Dementia Tax - Pure Robbery

[Suzanna1969]

Most of the people by me split their house in to tenants in common ownership and each parent leaves their half to the offspring.
As soon as 1 parent dies the offspring own half of it and if the other parent has to go in to care the council can not take the house in to account as it can not be sold without the offspring's consent.
In several cases the offspring have then sold their own homes and then move into the parental homes so they do not have to keep 2 homes going.
For some reason this has annoyed the social workers.

William

I had no idea this was possible and could save the house. Dad set up the Tenants in Common thing years ago but I thought that would only mean the house was safe while one of them still lived in it.

Dad is ringing his solicitors on Tuesday with a view to changing his will if it helps, thank you so much for this. I hope it's not to late!

Does anyone know if Mum will be allowed to change her will now she's been diagnosed with dementia? I'm thinking probably not!

 

[notsogooddtr]

Who should pay for their care?And what should happen to their money?

 

[aquarius58]

They have an illness and so the NHS should pay for their care.

When the NHS was set up Nye Bevan said - A comprehensive and completely free 'cradle to grave' system of welfare, health provision and education.

 

[aquarius58]

Sorry I didn't address their money. They should be able to do whatever they want with their money. they could spend it rather than save it. Or they could leave it in their will to charity or individual/s

 

[Pickles53]

In the very near future everyone will have wised up to this fraud and monies will be moved around to protect the innocent. The government will move on to the next best lucrative revenue stream and everyone will enjoy equal treatment in dementia care.

And then the NHS budget will be under even greater pressure than it is now...Unless everyone wants to lay higher rates of tax/NI there is nowhere else for the extra funds to come from.

 

[katek]

They have an illness and so the NHS should pay for their care.

When the NHS was set up Nye Bevan said - A comprehensive and completely free 'cradle to grave' system of welfare, health provision and education.

Absolutely!

And the people of my parents' age, who were young adults then, just starting work, paid taxes to fund that system assuming that they would be protected for life. No need for private health insurance like in countries such as the USA, where taxation is usually lower. People on low/average salaries struggled really hard to buy a property, little realising it was this (as well as their taxes) that would in fact end up paying for the long-term care they didn't know they were going to need. Had there been a way of foreseeing this, they would probably have enjoyed their money more at the time and rented instead.

They have been badly let down and Nye Bevan would be turning in his grave if he could see what had happened to the elderly and other long-term sick people.

 

[katek]

And then the NHS budget will be under even greater pressure than it is now...Unless everyone wants to lay higher rates of tax/NI there is nowhere else for the extra funds to come from.

It'll be the LA budget rather than the NHS budget which will be under greater pressure. They already pick up the pieces when the NHS refuse CHC and the person is under the means test threshold. Therefore as more people above the threshold 'wise-up' and pass on their assets to avoid paying for what they rightly see as health care, LAs will then have even more people to support, and need more money to do so. Their funding comes from taxation too, so you are right in that we will having to pay more tax, but we will be paying it for the LA to fund health !?!?!

That is why I agree with what has been mooted in other posts - pay a little more to the NHS, ringfenced for long-term care, to allow them to fulfil what is in fact their duty by law. Let the NHS fund health, and LAs fund social services!

 

[fr0d0]

Here here Katek

 

[aquarius58]

We're in this situation because the government (both local and central but mostly central) has mismanaged the money that has been entrusted to them. Now we as a society need to get ourselves out of the mess.

By getting people who have saved throughout their lives to pay isn't going to solve the problem, not really.

And incidentally while we're on the matter of mismanagement of funds. The British government has raised the retirement age. I don't think that this has been thought through properly either. Who is the main carer of the elderly? Their children. the children retired and supported their parents more. I should be thinking of retiring now but instead I have at least another ten years of working ahead of me. So I'm finding it difficult, if not impossible, to help my parents.

 

[Pickles53]

It'll be the LA budget rather than the NHS budget which will be under greater pressure. They already pick up the pieces when the NHS refuse CHC and the person is under the means test threshold. Therefore as more people above the threshold 'wise-up' and pass on their assets to avoid paying for what they rightly see as health care, LAs will then have even more people to support, and need more money to do so. Their funding comes from taxation too, so you are right in that we will having to pay more tax, but we will be paying it for the LA to fund health !?!?!

That is why I agree with what has been mooted in other posts - pay a little more to the NHS, ringfenced for long-term care, to allow them to fulfil what is in fact their duty by law. Let the NHS fund health, and LAs fund social services!

I just recently read that in Northern Ireland there is an integrated system with 5 health and social care trusts. Beginning to think that this might help in England as the distinction between 'health' and 'social' care needs often seems arbitrary. Think in the Manchester area there is going to be a scheme to trial a similar approach.

If we are all willing to pay more for a comprehensive service that would perhaps make it possible. But clearly the politicians believe that there are no votes in proposing any rise in income tax, NI or council tax. I'd like to think they are wrong and that we can understand that if we want higher levels of services at a time of inevitably increasing demand this is the only way it can be funded.

 

[Pickles53]

We're in this situation because the government (both local and central but mostly central) has mismanaged the money that has been entrusted to them. Now we as a society need to get ourselves out of the mess.

By getting people who have saved throughout their lives to pay isn't going to solve the problem, not really.

And incidentally while we're on the matter of mismanagement of funds. The British government has raised the retirement age. I don't think that this has been thought through properly either. Who is the main carer of the elderly? Their children. the children retired and supported their parents more. I should be thinking of retiring now but instead I have at least another ten years of working ahead of me. So I'm finding it difficult, if not impossible, to help my parents.

Very good point on the impact of people working longer on care for older people. I was so tankful that I wasn't working when my mum started to need a lot more help. Previously when OH was working full-time trying to help his parents who lived a long way away he ran himself ragged. I was seriously worried about his health too even though his employers were very understanding and generous with time off.

I also read recently that 1 in 3 families depend on grandparents for childcare to some degree. We love looking after our grandson but it's only possible because we have retired. (Well I have, OH is supposed to have retired but keeps bring enticed back to do a few days freelance work. Every month he says this will be the last time....)

 

[katek]

I just recently read that in Northern Ireland there is an integrated system with 5 health and social care trusts. Beginning to think that this might help in England as the distinction between 'health' and 'social' care needs often seems arbitrary. Think in the Manchester area there is going to be a scheme to trial a similar approach.

If we are all willing to pay more for a comprehensive service that would perhaps make it possible. But clearly the politicians believe that there are no votes in proposing any rise in income tax, NI or council tax. I'd like to think they are wrong and that we can understand that if we want higher levels of services at a time of inevitably increasing demand this is the only way it can be funded.

More integration probably would be a good idea - if it was upfront, thought through, and done through the proper parliamentary channels i.e. a vote on an amendment to the original 1948 Act, to give LAs more responsibility for health care. That would of course mean some people would still have to pay (social services are allowed to means test) but the difference would be that that higher level care would then be legitimate for LAs to provide - payable for those who can/free for those who can't.

You make a good point about it not being a 'vote winner' to propose an increase in tax, and it is true that most people are probably not queuing up to do this! But what is the alternative? As you say, if we actually want a better service, we have to realise it has to be paid for somehow.

So, it is a choice of EITHER taxation (to NHS/LA) fairly paid by everyone according to salary OR charging those people who need the care, through their savings. I would prefer the former.

 

[Pickles53]

As you say, if we actually want a better service, we have to realise it has to be paid for somehow.

So, it is a choice of EITHER taxation (to NHS/LA) fairly paid by everyone according to salary OR charging those people who need the care, through their savings. I would prefer the former.

So would I!

It's depressing that so many people appear to believe there is a magic money tree somewhere.

 

[fr0d0]

It's depressing that so many people believe that excessive taxing of the worst off in society and that it's OK for corporations and the wealthy elite to be allowed to impoverish the rest of us. The money is there. That's how the wealthy increase their wealth even in situations like at present when there's supposedly a financial crisis. There's only a crisis for the poorest. Funny that.