $448
$8 x 16hrs =$128 day,$896 week,$46,592 year
Under California’s DWBR, the employee would be paid $1,164.00 ($8.00/hour x 45 regular hours + $12.00/hour x 67 overtime hours). Under the revised DOL regulations, the employee must be paid $1,184.00 ($8.00/hour x 40 regular hours + $12.00/hour x 72 hours). By my calculations, that about a 30% to 32% increase in wages for the employee, if the family can afford the increase. If the family cannot afford the increase, the family will have a couple of options.
Option number one will be to hire more workers to avoid paying overtime. In California, because we have a daily and a weekly maximum on regular hours, there is no way to avoid some overtime liability because the employer can only deduct for sleep time if the employee works a 24-hour shift. Under the DWBR, the minimum an employer could pay an employee for a 24-hour shift would be $156.00 per day ($8.00/hour x 9 regular hours + $12.00/hour x 7 overtime hours, with no compensation for 8 hours of sleep time). The family would have to hire at least two workers to avoid the 45-hour weekly overtime cap. The workers would also have to have a separate place to reside and pay for their own meals on their non-working days.
That means instead of one worker earning $896.00 per week, and receiving room and board to boot, one employee will receive $780.00 per week and another employee will receive $312.00 per week. The employer will pay $1,092.00 per week. That’s about a 20% increase for the family, and a 15% decrease for the worker, excluding the loss of room and board.
The only way to eliminate any overtime liability at all under the DWBR for 24-7 care would be to hire 6 different workers, each working no more than 9 hours a day or 45 hours a week. Since an employer cannot deduct for sleep time for 9-hour shifts, the employer would have to pay one employee a day while he or she is sleeping, and the actual cost would be $1,344.00 per week ($192/day x 7 days/week). Since paying no overtime would necessitate eliminating the sleep time exclusion, and because it would mean having six different workers through the week, most employers will not choose this option.
Keep in mind, none of these calculations take into account the increased minimum wage in California that becomes effective July 1, 2014.
Under the DOL regulations, there is a way to avoid any overtime by having 3 employees each work two 24-hour shifts and one 8-hour shift. The employer would only pay $960.00 per week but that means each employee will only receive $320.00 per week, and this would not comply with California law.
In summary, option number one requires the family to pay at least 20% more, but the individual employee will receive 15% less wages and now has to find a separate place to live. The good news is that one additional person will be employed. Keep in mind, none of these calculations consider the increased minimum wage that will take effect in 2014 and 2016.
A second option is to place mom in a residential care or assisted living facility. The costs vary depending on the level of care required, and many allow family members to bring some of their own furniture so it can actually feel like home. Many do not like this option because it moves mom out of the home, and it can be difficult to find a facility that provides the level of care the family desires. This option does nothing for the caregiver unless the caregiver has sufficient skills to work in a residential care or assisted living facility.
A third option, at least in California, is to obtain government assistance. Workers employed through IHSS or other specific state and county programs are still exempt from California’s overtime laws. This allows every tax payer to bear the burden of increased care, but relieves some of the burden from the individual family – assuming the family qualifies for services.
A final option is for a family-member to quit his or her job and stay home full time to take care of mom. Before the necessity for a two-income household it was common for parents and grandparents to live with the family so the family could be responsible for taking care of themselves. Each family will have to decide if that is a viable option for them.
I am concerned that people will try to skirt the laws by hiring “independent contractors.” While there are some instances where a caregiver can be an independent contractor, I cannot think of a situation where a 24/7 caregiver would be an independent caregiver. Families should consult their attorney before hiring a caregiver directly and when choosing a third-party employment agency.
In my experience lawyers won't touch anything that they cannot make tens of thousands of dollars, so if your mom's estate is not worth very much (like most of us) the lawyer would want to be on a retainer (you pay up front).
It's so sad, but true, that those of us who re-arrange our lives to be caregivers, are not only not paid, but cannot recoup anything from the estate.
And those siblings who avoid doing anything, oh don't get me started.....
There are places that sell rubber stamps and some folks by them and make papers, most often nobody checks and nobody does anything as they will not know as they are not listed as a heir.
Your Mom has dementia I also read in your profile . How is she doing in the home situation? This is not always a situation that can be a one caregiver role in later stages, or in early stages either. This is quite costly for in home or long term care. Is there a long term plan. Does anyone have Power of Attorney?
Igloo's suggestions seem sound. But is your mother competent to get into legal decisions at this point? And would she understand the concept and reasoning of you keeping the house as long as you want, or is she going to say, "But I love all of my children equally. I want to give the house to all of them"?
I wish you well.
You know the whole usufruct or whatever they may call this legally in your state, is used all the time for guys with 2nd or 3rd wives who want to technically leave their property to their kids from the first marriage but still take care of the newer wife and not require her to change her standard of living if he dies before her. Good luck and you have to remember to look out for yourself!
As sad as it seems, your siblings are not responsible legally for paying you to care for your parents. If they were decent people, they would relinquish the house to you for your kindness, but it sounds like they are not willing to do this. Many parents have wills set up that real property will be sold and the money distributed among the children. If this is the way the will is written, then there is little you can do except to buy out the interests of your siblings.
Even if the house is gone, there are many good places to live. Many senior communities are subsidized by the federal and state governments, so rent is low. The nice thing about these communities is there are no maintenance expenses or property taxes. The amount of rent paid is based on your income. All is not hopeless.