Care Home Fees

What Hunter has said in the above is currently the law, A home cannot be touched for care home fees while the spouse is living there. If the person who has gone into the home has more than 23,000 he/she will be responsible for paying the whole cost, once down to 23,000 a contribution is still expected until 10,500 left. with costs of care is between 400 and 700.00 per week, savings will not last long.
Age Concern Cymru have excellent fact sheets on this matter/ or Age Concern England.

Reported.

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Admittedly most of the care home assessments I have sat in on have been situations where the offspring and parent has owned a property jointly.

As I have said the advice of every Social worker at first has been to sell the house and for the offspring to downsize.

If the offspring says no then the Social Worker then says they will have to pay top up in some cases amounting to £250 per week and the Social Worker does not ask if that would be affordable and the Social Worker does not point out it is a voluntary payment.

I was very amused under the compulsory care section for families it says that the responsibility for care mainly falls on a woman.

I was a carer and in the wider family most of the carers have been men.
I suppose we are not a typical family because in recent years most of the men have outlived the women.

Frank

I'm looking into care home options and have found advice on care to be very useful. try them out

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Advice-on-Care/232906616851239

Frank, don't you recognise a wind-up merchant when you see one?

This is getting very silly boys - stop it!

Gerry

Your suggestions are getting ludicrous and unreasonable.
What you are now saying is if a mother has to go in to care for say 5 years dies and then the father gets a new wife and they both have to go in to care for say 5 years each the liability for the fees will be passed on to the fathers offspring if the woman's offspring have no assets and if similar things happen to the offspring the liability will pass to the next generation.
Also the offspring may hate the fathers new wife and would not want anything to do with her care.
If the liability goes snowballing down say 5 generations they may be living on bread and water all their lives just to pay off care fees ran up by previous generations.

Frank

Another change which should happen in the law is if a parent gets a new spouse after the mother / father has passed away the children of the parent as well as the new spouses children should be held liable for any care fees if there are insufficient assetts,

Gerry

yes your right I need to look into these things.Thanks for your help.People do over here sell their homes to their children for whatever price they decide on. Glad things worked out for you.Sure can get complicated!

Enviousamerican

You must get the advice of a solicitor in your own country.
If you signed your house over to your son to avoid care fees in the UK that could be classed as deprivation of assets regardless of how long ago.
Also it is remote but I worked with somebody who is now in care. I don't know the full details except he is in his mid 50's.
The father is still alive and living in his own home.

Frank

Frank,thats something we all should think about. I often think I should sign my house over to my only child a son. But what if something financially bad happened to him? You never know what can happen,especially over here where bankruptcy caused by medically care is number one.

Enviousamerican

You are right. It is really putting the assets beyond the reach of the council to avoid care fees.
Another thing which could happen is a person may repay a loan so the guarantor who may be a relative wont be called to pay the debt.
Son's / daughters moving in to jointly owned property causes most of the arguments however,
If a son / daughter occupies a property as a joint owner with the parent generally it can not be used for care fees but if they live elsewhere half could be taken.
If the son / daughter has only been there a short time the council may argue the offspring moved in to put half the house beyond the reach of the council.
Unfortunately things could happen like the parent may have been in good health at the time the child moved in and has suddenly gone down hill or the child moved in thinking he could care for the parent so it could be argued the child moved in with good intent but the council may argue the child moved in to put the house beyond the councils reach.
Also a short time is a moot point. How do you define it?. 6 months, 3 years? 5 years? 10 years.
Opinions could vary.

Frank

Frank,,Deprivation of assets.Is that kind of like hiding assets? So if someone waited to long to will there assets to family it could be seen as knowing a care home might be needed soon and property was trying to be save? I hope that makes sense.

Enviousamerican

In the UK if it is mainly a medical need the NHS has to fund care but if it is something like disability the individual has to fund the care until the assets are used up.
The council then has to pay but it can take the persons pension towards the fees.
There are all sorts of exemptions which are not clearly defined. If there is a relative over 60 living in the property it can not be taken towards the care fees.
Also if a joint owner is living in the property it can not be taken towards the care fees or if a spouse is in it.
If a carer is in it the council has discretion not to take the property.
If a son / daughter is living in the property and they have no title to it the council could take the property if they are under 60 but they can not if they have inherited some of it from a deceased parent.
Arguments do happen however.
I know of a case where a mother passed away and the father had to be taken in to care a month later and the son was living in the property.
The mothers share was willed to him but probate had not been obtained.
Social Services did try to argue he had no title to the property at that point but they did not win their case.
Another argument happened after a child moved in with the father as a joint owner 3 years before he went in to care.
Social Services tried to argue deprivation of assets had happened as they thought it was on the cards the father would have to go in to care but again Social Services did not win partly on the time scale and by virtue of the fact the child had been a carer.

Frank

OH,how unfair that would be! like I said a person should be responsible only for their own debt. If they are dead and their is no money left,too bad care home! They are for profit businesses and you know they charge more money than is needed to take care of people or they would go out of business.Of course I don't know exactly how it works in your country when the money runs out.

Thinking about it they could refuse to issue B, C and D a passport before all care fees are paid.
The only problem is they might not be able to get their top paid job without a passport.
Where I worked it was a condition of the job that you had to have a passport above a certain grade.
I was obliged to have a passport even though I only went abroad twice on business in my working life and that was as a result of somebody going ill.

Frank

well I would if I were him!

And another thing.
D might leave the UK and they may get nothing off him anyway.

Frank

Well, it would certainly test a person's love.

Gerry has also said the property of any spouse should be taken.
Would anybody want to marry a person with so much debt?.

Frank

Sooo, Gerry, lets get this right. (A) goes into care, costs more than he has so the debt passes to his son (B). (B) having just retired,continues to pay for (A) has a stroke and needs care which quickly uses up all his funds so his son (C) takes on the rising debts, along with trying to save for his own retirement, pay his mortgage and repay the loan he took out to subsidise his son (D) through university. (D) is looking to a future of paying off his university loan, mortgage, pension fund, care home fees, cannot afford to ever have a family.

With regard to recovering care fees from the grandchildren or great grandchildren what I think should happen is £50 per week should be deducted from their salary / wages to go towards the care fees debt and all savings / property should be taken when they die including the property of the spouse.

Gerry

thanks Frank,I need to see if that is possible here.I need to update my will anyway.

Enviousamerican

In the UK a house can not be sold or charged when a husband / wife is living in it.
It is possible to split the ownership of the house in half ( tenants in common ) and one parent can leave their half to the offspring.
This means if 1 parent goes in to care at worst only half the house can be taken for care fees.
If the child is living in the property none of the house can be taken for care as the child has the right to occupy the property for the rest of his / her life. Obviously as nobody will buy half a house with somebody in it the parents share is worthless.

Frank