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

    You can access this area by going to the Health and wellbeing forum >here< or you can directly access the area >here<.

Saving assets from care fees, grrrr...

Amber_31

Registered User
Jun 29, 2016
79
The problem is nothing seems to be going on to address the sheer unfairness facing self funded dementia suffers - the worst being the fact that those self funded are made to pay considerably higher fees to subsidise LA places.

The care costs cap may have helped some self funders in a different respect - but it's been shelved! Obviously the reason is lack of money, but with the recurrent use of the phrase 'care crisis' have we any faith that the care costs cap will come into force in 2020? Also the cap only helps those with high value homes; those with their own but modest home are not assisted with a cap of circa £117k.
 

Pete R

Registered User
Jul 26, 2014
2,038
Staffs
Can anyone advise me if my husband were to go into care we jointly own a flat worth about 60,000 would half of that be used to pay for fees as it's owned jointly or all of it? This is rented out by the way so assuming it was the case would it have to be sold?
As you are co-owner they cannot force you to sell it. The LA would though I think expect the half-share of the rental income that belongs to your husband to go towards his care fees.
The question was answered correctly by Saffie in post #26. £30,000 would be included in the husbands assets & therefore make him a self funder. If there are no other funds to pay for care then it may mean a sale of the flat.

:)
 

Pete R

Registered User
Jul 26, 2014
2,038
Staffs
The care costs cap may have helped some self funders in a different respect - but it's been shelved! Obviously the reason is lack of money, but with the recurrent use of the phrase 'care crisis' have we any faith that the care costs cap will come into force in 2020? Also the cap only helps those with high value homes; those with their own but modest home are not assisted with a cap of circa £117k.
I looked after my Mom in her home for 11 years before she went into a NH. Her home is a modest 2 bedroom town house worth around £200,000.

If the cap had come in I could just about have been able to afford to remain in her home but will now be forced to sell.:(

Although that is in itself good news as she continues to defy the rules and will probably outlive me.:)
 

70smand

Registered User
Dec 4, 2011
269
Essex
I completely understand that my parents house is theirs and not my inheritance, but it's my mum I feel for. Dad has just gone into a nursing home with Alzheimer's and is self funding until his savings run out. This will only be in about 6 months. He didn't get CHC funding but did get the extra £150 for nursing care and the home he is in will lower the cost when his money runs out so we don't have to top up. They can't make mum sell the house, but if she does they will have his half. What upsets me is that both mum and dad are only 70 and once the council takes over funding they will takes dads pension leaving my mum with a pension of less than £300 a month to live on. Mum has savings and she will have to use them to live on. I feel angry that my mum stresses about how she will manage in the future when they have always been so careful with money.
 

Pete R

Registered User
Jul 26, 2014
2,038
Staffs
They can't make mum sell the house, but if she does they will have his half.
As long as your Dad or his PoA agree then the Local Authority have the discretion to give your Mum all or part of his half to buy another property.
Annexe E Just under Sec10
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/care-act-statutory-guidance/care-and-support-statutory-guidance#AnnexE


......once the council takes over funding they will takes dads pension leaving my mum with a pension of less than £300 a month to live on.
Half of any private pension can go to your Mum. Your Dad will be able to keep £24.90 per week for "pocket money". This Personal expenses Allowance can be increased to help your Mum out.

Annexe C Sec 47d....
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/care-act-statutory-guidance/care-and-support-statutory-guidance#AnnexC
 

Roseylee

Registered User
Sep 24, 2014
25
Fair Care Home fees

Hi, I haven't posted for a while, as Mum has been doing well, but from time to time I do worry what will happen when her money from the sale of her home runs out. She is a self funder and currently, the sale of her home subsides her care home fees by about 55% per year. That money will not last for ever.
I agree with others who have posted in as much as it's Mum's money and it has to be used for her care. I do not need her inheritance, and I am just so pleased she is well looked after. So it's not the "inheritance" side I have an issue with. It is the fact that the self funders subsidise the LA to a huge degree. My mother gets the same care, the same food, the same size room as the lady in the room next to her. Difference is, that the lady in the room next to her is funded by the LA. You wouldn't book into a London hotel and be asked to pay more than someone in an identical room, with an identical view, and the same breakfast, would you? So there should be one price for all, dependent on the room, and if you can pay for it, you do, and if you can't the LA pays it. The cost therefore would be probably somewhere in the middle, ie less for Mum but higher for the LA. Just seems fairer.
 

Jessbow

Registered User
Mar 1, 2013
2,988
West Hertfordshire
. My mother gets the same care, the same food, the same size room as the lady in the room next to her. Difference is, that the lady in the room next to her is funded by the LA. You wouldn't book into a London hotel and be asked to pay more than someone in an identical room, with an identical view, and the same breakfast, would you? So there should be one price for all, dependent on the room, and if you can pay for it, you do, and if you can't the LA pays it. The cost therefore would be probably somewhere in the middle, ie less for Mum but higher for the LA. Just seems fairer.
You would probably get your rooms cheaper in your hotel if you block booked then for 365 days a year, and guaranteed you'd pay for them, regardless of them being occupied. The hotel guarantees its income so can afford to do it a bit cheaper. Its basically what the authorities do .They are onto a good thing, because its rare that a room is unoccupied
 
Last edited:

realist1234

Registered User
Oct 30, 2014
108
Hi, I haven't posted for a while, as Mum has been doing well, but from time to time I do worry what will happen when her money from the sale of her home runs out. She is a self funder and currently, the sale of her home subsides her care home fees by about 55% per year. That money will not last for ever.
I agree with others who have posted in as much as it's Mum's money and it has to be used for her care. I do not need her inheritance, and I am just so pleased she is well looked after. So it's not the "inheritance" side I have an issue with. It is the fact that the self funders subsidise the LA to a huge degree. My mother gets the same care, the same food, the same size room as the lady in the room next to her. Difference is, that the lady in the room next to her is funded by the LA. You wouldn't book into a London hotel and be asked to pay more than someone in an identical room, with an identical view, and the same breakfast, would you? So there should be one price for all, dependent on the room, and if you can pay for it, you do, and if you can't the LA pays it. The cost therefore would be probably somewhere in the middle, ie less for Mum but higher for the LA. Just seems fairer.
When the elderly care sector is privatised, this is what happens.
 

Saffie

Registered User
Mar 26, 2011
22,506
Near Southampton
Hi, I haven't posted for a while, as Mum has been doing well, but from time to time I do worry what will happen when her money from the sale of her home runs out. She is a self funder and currently, the sale of her home subsides her care home fees by about 55% per year. That money will not last for ever.
I agree with others who have posted in as much as it's Mum's money and it has to be used for her care. I do not need her inheritance, and I am just so pleased she is well looked after. So it's not the "inheritance" side I have an issue with. It is the fact that the self funders subsidise the LA to a huge degree. My mother gets the same care, the same food, the same size room as the lady in the room next to her. Difference is, that the lady in the room next to her is funded by the LA. You wouldn't book into a London hotel and be asked to pay more than someone in an identical room, with an identical view, and the same breakfast, would you? So there should be one price for all, dependent on the room, and if you can pay for it, you do, and if you can't the LA pays it. The cost therefore would be probably somewhere in the middle, ie less for Mum but higher for the LA. Just seems fairer.
I don't understand. If your mother is a self funder surely 100% of her fees are paid for by her.
 

Amber_31

Registered User
Jun 29, 2016
79
You would probably get your rooms cheaper in your hotel if you block booked then for 365 days a year, and guaranteed you'd pay for them, regardless of them being occupied. The hotel guarantees its income so can afford to do it a bit cheaper. Its basically what the authorities do .They are onto a good thing, because its rare that a room is unoccupied
The sad thing is you would have the choice between accepting or refusing to do business with the London hotel - that's the nature of the open market. If you had knowledge that you were paying considerably extra, say between 30-50% more (sorry if those aren't the right figures) for nothing in return for yourself but to subsidise block bookings in the many hundreds of London hotels you could find one that looked like better value for money, and failing all that decide you weren't going to stay in a hotel!

PWD needing a care home don't have the same wide luxury of choice as firstly they need a carehome, secondly their particular needs might narrow down choice, thirdly, maybe proximity to their family. So I'm reality there may be less than a handful to choose from, all treating self funders in the same way. It's contrary to the usual ways of a free market competitive economy for one customer to be forced to subsidise another with no choice, so why do dementia sufferers, out of all other customers in all other businesses in the U.K. today have to do this? Because they've got dementia and their carers are exhausted and I can't remember it having been discussed at PMQT.
 

Pickles53

Registered User
Feb 25, 2014
2,474
Radcliffe on Trent
The sad thing is you would have the choice between accepting or refusing to do business with the London hotel - that's the nature of the open market. If you had knowledge that you were paying considerably extra, say between 30-50% more (sorry if those aren't the right figures) for nothing in return for yourself but to subsidise block bookings in the many hundreds of London hotels you could find one that looked like better value for money, and failing all that decide you weren't going to stay in a hotel!

PWD needing a care home don't have the same wide luxury of choice as firstly they need a carehome, secondly their particular needs might narrow down choice, thirdly, maybe proximity to their family. So I'm reality there may be less than a handful to choose from, all treating self funders in the same way. It's contrary to the usual ways of a free market competitive economy for one customer to be forced to subsidise another with no choice, so why do dementia sufferers, out of all other customers in all other businesses in the U.K. today have to do this? Because they've got dementia and their carers are exhausted and I can't remember it having been discussed at PMQT.
It is sadly what happens when you let the market operate. It does happen in other situations that some customers subsidise others: gas/electricity prices are based on the premise that those who switch deals regularly get lower prices because those on the standard tariffs are paying more, for instance. But I agree with you that this is a siutuation where 'customers' don't have much 'market power' and that choice is often more apparent than real given the constraints on most families of finding a suitable home for their relative.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
113,396
Messages
1,660,014
Members
64,268
Latest member
DebbieC61