DEAR BRUCE: My husband and I are approaching retirement and have met with a variety of financial advisers, all of whom have encouraged us to buy long-term care (LTC) insurance. The usual cost quoted is in the $300 to $400 a month range. We are skeptical. We have both worked and will have pensions, Social Security and investments in 457 deferred compensation. It seems that long-term care is a fairly recent invention of the insurance industry we've only heard about in the past 10 years. What is your take on purchasing long-term care insurance? -- Vickie, via e-mail DEAR VICKIE: It may be you have heard of long-term care insurance only in the last decade, but trust me, it has been around longer than that. The problem is long-term care for someone with no assets or someone who is wealthy doesn't make sense. It's the rest of us in the middle that have to sit up and take notice. Three to four hundred dollars a month sounds like it's for the both of you. The benefits, how long of a period or how much per month and what maladies are covered that can determine the premium. You mentioned you have considerable assets and that you have worked hard and so forth. The troublesome part is for many people that still won't provide anywhere from $50,000 or more a year for long-term care and can quickly exhaust the assets, putting the surviving spouse in some jeopardy. You should sit down and determine what your income will be jointly and then individually. This will be the case in almost every instance, if one person dies before the other. Many times pensions are reduced, Social Security will clearly be reduced, etc. It is not necessary to insure for the entire amount. If your assets will allow you, as an example, to comfortably spend $35,000 a year upon one person's death. Then, perhaps, a $30,000 a year policy would be sufficient. The troublesome part is, without insurance, unless you are very well fixed financially, the surviving spouse can be left impoverished. DEAR BRUCE: Please explain to me consequences at death of having property deeded "tenants in common with right of survivorship." -- Ed, via e-mail DEAR ED: I am not certain I can give you a complete answer, but you do raise an interesting question. It sounds to me that you would like the property to go to two or more tenants. This may be your children or something of that nature. Anytime you are leaving property to more than one person, undivided interest in property can lead to very contentious situations. I was always more comfortable in having the property left in a will whereby the executor of that will is directed in the will to dispose of the property and divide the proceeds rather than have the property put in the names of two or more people however related. Oftentimes, one wants to sell and the other one doesn't. Many times one would like to keep it in the family but doesn't have the assets to buy out the others. I am far more comfortable in leaving it in the will with specific directions to your personal representative or executor as to your thoughts on the matter. It could be you want to leave it in their names, but then there are better ways to do that. One of them could be a trust. Interested in buying or selling a house? Let Bruce Williams' "House Smart" be your guide. Price: $14.95, plus shipping and handling. Call: (800) 337-2346. Send your questions to: Smart Money, P.O. Box 2095, Elfers, FL 34680. E-mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org. Questions of general interest will be answered in future columns. Owing to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided. Copyright 2010, United Feature Syndicate, Inc.