MCCarthy Stone- what's your view?

M&S flats do have care provision. My MIL lives in one and she has a carer for 15 minutes in the morning and evening. It's good because if the carer is on holiday or off sick it is their responsibility to find a replacement, and also really flexible, so she can cancel the care if she doesn't need it (eg if a family member is available to help her that day) or book extra help (in 15-minute chunks) if necessary.

But M&S flats are nothing like care homes. For a start there's no care provision. If you need a care home, don't look at a flat with no on-site care!

It does seem that the current system is quite heavily reliant on family stepping in, especially as I mentioned, during that 'in-between' period when you need some help, but aren't at the stage of needing a residential or nursing home. However, as you point out it can be a real burden on family members, and as people live longer / have children later / have no children, it's difficult to see how this 'model' can continue to function.

I do really like the retirement village concept with different levels of care that you can move between as needs change. It would be reassuring to be able to age in one place.

I'm glad I have a good pot of savings and plenty of time to build up more to be able to afford to live in this kind of environment. But the government will have to address what can be done for those who aren't in such a fortunate financial position. It's really difficult to see where the money is going to come from to support an aging population.

Oh yes, I have seen that one whilst I have been researching. A bit far away from where I am currently based, as I'd like to stay closer to home, but looks lovely. Good to hear of some positive experiences of these kind of places too. Thank you.

Reacting to Crikeyalmighty and Tryingtokeepgoing, I can't see how the former's ideas would. Service charges are necessary. It is the fact that they are payable after death without any limit that has destroyed the market. There are no prospective buyers; all scared off by unlimited charges. It becomes self-perpetuating. If, as I suggest, the service ceased post-mortem after, say, two years, buyers would come back, having the confidence the estate would not become a cash-cow for McCarthyStone. It would, 99% certain, have no financial disadvantage for McC as if the flats are sold and occupied, they get their service charges. In fact, it would be of benefit to them- the complex, built in 2017,where my aunt lived, has 52 apartments, 20 of which have NEVER sold. After the initial marketing, the bad publicity, cause the stream of prospective clients to dry up. Bringing buyers back to market would give McC a fighting chance of selling them- real estate with a value of about 4 million pounds!

If the head of the Association of Retirement Community Operators (ARCO)< Michael Voges states the sector has to change, to restore trust, surely that says it all.

@Tryingtokeepgoing I probably didn’t word that correctly - a non refundable premium due on purchase to cover off 2 years at selling point - but you still pay full service charge whilst living there

The economics of your (1) dont stack up though I don't think? Assuming someone moves in at 70, lives to 82 and spends the last 3 years in a care home then there are 9 years of service charge to fund up front...with the conesquent arguements when someone dies after 4 years and the 'motivated' relatives want a refund ;)

In terms of (2) McCarthy Stone already offer flats to let directly, and also allow the letting of owned flats. Though in the first case they are just standard ASTs - but presumaby the Governments proposed changes to tennants rights would address this anyway.

Well it depends. If it will hopefully ensure independence for longer, then it's probably still cheaper than £1500 ,per week EACH in a care home. Service charges are huge on new apartments. Circa £10k a year. But my mother loved hers and despite we lost a fee thousand it was worth every penny. She made friends, built a support network etc. Are they socialble? If not it may not be the best choice. Socialble people who like activities gain the most from this type of environment. If you look at second hand options there is a very wide choice for a fraction of the price. There is a while website dedicated to retirement properties and some bargains. Not all services charges are that high, some may be only £3k if its independent living for example.

I work in adult social work assessing for care at home packages for elderly though I'm in Scotland where free personal care is available (given it meets criteria and we don't provide funding for household tasks) though even up here things seem to be different between local authorities. I have no idea how it works in England, I get confused just reading about it.

I think for those us in our 30s-40s the landscape of elderly care will be vastly different to it is now. More people are choosing to have no children or fewer children than before (in fact a lot of my colleagues are like this so we've not been so terrified of older age care we've felt the need to pop out numerous children!). Not even that people are living longer with more complex health needs that is simply isn't sustainable or fair for families to shoulder this caring burden themselves without them burning out or it taking a toll on their health.

I don't think its all doom and gloom though. In fact I've read some articles from groups who are trying to influence policy change around these areas while also building up community support too.

@Ginghamsheep that’s in Corsham , wilts by the way -8 miles from Bath

@Ginghamsheep we’ve got a lovely development about 7 miles away from us exactly as you described called Wadswick Green- pool, gym, restaurant ( nice one) and rather lovely flats - it’s not cheap and pretty high service charges , but does seem pretty sought after and I know2 couples in their 60s who have bought there

Itis well known that you pay service charges even if the person isnt there for whatever reason. I get that your relative/wider family didnt know but from what I saw people are moving in far far too late. This means the chance of the elderly person's health changing is very high. Added to that if the person brought brand new (which is a huge error imho) in say 2 years its really not going to increase in value.

The wider family then try to sell a brand new flat with say 18 months usage and dont understand why they cannot get anything like the value they are expecting.

These sorts of threads are very useful but people REALLY need to do their research before buying one.

Yes, I think it is based on the American model. I'm keen not be reliant on the welfare state when my times comes, because I worry what it might look like.

I wonder if the American model will become more prevalent in the future. I don't really have in depth knowledge of the state elderly care in this country currently, but my understanding is that council budgets are very stretched, and that the LAs only fund care homes places when it is absolutely necessary. I think that leaves those that don't have family to support them (or can't afford a place in a private retirement village like I have my eye on) very vulnerable, especially in the 'in-between time' when you might need a bit of support with things like household tasks and meal preparation, but aren't in need of full time care in a home.

@Oddjob1 I do think just a few small things like this would make the market a bit more fluid. So many old people panic about the not being able to sell etc - especially if they need a care home etc - and remain in unsuitable housing for them partly because many will be aware you can struggle to sell these places- even ata considerable loss

1. My other change would be that these company’s have to do a buy back within 4 years of a brand newbuild purchase at maybe 20% discount off purchase price, if it hasn’t sold on open market after 8 months. They can then do these as resales on ‘their’ dollar or use them for rentals

@Oddjob1 which is why I posted earlier that I think 2 things should come in
1 a premium of 2 years service charge paid on purchase - and after that none is chargeable - so no obligation of families or estates

2 ability to rent out for 2 years at a time - renewable if required - obviously tenant vetted and must be in right age group and ability to pay etc.

That sounds like the American model, a large village type complex with a route, if needed, into increasing levels of care. My American in-laws bought care home insurance which does not seem to be on offer in the UK but is an interesting idea. There is no welfare state to catch the elderly in the US which is the main difference.

Not M&S, but my brother and his wife (aged 55 and 50) bought a Park Home on a site for over 55s. Lovely home with a gorgeous garden on a lovely site and reasonably priced but they are looking to move because they are a little bit tired of all their neighbours dying. Most other occupiers tend to be around the 80 mark, and it seems to DB and wife that no sooner does someone move in and they all get to know each other, than they die. So they have really felt it being the youngest by far in the district and now want to move to a more 'mixed' living environment.

I understand what you saying. It isn't actually a M&S development I have my eye on for the future - it's a retirement village with independent living and then a care home in the same village for if needs change. I like the look of the surroundings. It occupies which is kind of like a beautiful park, so that is part of the appeal for me.

I do think 50s is too young, but maybe 60s is reasonable. Part of my worry is that my mother suffered a serious illness in her mid 60s which has left her disabled and in need of some care, so I guess I worry about that happening to me too, and how I would cope with a move if I was older and in need of care.

But that's true for all flats with service charges surely? The only saving for the things you mention is a little bit of labour - nothing in the great scheme of the fixed costs involved. Why should the other occupants pick up a bigger share of the cost, most of which are the same whether the flat is occupied or not, for an empty flat?

Surely living somewhere where the average age of people living with you is a good 20-30 years older than you is going to be more isolating? I work in Older adult social work so have some dealings with these places and can't recall ever seeing anyone in their 50s or 60s living in those places.

I have know plenty of friends who are in their 50s and 60s without children and they are all living vibrant full lives. They certainly aren't moving into retirement complexes to socialise with people in their 80s. I can understand the loneliness you may feel but moving into somewhere where your social life and companionship is with people who are very elderly I don't think is going to help and will if anything just highlight a more sense of isolation.

I can't understand this idea of moving somewhere potentially 20 years before you're going to even need the care.

As for the original question asked, I've had some dealings with m&s through work and none of it has been positive. Certainly the complex that myself and colleagues have dealt with has carers on sight but don't actually seem to want to do any of the smallest bits of support or caring though I know this will differ from place to place.

The idea of a community though I do think is a great one and one that elderly people can definitely benefit from.

To add-the problem is at its most extreme in the retirement housing sector reserved for 70+. Higher service charges- in our case 8,500 a year to be paid, if necessary after death until the estate is exhausted. Despite two requests to adjust the charges to reflect the services now offered-no cleaning of the flat, no use of the laundromat, the restaurant or the communal facilities, McCarthyStonerefuse to make any adjustment whatsoever.

Re; my post about the McCarthystone service charges. That the government have to step in is not only about the financial exploitation by firms like McCarthyStone and Churchill. With all the bad publicity in newspapers, on TV and on the internet, pensioners have become very wary of the product. Given that this government was elected on a mandate to deal with the housing crisis, providing a financially safe framework for pensioners to move into 'sheltered' accomodation leaving family properties behind, seems to me a no-brainer. Apart from anything else, downsizing and leaving such properties for the market, is environmentally much better than new-build.
It isn't about the money-we have already long accepted we will lose every penny-it is about fighting exploitation and getting buyers back to the market.

There are a number of complexes (not MS ones) that are geared towards 50+ but for people who don’t have children. Marketed towards the younger end of the age bracket, so not elderly, and I guess for people who don’t want to live in housing developments surrounded by children

because people don’t tend to live long in them on average. Supply then outstrips demand as they are essentially a middle class option for those with money, not a blanket solution to an ageing population. I don’t know what the solution is, sadly.

Exactly this. My household has both primary-aged children and an parent eligible to be in an over-55 development in it. I doubt my family would be welcomed if we moved somewhere like that! There’s several families in a similar age set up within my children’s school classes. People are having children later and second marriages mean men are having a second family at an older
age.

Most families I know will have dependent children throughout their 50s and probably into their 60s if the children go to university. As well as working into their late 60s. You can’t just move out of a family house into a two bedroom flat when you still need to house the children.

Having seen what age the generations above me began to decline and become less capable, I think 70-75 would be the optimum age to move into one of these developments. Instead of 80-85!