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?

Wow, I can't imagine being considered "elderly" at 65 but appreciate that 30 years is a long time.

Want2BeSupermum, I'm sorry about your father :( Are you saying that they tried to get a diagnosis of Parkinsons so they wouldn't have to treat his cancer? I wasn't aware you could duck out of treating anyone for cancer, regardless of anything else they had. That is shocking!

That's one of the most disturbing posts on this thread so far. I'm so sorry you have had to go through this.

Her ni contributions will not go anywhere near even funding the public services she has already used plus state pension. You have to be a higher rate taxpayer before the state isn’t subsiding the average person. There is no reason why the rest of us should pay end of life care for your mother so you can inherit her assets. There should no right to inheritance. She doesn’t live in the house and she is going into a care home so she doesn’t need a house. If you want the house for sentimental reasons you could arrange to buy it from the council.

The issue isn’t some kind of “dementia tax”. It’s that we can’t afford to pay for living and personal care costs of relatively wealthy people so that their families can benefit from their assets when they pass on.

cant Exactly. Life expectancy in my family is 85-104. At 70 my Dad was running two businesses which were profitable and employed about 50 people. Being told he was end of life at 70 made no sense for him. For DHs family it does. His mothers side of the family rarely make it past 70. His mother is 73 and in poor health. I don't expect her to be around much more after 75. My SIL is 55 and really sick with vasculitis. I don't expect her to survive another 10 years.

What is right for you isn't right for someone else. The NHS has blanket age brackets which determines care. Over 70 and you really have to watch them. They want everyone on the Liverpool pathway from what we have experienced.

No I disagree Blagora tax is theft

i don't mind i f people want to call me old woman but I thkn these most of us who are 55 - 60 ( am 56 and work full time ) are really not on just about any score or definition "elderly". If I am elderly I want my winter fuel payment and free bus pass...... I feel no different than in my 20s except I am less ill (see a GP once in 12 years, not had a cold for over a year even ) and much less tired as no babies keeping me up, just teenagers...

Notafeeling, you don't have to be "elderly" at any age. It's a state of mind and an attitude. I've known people who were middle aged at 20 and others who were still young in their 90s. People are living longer and staying younger for longer too. You can give in to age or tell it to piss off, there's a choice.

It's a state of mind and an attitude

I asked DS (late teen) how old my 80ish year old father is 'inside'.

'Late teens / early 20s,' he replied. 'With moments of being an 8 year old'

'How old is Grandma?' [also 80ish]
'A grown up. Definitely a grown up. But not OLD'

Health issues aside, I agree with you BlueLady. I'm 33, play in a band (we're doing all the festivals except Reading, Glasto and Leeds in the UK) and have very few responsibilities other than some payments to help my mum out, saving and paying bills.

I work (day job) with 20 somethings and I think their "fresh from uni" go go go helps stop me from becoming too "old".

OP is being VVVVU.

As already stated only people on high salaries come close to 'paying their way' in terms of the mostly very good public services we have in this country. Care homes are crushingly expensive, it'd be super-unfair & unrealistic for the state to have to pick up every penny of the cost for everyone.

If you believe that those on a low income need to pay more tax then you need to educate yourself and have some empathy. Lots of people are already struggling and aren't concerned about education or healthcare

I'm extremely educated thank you! Also lived in Denmark for a while where taxation is huge but the welfare system is fantastic.

I love your son, cantkeepaway, you've done a good job there.

Blue, asked how old FIL is:

'Old. Very, very old. Rather fossilised.'

I haven't dared ask how old he thinks I am inside!

I think you should, you might be agreeably surprised.

It depends how much extra tax it would be and it would have to benefit everyone and be paid for by everyone.

It might have effects though that we don’t want. Live in a city with children and you have to earn a fair bit to cover half in tax and the other in childcare. Increase either and it’s likely they’ll be fewer second earners, or women with children, who will want to work.

Crazycatgal if his house is worth only 80k then no doubt the state will still have to pay some of his care home/ healthcare anyway. What’s wrong with contributing 80k at the end of your life so future generations aren’t bankrupt.

I ve linked to how much it would cost 5.5 billion.

we d not need to give up much to afford it.

But the really issue is that most of us earn shit wages, pay sod all tax and claim loads of working benefits and child care benefits, its unsustainable, meanwhile of our employers make large profits , pay themselves millions and their shareholders even more.

i wonder how many of those saying pay for it yourself, would also be happy to scrap child care and child benefit, having a child is a complete life style choice and why should i have to pay for your desire to have 3 kids and all the associated costs?

Did someone else question this? I saw it but cbb to scroll back

£5.5bn equates to just over £400 for everyone over 65 in the uk.. this will not go far at all. We would need to raise approx double what we currently raise in income tax to enable retired people to receive non-means-tested free accommodation and care. Just so they can pass on their savings and investments to their children. Absolutely bonkers and never going to happen.

jasjas,

Does the source state exactly what is covered? Full time free residential care home care for everyone who might need it?

That does seem rather unlikely - if, say, that cost at a very conservative estimate just over £800 per week, then c. 1 in 100 people could have this funded and nobody else could have anything funded at all. (ie that 1 in 100 person would use up the other 99's funding, and their own, in having that care for a year).

Could you specifiy exactly what the source meant?

I did link to it :)

Personal care not med care.

Look, you need to get over this idea that 16.5m pensioners ALL end up needing residential nursing care most do not, most die in hospital or at home, its currently 290k........
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/ageing/articles/changesintheolderresidentcarehomepopulationbetween2001and2011/2014-08-01

@headstone Where did I say that he didn't want to contribute? I posted saying that using assets to pay for care homes doesn't just affect the middle classes.

I apologise crazycatgal, I thought that is what you are suggesting, although I would consider anyone owning a home to be middle class these days even if it’s not worth much.

@jasjas1973 my point is that if you were to make social care for retired people non-means-tested ie free to anyone who wants it then there will be a mass stampede and the number of people taking advantage will massively increase above where it is at the moment. The number of retired people in care homes is so limited right now in large part because lots of people can't afford it so are figuring out ways to cope ie leaning on family members to look after them etc. And then when working age people realise they won't need to pay for their accommodation and living costs in jasjas's utopian future, they sure as hell won't bother saving as much as they do now, so the problem gets worse and worse.

Except when they discover the standard of care and accommodation that's on offer if it's "free" everyone with any assets will opt to pay for something decent and in a few years we'll be back to square one.

I agree 55-60 is elderly. Bullshit.

I’m guessing you’re 20s AlarmClock?