• All threads and posts regarding Coronavirus COVID-19 can be found in our area specifically for Coronavirus COVID-19 discussion.

    You can directly access this area >here<.

Protecting assets.

Status
Not open for further replies.

MrsV

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
235
0
Northamptonshire
It just seems unfair on those in the middle (regarding assets) :

If you have very little money, SS will pay for your care. You may be left with £14,000 you can pass on to your children.

If you have some savings and/or only a small property to sell, ALL that will probably get used up paying for your care costs but you may still be left with £14,000 to pass on.

If you're well-off, you will also have to pay for your care but you should still have money to leave to your children.

Maybe it's my skewed viewpoint but it seems to me that those in the middle do worse under the current rules.

(OK, yes, it definitely is skewed.)
Hi Jaded and Faded,
I totally agree the system is very unfair. Its not fair that two people sat next to each other in a dementia care home get the same care; yet one person had to sell their home and use up all their life savings to pay for that care. and the other person rented their home and has everything paid for them by the LA. Its the self funders who pay for the ones who don't have any means to pay (well them and the LA picks up the rest).

Then there are those who did have a house, and approaching later life, in their 70s decided to sell it, and move into a rented house, give a lot of money to their children, travel, spend their winters in Spain. Both enjoying good health, no sign of dementia. They tell me its their money, and they are both well and healthy and can spend their money as they like, they keep a decent amount for their outgoings. They feel should either of them be diagnosed with dementia in the future, then they had no idea about it at the time, and could not have forseen it, after all they dont have a crystal ball to see into the future. and not all old people get dementia.
 

MrsV

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
235
0
Northamptonshire
Wow. That is a lot extra. I don't know how much extra Mum paid. I wonder what solution the Government will decide is the right one !
Yes, its very unfair.
Age UK have said that each person would need to save over GBP100,000 to cover the average cost of residential care. No one can possibly save that amount in their lifetime. So they make us sell our homes to pay. Its also unfair that people who have spent their income and not saved at all during their life get residential care free. :( I very much doubt the government would do anything to help people so they didnt have to sell their home to pay for care.

The only people who make a fortune out of this are the care home owners. Every loved one in there is contributing to their fortune.

After seeing how bad dementia gets with my own mother, my own plan would be to take a trip to Dignitas should I receive a diagnosis. The law needs to change in this country.
 

northumbrian_k

Registered User
Mar 2, 2017
1,477
0
Newcastle
I have never given much thought to comparing what my wife pays for her residential care to what the other residents pay. It is none of my business anyway. It is a bit like when one gets a bargain deal from a travel company. At the resort one will always find someone who says they got a better deal ...

I don't agree with the current system but have had to work with it to get my wife the care that she needs. Perhaps for the 18 months that she was self-funding she may have been subsidising other residents. I just thought of it as paying the going rate. Now her funds are below the threshold her contribution has reduced massively. The council has picked up the remainder of the tab, at whatever rate it has negotiated commensurate with its available budget.

Funding for social care - like so many other things - is deeply flawed but I'm afraid that it isn't going to change any time soon.
 

nita

Registered User
Dec 30, 2011
2,175
0
Essex
@Jaded'n'faded i feel i need to apologize at this point as we were on low pay so couldnt really do the saving. never own our house but rent and he was laid off a few times in the 80s as lorry firms went under. my dad is still living as far as im aware. i wont inherit and dont want it. my 4 kids are all housed with their own families. they wont inherit off of us. my point is that it wasnt my fault i couldnt save and have mortgage etc but reading your post i feel guilty that this never happened. there are as many different circumstances as people. the most we are trying to do is pay for a funeral. maybe be aware of other people. the system is not fair but nothing about dementia is fair and i cant change that
I can empathise with you, @jennifer1967 as my mother could not save - she did cleaning jobs part-time while my brother was ill from his teens onwards. My father had left us though he did contribute a bit. My mother eventually got better paid jobs but never enough to save and we had more illness in the family. My Mum had to find all the household bills out of her own low pay.

Some people have misfortunes/illness/unemployment etc. in their lives and don't earn enough to save which was the case for my Mum.. Ironically, the only time she became better off she wasn't able to benefit from it - it was when she became ill in her 80s and received Attendance Allowance. When she died, she actually had a small amount of savings to leave us.

People no longer understand that that is what the state system is for - it's a safety net for people who fall into poverty. I think all the problems with people paying for their care has come about in recent years with the greater longevity and thus more people getting dementia. Also, at one time care homes were in public hands, now large investment companies are making profits from "care."
 

jennifer1967

Registered User
Mar 15, 2020
5,918
0
Southampton
I can empathise with you, @jennifer1967 as my mother could not save - she did cleaning jobs part-time while my brother was ill from his teens onwards. My father had left us though he did contribute a bit. My mother eventually got better paid jobs but never enough to save and we had more illness in the family. My Mum had to find all the household bills out of her own low pay.

Some people have misfortunes/illness/unemployment etc. in their lives and don't earn enough to save which was the case for my Mum.. Ironically, the only time she became better off she wasn't able to benefit from it - it was when she became ill in her 80s and received Attendance Allowance. When she died, she actually had a small amount of savings to leave us.

People no longer understand that that is what the state system is for - it's a safety net for people who fall into poverty. I think all the problems with people paying for their care has come about in recent years with the greater longevity and thus more people getting dementia. Also, at one time care homes were in public hands, now large investment companies are making profits from "care."
thanks @nita thats exactly what i meant although you put it better
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
thanks @nita thats exactly what i meant although you put it better
I've always worked but always managed to stay poor!

I moved into my house in 1984 with my partner (later my husband, later my ex.) It was a brand new 2 bed semi on a shared ownership scheme. The full price was £20,000 (yes, really!) but we could only afford a mortgage on a quarter, so that's what we went for. The other 3/4 was/is rented from a housing association. The intention was to buy further shares and eventually the whole thing as our incomes increased. Only they never did! Back then, Mater and Pater had loads of money but rarely spoke to me and if they did it was with disapproval and criticism. They could have chosen to help me out financially back then, though it was their money so no reason why they should have. It wouldn't have occurred to me to ask for their help. (They could have chosen just to be nice to me occasionally but they never did that either.)

As things have turned out, I am finally buying my house with what's left of mum's money, post care home fees, that I inherited. She (and my late father) would be horrified to hear what the place is worth now and how much I'm having to pay to buy it. If we'd done it back then, I would have owned my house (and not paid rent every month for 37 years) and the inheritance would have been much the same! But hindsight is a wonderful thing. None of us know what the future holds and it's easy to look back and think, 'I wish I'd planned things better.' No one says, 'I'll just put this £150 grand to one side in case I get dementia.'

That's the point of this post really. I've never had to do any financial planning before as I've never had any 'spare' money! But once the house sale is sorted (it's been going on for months) I will have a proper asset for the first time. I'll be doing a will, LPA, etc. too, and it just seems prudent to protect my house if I can. If it has to be sold to pay for care, so be it. But if that can be avoided, that's what I'd like to do.

Of course, we now have a new health minister with plans for changes to social care. So it might turn out that all care is free by the time I need it... (Crikey - did anyone see that pig flying past the window?)
 

TNJJ

Registered User
May 7, 2019
2,215
0
cornwall
I've always worked but always managed to stay poor!

I moved into my house in 1984 with my partner (later my husband, later my ex.) It was a brand new 2 bed semi on a shared ownership scheme. The full price was £20,000 (yes, really!) but we could only afford a mortgage on a quarter, so that's what we went for. The other 3/4 was/is rented from a housing association. The intention was to buy further shares and eventually the whole thing as our incomes increased. Only they never did! Back then, Mater and Pater had loads of money but rarely spoke to me and if they did it was with disapproval and criticism. They could have chosen to help me out financially back then, though it was their money so no reason why they should have. It wouldn't have occurred to me to ask for their help. (They could have chosen just to be nice to me occasionally but they never did that either.)

As things have turned out, I am finally buying my house with what's left of mum's money, post care home fees, that I inherited. She (and my late father) would be horrified to hear what the place is worth now and how much I'm having to pay to buy it. If we'd done it back then, I would have owned my house (and not paid rent every month for 37 years) and the inheritance would have been much the same! But hindsight is a wonderful thing. None of us know what the future holds and it's easy to look back and think, 'I wish I'd planned things better.' No one says, 'I'll just put this £150 grand to one side in case I get dementia.'

That's the point of this post really. I've never had to do any financial planning before as I've never had any 'spare' money! But once the house sale is sorted (it's been going on for months) I will have a proper asset for the first time. I'll be doing a will, LPA, etc. too, and it just seems prudent to protect my house if I can. If it has to be sold to pay for care, so be it. But if that can be avoided, that's what I'd like to do.

Of course, we now have a new health minister with plans for changes to social care. So it might turn out that all care is free by the time I need it... (Crikey - did anyone see that pig flying past the window?)
😃🐷. I did..
 

MartinWL

Registered User
Jun 12, 2020
988
0
You could consider putting the house into a trust, with yourself and the two children as trustees. Trusts are complicated and expert legal advice would be essential. Potentially the house wouldn't be part of your assets to be sold to pay for care as it would belong to the trust not to you.
 

Female1952

Registered User
Apr 6, 2021
17
0
If you read other threads it's not all about inheritance. It's spouses being physically and sexually abused by partners with dementia. Frail partners or children with other responsibilities dealing with incontinence and other issues with no help from GP or social services.
There's a lot thar needs to be sorted before inheritance is eveb considered.
I speak as POA for my aunt, who is paying £5.5k per month for her care. She's been in a care home for more than 4 years- the important thing is that we got her there and she's well cared for.
 

Lawson58

Registered User
Aug 1, 2014
2,502
0
Victoria, Australia
If you read other threads it's not all about inheritance. It's spouses being physically and sexually abused by partners with dementia. Frail partners or children with other responsibilities dealing with incontinence and other issues with no help from GP or social services.
There's a lot thar needs to be sorted before inheritance is eveb considered.
I speak as POA for my aunt, who is paying £5.5k per month for her care. She's been in a care home for more than 4 years- the important thing is that we got her there and she's well cared for.
And that was the other thought I had whilst reading the posts. Having my own money means that I can not only remain independent for as long as I can but it also allows me to have a choice in wherever I end up, be it at home or in care. You can only have a choice if you can afford it and I think my children would be appalled if I left money to them instead of caring for myself properly.
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
And that was the other thought I had whilst reading the posts. Having my own money means that I can not only remain independent for as long as I can but it also allows me to have a choice in wherever I end up, be it at home or in care. You can only have a choice if you can afford it and I think my children would be appalled if I left money to them instead of caring for myself properly.
Yes, money certainly buys you some choice. But is it fair that some people get choices over their care whilst others (e.g. those funded by SS) have no choice at all and have to accept whatever SS gives them? No, it isn't.

Can we also spare a thought for those people with dementia who have no family/friends to speak for them and act on their behalf? I was wondering what happens in such a case - presumably a deputy is appointed to look after their finances. Would that person also do such things as applying for CHC on behalf of the PWD if they would be entitled to it? Would anyone care that the person's money was being used up still paying for care and that very little was left for the person's beloved cousin in Australia? I'd be really interested to see figures on this: how many people without family or friends to apply for them were actually awarded CHC? I bet there are none.
 

marionq

Registered User
Apr 24, 2013
6,396
0
Scotland
@Jaded'n'faded the situation with those who have no close family is not straightforward. My SIL never married or had children and although one of nine siblings they were all dead by the time she had to go into care. She is profoundly deaf, cannot speak and is mostly illiterate. Nevertheless she worked as a seamstress from 16 to 64. By default I had to deal with her situation and affairs and it had not been easy. I tried to get the LA to apply as deputy or the care home to become her appointee but neither worked out for one reason or another. Eventually the LA accepted that as she now has cancer as well as mild dementia they would pay all her costs and reclaim them through their lawyer when she dies which may well be quite soon.

She is fortunate to be in a lovely care home and that once I had got things in some kind of order she has all she needs. Once all her expenses are paid there will be several thousand pounds each to the dozen nieces and nephews who would barely recognise her if they met her in the street.
 

canary

Registered User
Feb 25, 2014
15,539
0
South coast
Yes, money certainly buys you some choice. But is it fair that some people get choices over their care whilst others (e.g. those funded by SS) have no choice at all and have to accept whatever SS gives them? No, it isn't.
Nothing in life is available to everyone. There are always a range of things at different prices - that is true from things like supermarket items to cars. It would be nice if everything were available to everyone, but life is not like that.

In that respect, care homes are no different - they all cost different amounts and the Local Authority is naturally going to go for the cheapest option.

There is a trade off between self-funding and LA funding. If you are self-funding you can choose where to move to (assuming that they will accept you and they have the room) and (to a certain extent) the timing, but you have to use up your savings. If you are LA funded, you do not have to pay, but you have very little, or no, choice.

Both camps can argue this is not fair, but without a huge (very expensive) overhaul by government - and I dont see any willingness for then to grasp this particular nettle - nothing is going to change.
 

Lawson58

Registered User
Aug 1, 2014
2,502
0
Victoria, Australia
Yes, money certainly buys you some choice. But is it fair that some people get choices over their care whilst others (e.g. those funded by SS) have no choice at all and have to accept whatever SS gives them? No, it isn't.

Can we also spare a thought for those people with dementia who have no family/friends to speak for them and act on their behalf? I was wondering what happens in such a case - presumably a deputy is appointed to look after their finances. Would that person also do such things as applying for CHC on behalf of the PWD if they would be entitled to it? Would anyone care that the person's money was being used up still paying for care and that very little was left for the person's beloved cousin in Australia? I'd be really interested to see figures on this: how many people without family or friends to apply for them were actually awarded CHC? I bet there are none.
If I have the money to pay for my care, then that frees up funding for someone else, someone who might not the get the care they need because of their circumstances. If I can see out my life without being a burden on others, then that would make me happy.

We live in a world in which not much is fair. The gap between rich and poor grows wider every day. And is it fair that some people get dementia when others don't?
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
@Jaded'n'faded the situation with those who have no close family is not straightforward. My SIL never married or had children and although one of nine siblings they were all dead by the time she had to go into care. She is profoundly deaf, cannot speak and is mostly illiterate. Nevertheless she worked as a seamstress from 16 to 64. By default I had to deal with her situation and affairs and it had not been easy. I tried to get the LA to apply as deputy or the care home to become her appointee but neither worked out for one reason or another. Eventually the LA accepted that as she now has cancer as well as mild dementia they would pay all her costs and reclaim them through their lawyer when she dies which may well be quite soon.

She is fortunate to be in a lovely care home and that once I had got things in some kind of order she has all she needs. Once all her expenses are paid there will be several thousand pounds each to the dozen nieces and nephews who would barely recognise her if they met her in the street.
So is anyone officially her deputy? Although the LA are paying now, they intend to recoup the money when she dies - a rather odd sort of DPA. I see that you were involved in her finances to some extent - who does that now? Do you know the value of her assets and how much the LA will be charging her (on her death) for the cost of her care? i.e. are you sure about the amount that will remain? (Obviously no one knows how long she's got left and I'm glad she's in a nice home.)

You see, the problem I have with this is that your SiL may well be eligible for CHC at some point but will anyone apply for it on her behalf? Or is it more likely the LA will just continue to pay the CH for now, knowing they can claim a huge amount from her estate, and not bother putting her up for CHC? (Because no one is going to challenge it...?)
 

marionq

Registered User
Apr 24, 2013
6,396
0
Scotland
There was no POA because she would not have understood. I had no legal standing and no access to her bank account which is why I asked them to take over. All of these bodies have worked with me because she cannot communicate which is unusual. I think they all felt out of their depth. I have had dozens of phone calls over the last year since she was taken in, asking my opinion and my agreement which was a surprise to me. To be fair to all of these bodies involved
I think they wanted to do their best by her but the situation with her condition plus the pandemic left everyone tearing their hair out. I know her financial position because the bank still sends her statements to my address once a month. Originally she shared an account with my husband but he died a few months before this all began and though I took her to the bank and changed the account into her name only they still sent out the statements. I don’t think she will last long enough to claim anything quite frankly. I’ll be interested in what the lawyer charges when this is all over.
 

Jaded'n'faded

Registered User
Jan 23, 2019
1,953
0
High Peak
If I have the money to pay for my care, then that frees up funding for someone else, someone who might not the get the care they need because of their circumstances. If I can see out my life without being a burden on others, then that would make me happy.

We live in a world in which not much is fair. The gap between rich and poor grows wider every day. And is it fair that some people get dementia when others don't?
So true.

All my life, whenever I threw my hands up and declared, 'It's not fair!' my mother would always reply, 'No one ever said life is fair. Get used to it.'

Mum paid for her care because she had ample funds and that's fair enough. But it's not fair she paid so much more for her room than the LA were paying for the residents they funded. Mum paid tax and NI all her life (and she always worked apart from 5 years when my brother and I were very young.) So she paid for her own care, paid towards the care of other through taxes then got shafted again paying the higher fees at the care home. Should she have been made to pay again? No.

But maybe I should take the blame as I chose the CH. Back then I didn't have a clue about funding or how it worked. When I did discover the truth, the manager was quite open with me about how much more my mother was paying because the LA don't pay enough so they charged private residents more to make up the shortfall. This only happens in homes that take both private and LA funded residents. I should have chosen a fully private home for her. But how was I to know about this injustice? This is probably the one piece of advice I'd pass on to anyone comtemplating a self-funded move into care for their loved one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
120,671
Messages
1,767,964
Members
71,693
Latest member
angelasconcerned