117 and assets

[Mimi1977]

Hello all, I've been reading this forum for a few weeks so just a few questions re 117. Mum has been under a 117 for a good few years, living at home with supports. She was sectioned in April (Section2) then in June Section 3 when her condition worsened. She's had bi-polar disorder for the last 40 years and in June was diagnosed with Alzheimers.

I am her only child and main beneficiary in her will. I am in the process of registering her EPA set up years ago. I understand that her after-care is free due to the 117- it is likely she will be going into a care home. She has a house and savings - value circa £200k, for the past few years she's hardly spent anything as she rarely ventures outside the house.

My questions are:-
1) Being under a 117 can I assume the status of her financial assets will not be scrutinised in determining her care, even if they continue to grow in value.
2) I note there is a cap of £72k for those in residential care - again I assume this again is not an issue under a 117.
3) If the LA give me options of a residential placement and I am not happy with them, can I elect to pay a 'top-up' from her resources in order to find a placement that meets my approval? Or is this something I should be wary about?

I'm just mulling over the issues and would appreciate the thoughts of forum members.

many thanks

 

[jenniferpa]

Hi mimi.

1) If she remains under a section 117 (as she should) no her financial situation will not be scrutinized. Mind you (and I'm not suggesting you would) but when you register the LPA you do have a requirement to be fiscally responsible with those assets.

2) Unfortunately the care cost cap implementation has been delayed until 2020. Fortunately (for your mother) this doesn't apply to her anyway.

3) This has changed under the Care Act. Previously top-ups were not possible but now a patient may use their own funds to "top-up". Which is not to say it's a good idea to agree to such a top-up, but it should be possible.

 

[Pete R]

Mimi, the only thing I would add is that if you apply for #3 and want to use your Mom's capital the LA may well look into #1 as you/your Mum will have to enter into a written agreement and they must be sure that any top up can be met for the duration.

 

[Mimi1977]

Thank you Jennifer and Peter.

The substantial part of her assets is her house, which I have no intention of selling in the short and medium term, as I need somewhere to stay when I visit her. I don't live in the UK - but I'm only an hour flying time away, so I am hoping to come over one week in every four. This way I can keep an eye on the house, be near-ish to mum and have time to see her and take her out. I know my mum would value that the most. I know there will come a time when she wont know me, so I just want to make sure I make the most of the time between now and when that time comes.

Peter - your point is very helpful. It did occur to me that offering to pay more may open things up for scrutiny. I think I will just have to wait and see what kind of placement is offered. I have been very affected by the hospital ward she's on at the moment - so spartan and almost prison like. I just want my mum to be in a comfortable place where she can have all her bits and pieces around her. I haven't been in any residential homes in England so I am probably projecting my own anxiety re the type of setting someone on a 117 will end up in. I'm sure there are forum members who have loved ones provided for under a 117 and are very happy with the quality of care, I'm just being honest about my feelings right now.

That said, I do feel very lucky that her care costs will be covered. Mum hasn't had a great life - tragedy and illness have dominated, I just want to make her life as comfortable as possible.

One complication, under the Mental Health Act, I am not allowed to be 'next of kin' as I don't live in the UK - I know, I was gob smacked. So reading pasts posts I am worried if my voice will not be heard re her placement if there is a cost issue. I understand that the NHS meet the costs but sometimes social care staff in the LA ( who do the placement) may work to a budget cap - which apparently doesn't exist for 117. If I was next of kin I could refuse for her to be discharged if I wasn't happy with the care home placement, I'm assuming I wont have this power now.

You can see my head is mulling over so many issues. I am trying to take one step at a time, but forewarned is forearmed.

 

[Pete R]

The substantial part of her assets is her house, which I have no intention of selling in the short and medium term.........

With other residents in care outside of 117 the LA can offer a Differed Payment Agreement and I can find nothing in the New Act to say it cannot be offered for 117 top ups. You will need to ask the LA involved. With a DPA the LA pay the top up till either the property is sold or on death. There can be charges and interest involved so it may not suit everyone.

........if there is a cost issue.

The LA/NHS have to fund a place for your Mum. So really the cost issue should only crop up if you do not like it and can find somewhere else that can meet her needs and is more expensive. If the top up can be paid by your Mum or someone else the changes in the law should prevent any cost issues.

 

[jenniferpa]

One complication, under the Mental Health Act, I am not allowed to be 'next of kin' as I don't live in the UK - I know, I was gob smacked.

I know - I was stunned when I discovered that little gem in the Mental Health act. My mother wasn't sectioned but I was doing research just in case and was appalled to find her only daughter wouldn't count. However, I wouldn't worry too much about it as it would relate more to if you wanted to get her off section. Mind (www.mind.org.uk) has a lot of information about this if you haven't seen it.

 

[Mimi1977]

The LA/NHS have to fund a place for your Mum. So really the cost issue should only crop up if you do not like it and can find somewhere else that can meet her needs and is more expensive. If the top up can be paid by your Mumor someone else the changes in the law should prevent any cost issues.

Hi Pete, I have been digging around this morning and one point that does pop out is that my mum is NOT allowed to pay. If I don't like the home I have to make a case that her 'needs' are not met. There is also the notion of 'reasonable' cost particularly in relation to her "best interests" being met. In short, it's the usual making a case but if this is not accepted, I would have to pay from my resources if I was still set on the more expensive CH.

 

[Pete R]

Hi Pete, I have been digging around this morning and one point that does pop out is that my mum is NOT allowed to pay. If I don't like the home I have to make a case that her 'needs' are not met. There is also the notion of 'reasonable' cost particularly in relation to her "best interests" being met. In short, it's the usual making a case but if this is not accepted, I would have to pay from my resources if I was still set on the more expensive CH.

Not sure where you have "dug" but I would imagine it was into old stuff rather than The New Care Act that came in this April.

This is a link to the new Statutory Guidance.....
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa.../file/366104/43380_23902777_Care_Act_Book.pdf
Annexe A Sec 44 "Choice of accommodation and mental health after-care"

Also AgeUK Fact Sheet 10 Sec 15.4.....
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...80RSfFLzfD4XJAQ&bvm=bv.98717601,d.ZGU&cad=rjt

"The regulations give people who receive mental health after-care broadly the same rights to choice of accommodation as someone who receives care and support under the Care Act 2014 although there are no restrictions upon when the resident themselves can pay a ‘first party’ top-up."

Hope that helps.

 

[Mimi1977]

Yikes, that teaches me to go digging in old places.

Thanks for the links Pete, plenty of reading there but more importantly I am aware of the new Care Act.

 

[Pickles53]

Mimi you may have already thought of this so apologies for possibly stating the obvious....

Is the insurance company for both buildings and contents aware that your mum's house will be unoccupied at least between your visits? Most companies will not cover unoccupied but furnished houses for very long without either increasing premiums, reducing cover, excluding certain risks or adding special conditions...or a combination of all of these. Keeping them in the loop will avoid your mum's property being at risk if anything happens.

 

[Mimi1977]

Thanks Pickles - I have indeed just this week informed the insurance company - they cancelled the old policy and set up a new one with regard to the house being unoccupied.