Criteria for full time residential care and day care/respite

[susiesue]

I am really confused - is the criteria for residential care different to the criteria for day care/respite?

I keep being told different requirements by our LA - firstly I was told that as David had savings of more than £23,000 (albeit in bricks and mortar - not our home)he was not entitled to any financial assistance. I have spent the last few months getting permission from the COP to try and buy his half of the bricks and mortar and thus release his funds to pay for his care (residential) when the time comes. I then understood that when his funds fall below approx £14,000 the LA would take over the funding and also take his pensions.

I was also told that in the meantime it could be that money we have been spending over the last eighteen months on Day Care/Petrol taking him there etc and any other disability related expenses, could possibly be recouped as this was not the same criteria as residential care. I spent ages calculating cost of petrol etc etc only to be told by the same SW that he had made a mistake and as David's assets (same bricks and mortar!) were over their £23,000 threshold we were still not entitled to any help here either.

I am so mixed up - I have specially chosen a Care Home which is 'fully funded' by our LA - however, if they continue to charge us £1,150 a week when David goes full time(due to one to one care as he was so demanding during respite) there is no way the LA will fund that! What would happen then? - the Home say they would never ask anyone to leave as that is their home and they/we would have to negotiate with the LA. There is no way I would be able to afford top ups.

I really thought I had this all sussed out but now I am panicking.

 

[Izzy]

Oh my goodness Sue. What compications. I'm really sorry I can't help I have no experience at all of this. I really just wanted to say I think of you often. I hope someone can help you with this. Take care. Izzy x

 

[jenniferpa]

I'm not sure about the petrol and the travel expense issue. Are you saying that you thought that expending those would reduce David's savings (if not to below the threshold, they were at least expenses that were going in his side of the ledger), and now the social worker says they you be considered to have deprived him of those assets? Because if so, then the social worker is wrong. It is perfectly reasonable for someone who who is disabled etc to pay their expenses out of their savings and their incomes, not their spouses.

As to the "it might cost more if he needs one on one care". Now LAs have what is really a base rate that they pay for someone who needs care. However, if that base rate won't buy the care that person needs, they HAVE to pay whatever is necessary to meet that person's care needs. They are entitled to place the person in a cheaper facility if that can meet that persons needs (and they must consider a person's right to such things as family visitation, so they can't simply put them somewhere miles away) but they cannot refuse to provide more funding than they normally do if that's what it costs to care for him. They may not tell you this, but it is true.

In actuality, if his behavioural issues are so great, they may well be able to get at least partial NHS funding.

 

[JPG1]

Sue,

Any petrol money/taxi fares that you and David have paid out for petrol/day care cannot ever be questioned. From yesterday to today and forward to tomorrow, for as long as David is still not living in a care home.

It’s true that if David has "more than £23,000” in savings or realisable-assets in his own name, then he will not be entitled to financial assistance for LA. Jointly-owned savings are split 50:50 if there are only two joint owners.

Your CoP correspondence is to give you control over his half of the realisable-assets’ value that is at the moment in your joint names. How you persuade the CoP that you are placing that 50% into a ‘future care home fees account’ is something I know nothing about, but they will guide you in that, hopefully.

Whoever has told you that the money you have spent over the last 18 months on day care/petrol can be questioned is, frankly, talking nonsense. But for as long as any monies are in David’s own name, in his sole name, then he will be required to pay for his care until such time as his monies reduce to £23K, and then on a sliding scale until they diminish to £14K. Presumably 50% of the 'bricks and mortar' assets that you are asking permission from the Court of Protection to 'realise' will be then in David's own name, so will come within that plus or minus £23K.

There is no such thing as a ‘fully funded by LA’ home. Only if the potential resident of the care home has less than £14,000 in their own name. All care homes are priced, and it’s very probable/possible that in the Watford-area the weekly cost of 1:1 care may be £1K per week. But if the resident is self-funded, then the resident has control. Any resident who is fully-funded by the Local Authority must be placed in residential care that can meet all of their needs. Regardless of the cost to the LA.

And the LA base rate depends on the ‘arrangement’ the LA has with any particular care home/care home provider. LA base rates vary, depending on where you live and also on the ‘arrangement’ the LA has with any care home/care home provider. But the LA still has a statutory duty to meet the assessed needs of a resident, and also to take into account the desires and wishes of the resident and his/her family as to where s/he should reside. That basic Human Right to live where you choose to live. Within reason, of course!

 

[susiesue]

Thanks JPG1 and Jennifer

I think the SW was confused as he seemed to think that residential and day care were two different issues and that although David had assets over the £23,000 threshold, this would not apply to daily disability caring costs and these could be viewed completely seperately and the £23,000 threshold not relevant.

He has now explained that he was wrong (surprise, surprise!) and that even with daily costs the £23,000 savings threshold still applies and David does not qualify for these costs either.

What a nightmare this all is.......the quicker the COP gives me permission to realise David's share of the flats money the better - we are getting there slowly....

Thanks again

 

[jenniferpa]

I will say that it isn't always entirely clear, but I don't really rate this specific social worker (although: he's admitted he was wrong so this is a plus point )

 

[ElaineMaul]

Hi,
Just a thought ...... if David's behavioural needs are that great, might he be eligible for continuing health care funding?

It has been my Dad's behavioural needs which have been the biggest factor in him gaining CHC.

Hope this helps.

Elaine