Heartbroken that I'm being forced to sell mum's house, she worked hard for it and paid her national insurance

[Jkoakham]

And now her savings are running out I will need to sell her house to carry on funding it.

It all seems to very unfair, her house was supposed to be passed to me but instead it's affectively passed to government and private companies.

I thought the dimentia tax had been can cancelled?

Having visited many care homes in a work capacity I can happily say I’d rather my house was sold so that I can have a choice in which home I go to rather than being stuck in the cheapest option that LA funding will cover. Those places are grim, you feel the need to wipe your feet on the way out.

People seem confused between residential homes and nursing homes. If you have a medical condition requiring treatment and can’t safely do that at home, you need a nursing home. Sometimes you can apply for CHC to fund part of this but it’s hard to qualify.

If you have simply aged to the point that you cannot manage to cook/shop/wash/dress at home then you need a residential home. Or care at home from a professional agency or family members.

On average those placed in nursing homes tend not to survive past the 2 year point as they are so inform and frail so in theory it isn’t the cost of nursing home care that’s problematic, rather the cost of long term residential care for people who are simply
“Old”.

Olennas "covers a lot of things" is very vague. Someone paying NI for 50+ years eg has paid a lot. Including people who haven't needed health service much. & nobody is old for 50 years+

I always think when reading threads like this that it would be interesting for the government to send everyone a statement that outlined how much they had paid through taxation, NI etc and how much that the state had spent on them over their lifetime. I know this would be really difficult to do but I do think lots of people would get a rude awakening when they realise that despite having paid all they were asked to pay, they still aren't net contributors as they have taken more out of the system than they have put in. With this in mind, I don't really understand why there is this misplaced notion that all the tax and NI we paid over the decades should be available at the end of our lives to pay for nursing/care homes? Unless you are a high earner with good health and luck the chances are that you've had all the money you contributed spent on you already by the time you get to this point. We also of course need to factor in those in society that will never contribute much financially into the system but will still require the same if not more public money spent on them.

To stop other families from suffering what you are bearing, risk needs to be pooled

Definitely. Most people, given the option, would choose to insure their assets rather than face a say, a 5% risk that you'll lose it all to end of life care.

There's a highly developed insurance market for just this (and most everything) in the US.

Absolutely. The "squeezed middle" of comfortably-off, not on benefits but don't feel at all wealthy are probably just about breaking even so long as they die tidily of a short illness that doesn't take too much medical intervention. Probably only the richest 20% or so end up being net contributors at all.

OP said early on in the thread her mum has been in this nursing home for 16 months.

I'll guess for the sake of calculations that if a decent home is about £4,500 per month then Local authorities probably pay a maximum of £3,250 for a basic nursing home place. 16 months worth would cost £52,000.

Assuming OP's mum was generally healthy prior to old age so hasn't needed incapacity benefits etc but has been receiving the state pension for 15 years prior to needing a nursing home that will have already drawn over £90,000 out of the national insurance pot already before a penny goes on a care home.

Just contributing enough NI to cover 15 years of basic state pension would take 40 years of contributions whilst earning £28,000 a year at today's rates

To pay enough NI to cover 15 years pension plus just one year in a care home you would have needed to earn £36,000 per year gross salary for 40 years at today's rates.

I agree that people need to be more aware of what they have paid in and the value of what they are getting out.

Well I think the system is disgusting.
I know this is about care fees but a 40% inheritance tax on money that has already been taxed is scandalous so after probate costs unless the house is worth a pretty plum there wouldn’t be a lot left anyway. Sickening.

There’s a lot of ignorance on this thread about caring for someone with dementia and those who have sneered at the OP and said she should care for her mother herself if she wants to keep her inheritance should be ashamed. Trying to cope with someone with dementia is hell on earth, particularly if their symptoms include paranoia, aggression and delusions. The OP is probably experiencing complete and utter despair because even when you don’t live with the sufferer you are still constantly firefighting the needs resulting from their illness - which are multiple and relentless. In addition to this you are also watching the person you love leave their body and then have their body be taken over by someone you don’t know but who you are responsible for.

People with dementia are ill and it is deeply unfair that their families (if they have any money) bear the financial burden of their illnes, as well as the terrible toll the illness takes on them, whereas people with other illnesses die with very little need for care as they can be managed at home by family or cared for in hospital. This makes the financial consequences of ill health a lottery again, something which the National Health was set up to eradicate.

We all need to think very carefully about this. The care system in this country is far too inefficient and expensive, it needs overhauling and there needs to be proper discussion and thought about what we can do to share this burden equally.

It’s all very well saying people shouldn’t be annoyed if their life savings are not passed on to their family but the drive to improve your family’s lot is a powerful one that actually fuels our economy as people seek to find ways to do this. If you remove that possibility you remove hope and without hope many people would do the bare minimum as, really, what would be the point?

NI is just tax by another name. It all goes into the same pot

Furthermore a house is an investment and when you need to cash it in, you cash it in.

The “pointless and useless government” as someone described it provides a stable society based on our taxes. If we don’t have enough tax or cut spending too much, that stability crumbles.

Your mum’s house is for her and her needs. Not yours.

pink
My mum is a carer in a very good home (she’s 63!) and there are very few ethnic minority clients-so many of them must live to an old age, particularly if they are veggie and sober. It’s a thought that they must all be being cared for by their families at home.
The mostly likely case is that - the makeup of the population of this country is circa 88% white /european - so I would not expect a majority or even equal numbers of ethnic minority residents - maybe they do have a healthier life style / live with family but I suspect it is down to demographics

52Fesival - No, because buy or rent if you move, you don't get to keep the old family home.

It was 8 years from when my grandmother couldn't live independently to her death (she lived with my parents first then moved to a care home when they were unable to meet her increased needs), that's a long time to leave a house empty.

A care home isn't somewhere a dementia paitent had gone temporarily to have treatment, but where they have gone to live.

The ops mum's house has sat empty for 16 months, it's really madness to say we leave houses up and down the country empty for the best part of a decade so adult children can inherit them.

As I previously posted, "choice" is often not an option if you have a lot of care needs. Mil was not a gently dotty elderly lady when she had dementia. She was loud (termed a "screamer"), angry and doubly incontinent. Dh and bils searched high and low for somewhere and found only one place that would accept her - it resembled a very down-at-heel 1970s Butlins and had mostly council-funded residents. Mil was paying £750 a week. I would say, though, that the staff were lovely.

Regarding the lack of ethnic minority residents in nursing homes - many, many women in these communities do not work. It is a kind of "wage" to look after their elderly, with care allowances etc. In addition it is a duty to look after your husband's parents. This is not unique, a lot of Europeans think the same way and the burden falls to the women. I know several cases where no one gives a jot about old Aunt Anunciata stuck in the corner, they just want to keep any wealth in the family.

I agree that if you want to keep the house, do the care. No one wanted (or was able) to care for mil/fil. No one was going to give up their jobs and have their life and their children's totally curtailed. So the pil's house and savings were completely lost. Fair enough.

What you are sad/angry about is having a reduced inheritance.
It’s nothing to do with national insurance or dementia. Far better that good care of elderly is well funded than the next generation inherit.
We’ve told our parents to use equity release so they can enjoy their old age rather than scrabble around trying to make ends meet. They owe us no inheritance at all.

Yes, I never understand it when people say they are "paying for our parent's care" . Unless you are paying out of your own pocket then no, you are not. They are paying.

Am I peeved that we will not inherit anything due to care fees having already cost £600K? You bet. What £600K could have done...
But it was never our £600K.

My mum was faced with the same so they moved my Nanny in and we cared for her as a family. We rented her house out and used the monthly money we got for additional support like day centre, physio, carers etc etc. We did this for 4 years it was hardcore but we refused to loose the money and it was the best decision we ever made.

As you have to sell your house to pay for care, which swallows up inheritances that could be used to buy houses for the younger generation it will be interesting to see what will happen when generation rent hits old age. No equity release or self funding of care homes for them! Also who is going to be able to afford the large houses being sold off? It would be better to find the system for a short period then have a system of privately insuring against care costs in old age. Trouble is no one is prepared to take the hit of short term pain for long term gain. I’ve worked in an old people’s home as has my mum. Both of us very much favour a bottle of sleeping pills before going in one

OP. I think the system is grossly unfair.
My great aunty had to sell her house for care. She had dementia and her home carers couldn't give the level of care she was needing any more.
She wanted to leave her house to me, I told her I'd rather she were well cared for.
But living in an instititution was miserable for her, it was comfortable with lovely staff but it wasn't the same as being in your own home. She didn't like not eating what she liked when she liked for example.
And she was paying for the privilege.
It seems as though our society thinks it's fine once people outlive their usefulness to get stripped down for parts, and locked away.

Good idea Bella

Worth considering

40% inheritance tax on money that has already been taxed is scandalous so after probate costs unless the house is worth a pretty plum there wouldn’t be a lot left anyway.

But there's no inheritance tax on the first £325k (per person). Is £325k not a lot to you?

Surely it's better to tax an estate that is unearned income to someone, who is already getting a huge lump sum than to increase income tax for everybody when so many people are struggling with the cost of living already?

It's not fair, no. A house is the only asset many people will stand to inherit and the sadists in power are ripping that safety net away now, as well. Very easy for people on here who own their own properties and things to be sniffy about people like you, and me, JK, and call it greedy when all we're doing is thinking about our own old age and it looks bleak. Not at all, why should dementia be any different from cancer? Why? It's not, it's a health issue, but it's used to hoover up the money from a house at the end of life so people who aren't mega rich lose the only thing their family has to pass on of any real value, that they worked all their lives for. It's criminal.

It really isn't criminal. My dad was a great saver for a rainy day. All was well until he was nearly 100 and my mum was 96. Then the heavens opened and the umbrella saved for the purpose was opened. I'd be completely disgusted by our kids if they'd rather feather their own nests than spend our money - ours, not theirs - on the best care available, should we need it.

Bella, good call. Also for bigger families you can spread the load - i have 5 children - not that any of them are required to look after me in old age. I think that does work for a lot of people. Also a good few people don't need care at all so it's very much a lottery for many.

The dementia v cancer comprison is apt. It is why a very few people with dementia can get some NHS care for medical needs (but not the hotel food etc elements of a care home - but those latter bits are very very expensive hence the huge costs). Mind you my father's £130k day and night care needing 2 carers for lifting purposes last year at home was much more expensive than going into a care home. His lawyer said £100k a year for at home care if you live alone (our mother died first and he did not want to move in with one of us children ) was not unusual (and that was in NE England).

Who should have paid for your great aunt's care, then, IJustLostTheGame? And in a home where she could eat what she liked when she liked? Now that would be an expensive home. "Tea and biscuits, please!" at 3am.

If you wanted her house, you could have cared for her, you know.

IHT is going to be £1 million by 2020.

all it means is less money for social care and more money going into the pockets of the wealthy.
Incidentally, i will benefit from this change but but is wrong.

Paying taxes and having great public services is what makes a society worth living in

What my parents have earned, saved and bought (e.g. a house) over their lifetime (my nearly 80 year old dad still works, and they have varied over the decades from being church-mouse poor to modestly comfortable) is theirs.

Those assets and money can, and should, be used in any way necessary to shelter and care for them. At the moment, it does so by housing them while they look after themselves. If, as seems very likely, at a future point it needs to be converted from a physical house and savings to the shelter and care of a care home, then that's what it's for.

If any was left over for us because they had stinted on their own care and comfort, I would be ashamed.

My parents brought us up - paid their money for, at that point, if you want to see it that way - so that we could be independent in adult life. At critical points, they have made small gifts out of their limited funds to ease one or other of us over a hurdle. Had one of us had additional needs, of course they would have continued to support that individual life-long, but as it happens we have all been able to be independent for many years. I would see it as failure, on my part and on theirs, if I were to be 'relying' on 'inheriting their house' rather than seeing it as their property to spend on themselves.

I know this is about care fees but a 40% inheritance tax on money that has already been taxed is scandalous so after probate costs unless the house is worth a pretty plum there wouldn’t be a lot left anyway.

If the bulk of an estate is from increased value of property or money invested in a pension, it won't have been taxed already.

The average value of an estate in the UK is around £150k, so well below the IHT threshold of £325k (£650k for married couples). With the average price of a home in the UK now in the upper £200k range, most people's estates won't be liable for IHT.

I think the IHT take was around £5bn last year, compared with around £200bn from income tax/NI. It's tiny, and only affects those with moderate to significant assets.