The cost of care homes

Status
Not open for further replies.


pavarotti1980 said:
I guess the social care precept is regressive too?

I like your generalisation that only working class rent though. Biggest load of bollocks
Click to expand...

I didn’t say that. Outside of the big cities, it’s working class people who rent. Middle class people buy property unless they have a practical reason not to e.g. waiting for the right house to come on the market. The British are obsessed with home ownership.

Flared Hicks said:
Outside of big cities where the vast majority of the population, many middle class, rent.

The lad’s dug himself a crater but is happy enough sat at the bottom scratching away so best left to it.
Click to expand...

Tell me why middle class people would choose to rent, in somewhere like Sunderland. It’s super niche and only in circumstances where it suits them to do so I.e. career move.
 
Last edited:
Roaring Chubby said:
I didn’t say that. Outside of the big cities, it’s working class people who rent. Middle class people buy property unless they have a practical reason not to e.g. waiting for the right house to come on the market. The British are obsessed with home ownership
Click to expand...
Massive generalisation with no factual basis
 
pavarotti1980 said:
Massive generalisation with no factual basis
Click to expand...

Where are your facts for the counter argument to debunk mine then? My generalisation is totally plausible. The British are totally obsessed with home ownership and tend to dive in at the earliest opportunity. Middle class people in Sunderland don’t tend rent unless they are transient, perhaps.
 
Roaring Chubby said:
My point is, “acting within the law” as you said, basically means hiding the cash so you don’t incur the cost. I understand who people do it, but at the end of the day the cost of care is burdened on everyone else when in reality, they could have paid for what they use whilst we have a breaking society with reduced funding for nhs / police etc. People can fill their boots but I’m just astounded that people post that they are working the system and don’t expect to get called out on it.



Range Rover and pro fiddling care costs so the tax payer takes the knock iirc
Click to expand...
Public funding is being cut for political reasons, not because the money isn’t there. How much did this government send overseas last year in bribes to foreign governments, sorry, I think it’s called overseas aid? And how many elderly care home places would this have paid for? The allocation of public funding has been a disgrace under successive administrations. You mention large corporations exploiting loopholes, haven’t you considered why those loopholes are left deliberately open?
Whilst this is the case I personally have no issue with people using the system to their own advantage, and protecting monies hard earned over a lifetime of work and paying taxes whilst it’s within the law. What’s sauce for the goose and all that. You may find this morally reprehensible, that’s a matter for yourself and carries no weight. Personally I don’t blame anyone for protecting their or their parents money.
 
Dilligaf60 said:
Public funding is being cut for political reasons, not because the money isn’t there. How much did this government send overseas last year in bribes to foreign governments, sorry, I think it’s called overseas aid? And how many elderly care home places would this have paid for? The allocation of public funding has been a disgrace under successive administrations. You mention large corporations exploiting loopholes, haven’t you considered why those loopholes are left deliberately open?
Whilst this is the case I personally have no issue with people using the system to their own advantage, and protecting monies hard earned over a lifetime of work and paying taxes whilst it’s within the law. What’s sauce for the goose and all that. You may find this morally reprehensible, that’s a matter for yourself and carries no weight. Personally I don’t blame anyone for protecting their or their parents money.
Click to expand...
Have to agree.
You have to remember that middle class aren’t rich . They are hard working folk who have paid their way through their working lives . To then ask them to use all their savings up is in my opinion wrong .
The really wealthy will pay for it privately anyway so won’t be affected .
I will do everything I can to pass as much of my wealth over to my kids.
 
humbug said:
just skimmed through the thread and it's right the cost of care is horrendous unless the person qualifies for nursing care whereby the state picks up the tab and subsequently everyone.
my mam developed dementia and spent the last couple of years of her life in a care home before she died. when she was in care i would go every month to the post office to pay the bill.
not once did i think it was a rip off. she was looked after very well by kind and compassionate staff who gave her a great quality of life despite her condition and not once did i resent my dwindling 'inheritance'. it was her money, not mine or my sisters and couldn't have been spent better. to think any other is disgusting.
Click to expand...

Sadly this isn’t the case. People are still required to make a contribution towards their care. The NHS only pick up the tab for the extra nursing element of their care (which is in the region of £150-200 per week - I’m a bit out of the loop now after a career change).

If it is Continuing Health Care (CHC) then it is entirely picked up by the NHS but that is sparingly awarded and tends to be just for people coming towards the end of their life.

Residential and nursing care is very expensive. There is no obvious solution to it unfortunately and the current system is probably just about the fairest way possible; and it still costs the state an absolute fortune.

If anyone owns property the best thing to do is to put it in trust to family whilst still relatively young (with added legal caveats of course). That way you will at least protect one asset as any instantly accessible capital is going to be taken into account if you need permanent care.
 
Dilligaf60 said:
Public funding is being cut for political reasons, not because the money isn’t there. How much did this government send overseas last year in bribes to foreign governments, sorry, I think it’s called overseas aid? And how many elderly care home places would this have paid for? The allocation of public funding has been a disgrace under successive administrations. You mention large corporations exploiting loopholes, haven’t you considered why those loopholes are left deliberately open?
Whilst this is the case I personally have no issue with people using the system to their own advantage, and protecting monies hard earned over a lifetime of work and paying taxes whilst it’s within the law. What’s sauce for the goose and all that. You may find this morally reprehensible, that’s a matter for yourself and carries no weight. Personally I don’t blame anyone for protecting their or their parents money.
Click to expand...
This...
 
The Sheepfolds End said:
Sadly this isn’t the case. People are still required to make a contribution towards their care. The NHS only pick up the tab for the extra nursing element of their care (which is in the region of £150-200 per week - I’m a bit out of the loop now after a career change).

If it is Continuing Health Care (CHC) then it is entirely picked up by the NHS but that is sparingly awarded and tends to be just for people coming towards the end of their life.

Residential and nursing care is very expensive. There is no obvious solution to it unfortunately and the current system is probably just about the fairest way possible; and it still costs the state an absolute fortune.

If anyone owns property the best thing to do is to put it in trust to family whilst still relatively young (with added legal caveats of course). That way you will at least protect one asset as any instantly accessible capital is going to be taken into account if you need permanent care.
Click to expand...

you're right, i just couldn't think of the terminology. my mam qualified for what you mentioned 2 weeks before she died.

the second bolded bit was what my mam wanted to do years before she worsened and even needed care but as sad as it sounds whenever she brought it up i changed the subject and couldn't have that conversation with her.
 
humbug said:
you're right, i just couldn't think of the terminology. my mam qualified for what you mentioned 2 weeks before she died.

the second bolded bit was what my mam wanted to do years before she worsened and even needed care but as sad as it sounds whenever she brought it up i changed the subject and couldn't have that conversation with her.
Click to expand...

I can’t imagine it would ever be an easy conversation to have. I think it’s just up to the property owner to just arrange it and then let the family know the situation when sorted.
 
The Sheepfolds End said:
Sadly this isn’t the case. People are still required to make a contribution towards their care. The NHS only pick up the tab for the extra nursing element of their care (which is in the region of £150-200 per week - I’m a bit out of the loop now after a career change).

If it is Continuing Health Care (CHC) then it is entirely picked up by the NHS but that is sparingly awarded and tends to be just for people coming towards the end of their life.

Residential and nursing care is very expensive. There is no obvious solution to it unfortunately and the current system is probably just about the fairest way possible; and it still costs the state an absolute fortune.

If anyone owns property the best thing to do is to put it in trust to family whilst still relatively young (with added legal caveats of course). That way you will at least protect one asset as any instantly accessible capital is going to be taken into account if you need permanent care.
Click to expand...

Just a note to say that trusts, and in particular family trusts don't always prevent a local authority including a property in the financial assessment. No longer do they have to work to a specific deadline as to when the property was put into trust, or that the person would indeed need care. The LA may challenge the 'legitimate' reason, citing that regardless, it has been done with the impact of reducing the person's ability to meet care costs.

LA's under greater financial pressures these days will pursue as it is financially in their best interests. So take your chances as the cost will be charged to any beneficiary in the trust.
 
cruze said:
Just a note to say that trusts, and in particular family trusts don't always prevent a local authority including a property in the financial assessment. No longer do they have to work to a specific deadline as to when the property was put into trust, or that the person would indeed need care. The LA may challenge the 'legitimate' reason, citing that regardless, it has been done with the impact of reducing the person's ability to meet care costs.

LA's under greater financial pressures these days will pursue as it is financially in their best interests. So take your chances as the cost will be charged to any beneficiary in the trust.
Click to expand...

Yeah absolutely. Each LA can interpret the charging guidance as they see fit and trusts aren’t entirely guaranteed.

Signing over the property fully whilst young enough is another alternative.
 
Haven’t read the whole thread so apologies if it’s been brought up but having seen the situation from a personal viewpoint (mother with Parkinson’s and dementia) and a professional viewpoint (NHS and every care hone in the region) I’ve drawn a few conclusions of my own.

We have to have a serious talk about euthanasia in this country. People are being kep alive way beyond any semblance of dignity imo.

For some there’s a much cheaper alternative in the Housing 21 assisted living schemes (other operators are available) Buy 75% of an apartment, which is the max you can buy and you pay no rent....only a service charge and the care element. I’ve been in them all and they’re brilliant and thoroughly recommended by almost all the residents I’ve spoken to.....and you own the property so the money is still in the family when the occupier passes away.
 
Lord Alfred said:
Haven’t read the whole thread so apologies if it’s been brought up but having seen the situation from a personal viewpoint (mother with Parkinson’s and dementia) and a professional viewpoint (NHS and every care hone in the region) I’ve drawn a few conclusions of my own.

We have to have a serious talk about euthanasia in this country. People are being kep alive way beyond any semblance of dignity imo.

For some there’s a much cheaper alternative in the Housing 21 assisted living schemes (other operators are available) Buy 75% of an apartment, which is the max you can buy and you pay no rent....only a service charge and the care element. I’ve been in them all and they’re brilliant and thoroughly recommended by almost all the residents I’ve spoken to.....and you own the property so the money is still in the family when the occupier passes away.
Click to expand...
These still aren't cheap tho. You have to pay own food,utilities etc and more importantly the care is charged accordingly. If you need 24hr care then that will mount up.
Theses schemes have a place for certain people at a certain stage in their lives however I would maybe say for a lot of the more poorly/elderly folk then a care/nursing home is still the best choice.
 
JJH said:
These still aren't cheap tho. You have to pay own food,utilities etc and more importantly the care is charged accordingly. If you need 24hr care then that will mount up.
Theses schemes have a place for certain people at a certain stage in their lives however I would maybe say for a lot of the more poorly/elderly folk then a care/nursing home is still the best choice.
Click to expand...
My Dad was initially in one of those but they couldn't provide to his needs after a while so he had to be moved.

Such a shame as was a lovely flat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JJH
Dilligaf60 said:
Public funding is being cut for political reasons, not because the money isn’t there. How much did this government send overseas last year in bribes to foreign governments, sorry, I think it’s called overseas aid? And how many elderly care home places would this have paid for? The allocation of public funding has been a disgrace under successive administrations. You mention large corporations exploiting loopholes, haven’t you considered why those loopholes are left deliberately open?
Whilst this is the case I personally have no issue with people using the system to their own advantage, and protecting monies hard earned over a lifetime of work and paying taxes whilst it’s within the law. What’s sauce for the goose and all that. You may find this morally reprehensible, that’s a matter for yourself and carries no weight. Personally I don’t blame anyone for protecting their or their parents money.
Click to expand...

Lots of OT political ranting there that I can’t be arsed to correct mate
 
cruze said:
Just a note to say that trusts, and in particular family trusts don't always prevent a local authority including a property in the financial assessment. No longer do they have to work to a specific deadline as to when the property was put into trust, or that the person would indeed need care. The LA may challenge the 'legitimate' reason, citing that regardless, it has been done with the impact of reducing the person's ability to meet care costs.

LA's under greater financial pressures these days will pursue as it is financially in their best interests. So take your chances as the cost will be charged to any beneficiary in the trust.
Click to expand...
How can LAs use assets in trust rather than in the 'estate'?

There you go, @Roaring Chubby, I may have been wasting my time anyway. :lol::lol:
 
zwartekat said:
How can LAs use assets in trust rather than in the 'estate'?

There you go, @Roaring Chubby, I may have been wasting my time anyway. :lol::lol:
Click to expand...

If they feel that the assets were put in to trust to deprive the person, they will assess as if the person has the asset. They will then consider placing a legal charge on the recipient.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top