Paying care home fees

[SailingWanderer]

My Dad went into a care home last year as he has Ahlzeimer's and my mother's health is so poor she can no longer look after him ( he is 88 and she is 81 )
We are not entitled to any help with costs but what really gets to me is that we pay £600 a week for Dad and social services only pay £400 a week per resident in the same care home ...how can this be fair ?
My Dad worked hard all his life, was a giver of his time in the community and never had a thing from the state in all his life
The Dilnot report earlier this yeas suggests a cap of £35000 for self funding ones health care in a lifetime we have nearly paid that in a year
We also had to pay for my mother to go into a private setting to recover last year as she was considered ok to be discharged from hospital as she could get to the toilet on a zimmer frame ( she lives alone now )
I am ashamed at the way we treat old people in this country...my parents have me nearby to fight their corner but what of those who have noone ?

 

[Chemmy]

I think you'll find two very contrasting viewpoints on TP about this, sailing wanderer. It's a very emotive topic.

I agree that there shouldn't be a two tier fee system in a CH but I have no problem spending what could be considered by some as my inheritence...but is in fact (until she dies), actually Mum's savings, on her care. My parents weren't well off, they didn't ask for handouts but they live prudently and put money by for 'their old age'.

Well, Mum's old age is upon her now and she's been in her CH for over seven years, self-funding. What her prudence has given us is the opportunity not to be at the mercy of social services and to select a CH of our choice. I don't begrudge one penny of her savings being spent on her care. I was brought up not to expect a handout from anyone, including my parents, and if there's anything left at the end, yes, of course I'll be grateful but if there's not, so be it.

It's all very well expecting 'The State' to step in and provide. But 'The State' is, in fact, your kids and my kids paying taxes and I don't expect them to pay for my mother just so that one day I might pocket a lump sum.

I've no doubt there will be lots here who disagree - "those who didn't bother saving get looked after etc etc..." And there's also the "they paid National Insurance" argument - please note that this pays for state benefits, not health and social care, which has always been funded out of current taxes. just like education and the police.

You've only got to read on TP about the difficulties that families have to secure funding when there are no assets to appreciate that your parents' savings give you control over their future.

 

[Witzend]

The Dilnot report earlier this yeas suggests a cap of £35000 for self funding ones health care in a lifetime we have nearly paid that in a year

I can't see that cap ever working, not unless they make everybody pay it, regardless of whether they ever need care or not. Can't see it winning any votes, which is all the politicians of all parties really give a toss about.

My mother's care has so far cost well over £125,000 (self-funded), and she never claimed anything from the state, either.

Fact is, residential care is extremely expensive and with everybody living longer - and often being kept alive long past the point where Nature would have let them go - we're only going to need more of it.

 

[TinaT]

All residents pay the same fee of £480 per week in my husband's care home whether they are self funded or CC funded. Perhaps the difference here is that the home is LA run and is not expected to make a profit. Was your information correct regarding the £400 per week payment for CC?

LA funded care in private care homes negotiate prices on the basis that they supply almost 3/4 of all care places and so have a lot of barganing power.

Did you get a breakdown of costs before you signed any contracts? I wish there was some organisation for privately funded places which could negotiate on your behalf. A minefield indeed!

xxTinaT

 

[Sox]

Hi all - my sister-in-law has been self funding in a nursing home for 9 years and pays 40% more than the state funded residents!! Sox

 

[Witzend]

Just out of interest, my mother's CH fees of around £45K a year work out at just over £123 a day.
Considering what that includes (all meals/snacks/drinks/a lot of laundry/24/7 care and supervision/a lot of heating etc.) and that you can easily pay £70 a night for the cheapest hotel around here, I don't think it's bad value at all.

 

[sussexsue]

I think my views have changed significantly over the past couple of years, partly by listening to points raised on here.

It is a pity that some of mum's money has been used for her short time in a Care Home, especially when I think of all the years we put our lives on hold to care for her at no cost to the State, and all the taxes and NI my dad and her paid over the years. However, I accepted that this was the way it was and that her money was there for her benefit and inheritance should be taken out of the equation. As such, because she had sold her house, we were afforded the luxury of chosing the CH that we felt would best care for her, as opposed to the one SS forced upon us.

What I still cant get my head around though is that not only was she paying for her care, but subsidising other residents care. This still does not sit well with me.

Sue

 

[KingB]

my mum pays 750 pw and if that is subsidising those that cant pay then i think that is a lovely thing for her to do. Those other residents need to be there and if mum is helping to make that possible then that is something to be happy about.

 

[ggma]

I think everyone's points are so valid. We pay more for Mum than the LA residents in her care home, partly because she has a larger room and a nice en-suite. I agree with the point of view, that my parents money is theres as long as they live, and I am really glad we are self funding because it gives us choice and control and we do not have to be at the mercy of SS!

When you take into account what running a home, utility bills and food come to and compare to the cost of a care home, then it is not bad value, we all want the best possible care for our relatives, and I for one think that staff should be properly paid for doing a difficult job, that way we can expect the best possible care.

Looking ahead, I would hope my children make sure my husband and I are properly looked after, before expecting to have anything left!!

 

[Chemmy]

I've never asked whether there's a difference in the private/LA price. The situation by the time Mum went into the CH was so intolerable on both sides, that money never really was the issue.

Looking ahead, I would hope my children make sure my husband and I are properly looked after, before expecting to have anything left!!

I'd like to think that I'm setting a good example to my children by showing them that I don't expect to inherit and am happy for Mum's money to be used for her care. There's an old saying that applies here: Do as you would be done to

 

[Witzend]

I'd like to think that I'm setting a good example to my children by showing them that I don't expect to inherit and am happy for Mum's money to be used for her care. There's an old saying that applies here: Do as you would be done to

I'm happy for my mother's own money to be used for her care, too. And I've often felt profoundly grateful that we didn't have to be at the mercy of SS and in fact didn't have to involve them at all.

OTOH I absolutely hate the thought of my own children's inheritance going on CH fees, to fund me or OH in the kind of state my mother's in now, or my fil was in (also self-funded) come to that.

I often think it's a good thing my mother has AD, since she would be so utterly horrified if she were merely physically frail and knew what her CH was costing. She did not have a vast amount apart from her house, but now and then, usually after totting it up, she'd say, 'I'm only keeping it for you lot.'

OH's old aunt didn't have AD but she was always tight with money anyway and parting with the money for her CH fees was sheer agony to her - (think Whoopee Goldberg in Ghost, parting with that cheque.) In fact she would make OH pay the home ('They'll only charge more if they think I've got money') and she would pay him back. But oh, dear, trying to get her to sign those cheques... 'HOW MUCH???' He did have to get a bit tough sometimes...

 

[Cal5]

Hmm, not really sure I fully agree with some of the sentiments here. What happens when the savings run out is what exercises my mind!

Locally, residential care costs over £1000 p/w. I rang a CH today who seemed a little put out when they quoted £1200p/w and my response was 'How much? That's over £60,000 per year'!

To me there seems to be a great gulf between the minimum savings to get help (£23K) and the annual cost of care locally (more than £50K). This means that people who have been careful, and tried to plan for the future, but didn't have hugely well paid jobs, still end up being fleeced of what they could save and then being dependent on the state. The result is either a move to a home you didn't choose, or the burden falling (even more unfairly) on the children.

Surely some middle way could be found where the state provided a minimum (but acceptable) level of care for all, with a contribution according to wealth.

To my mind, this is all exacerbated by the unknown duration of the care needs. Some people can live with Az or VaD for well over a decade. You'd need some huge savings to pay for that sort of stay locally!!

Just my thoughts and frustration...

 

[SailingWanderer]

Care home fees cost more to private payers

I have no problem with my parents paying for their care and care not a jot if all thier money is used up in this way, also I have no problem with people who are unable to pay for themsevles for whatever reason.I also realise that care is costly and have no objetion to paying whatever it costs. What I object to is paying more than social services pay for people....it either costs £600 a week or it costs £400 a week there just cant be a difference as the rooms and the care are identical ( rightly so )

 

[jenniferpa]

The rationale (and I'm not saying I agree with it I'm just pointing it out) is that social services are a bulk purchaser of care home rooms and thus they get a quantity discount.

There was a TV program, in 2005 I think it was, about this inequity, and that was what was said in that.

 

[nmintueo]

I have no problem with my parents paying for their care ... What I object to is paying more than social services pay for people

Yes, and I thought you did make the point quite clearly in your original post. Having to pay a 50% premium for the same service seems, at best, excessive.

Inevitably, commercial reality is that the bulk purchaser - Social Services - has a bargaining advantage and can command a better price.

To some extent, individual purchasers may be able to bargain aggressively for a better deal, but they'll never be able to match that.

 

[Nebiroth]

The obvious answer would be for local authorities to commission care home placement and to pay the fees - even if the money actually originated from the resident and the authority only acted as an agent.

Care homes would not be permitted to know who was self-funding or otherwise.

 

[Chemmy]

The obvious answer would be for local authorities to commission care home placement and to pay the fees - even if the money actually originated from the resident and the authority only acted as an agent.

Care homes would not be permitted to know who was self-funding or otherwise.

Great idea, but what's the betting the LA would want to charge an "administration fee"

 

[jenniferpa]

Actually I believe that this is already an option in at least some parts of Scotland - the LA negotiates the rate and the contract is between the LA and the care home, with the self-funder reimbursing the LA. Other LAs may be doing it as well, but it was a Scottish member who mentioned that this was how it worked with her husband.

 

[Nebiroth]

Great idea, but what's the betting the LA would want to charge an "administration fee"

Possible, but given the price difference can be hundreds of pounds per week, likely still worth it.

Most government agencies charge very reasonable administration rates for this type of stuff.

 

[JackyS]

While we're on the subject of care home fees, I'm really confused!

Like many of you, I'm delighted that mum will be able to self-fund - at least for a while, once we sell her flat - and not at all worried that my "inheritance" will have gone (actually, my inheritance is the many happy memories and loving family my Mum has given me).

But, when Mum goes into a home (and I'm guessing that may not be too far off now), what happens when her money runs out? The best homes round here seem to be around the £1000 a week mark (although I haven't yet found out if the Council can get us a discounted rate - that's a new thought I've learned tonight) and Mum's money might just last a couple of years.

Is there someone in the Council who can sit me down and explain EXACTLY (maybe using diagrams!!) what Mum is entitled to, work out all the figures and tell me what happens next etc???

Or do I have to continue to search the many sources of info (this forum seems to be one of the best) and try and work it all out myself? Oh and is it worth trying to negotiate with the homes myself??