To think that if you have the funds to pay for your care home needs then you absoloutley should?

[BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz]

Interesting chat with a friend the other day about the extortionate costs of care homes and how if you live in social housing/rental and are on benefits then the government will pay for your care yet if you have "worked hard all your life and want to leave something for your kids" you are made to sell your home / use savings to pay for your care.

Friend is of the opinion that everyone who requires a care home should have it paid for by the government. So essentially a "hand out" yet also is of the opinion that those on benefits are getting "hand outs" and looks on them with scorn.

My personal opinion is that if you have the means to fund your own care home needs then yes; you absoloutley should pay for some or all of that. Why should the government fork out millions for every care home resident in the country so that a vast amount of them can then hand their properties and extensive savings down to their children?

It's simply not viable to fund 100% of care home needs across the country and if you are the kind of person who gets smug about "paying my way all my life" to the tune of living mortgage free in a 300k plus home with vast savings then you should be happy to continue "paying your way" til the end.

I also pointed out to her that as she will be funding her own care she will likely have more say in where she goes.

The end result was we both agreed the best solution was to swerve the care home altogether but I wondered whether I was BU to expect someone who can afford to pay for their care to actually pay for their care?

Yes Mont it is like that.

You often struggle to buy a home and pay a mortgage. They got rid of MIRAS which immediately inflated house prices in the 80s.

*believe it sets the complete wrong message- don’t work hard, don’t earn anything and you will be fine in old age.

Whilst the majority of the population who work hard, get taxed at every corner then need to pay for their care.

Working people have been the main contributors to the tax system and they then cannot get to use it when they need it the most.

I would prefer to be taken to dignitas in my old age and my family inherit my money, but wait...they will have to pay 50% of my estate to the taxman...it’s just wrong!*

Taxpayers use the system throughout their lives, especially if they have children. Where do you think the money for education, the NHS, roads, etc comes from? You also seem to unaware that lots of people work hard, pay tax but earn too little to amass any assets.

Inheritance tax is 40% on anything in an estate over £325k, that rises to £1 million per couple if they own a property. Few estates pay it. And you can’t be taken to Dignitas, you have to be compos mentis to use their services.

The problem is if you look to net contributors to fund more at some point they opt out and no more is raised.

So you’d be better off diverting from elsewhere. Long term health care for say a decade is a huge cost though.

I think it is very very wrong that someone can inherit almost £1 million from their parents without paying any tax on it. But I've already had this discussion on here and for some reason most are implacably imposed to higher inheritance tax. I really don't know why.

I just inherited quite a chunk and would have been very happy for most of that to have been handed over to the NHS and/or to pay for long term care for all. But only if everyone else in my position does the same i.e., through taxation.

But I think everyone with wealth should pay toward's everyone's long term care. Not just the unlucky ones paying for themselves while the rest still get to pass on £1 million to their children.

Whether I have £4K sat in the bank that will be £4K in a decade’s time or whether I have £4K that’ll be more than £4K in a decade is irrelevant.

It's really not. In the not-so-distant past high returns gave a high incentive to save. And high interest rates also put people off borrowing. When interest rates are not even keeping up with inflation you may as well spend it while you have it. And borrow too! That's actually the whole thinking behind monetary policy. Otherwise why bother adjusting interest rates to boost/slow down the economy? (admittedly it is also about investment rates too, not just spending v saving)

"Woodhill"

"You often struggle to buy a home and pay a mortgage. They got rid of MIRAS which immediately inflated house prices in the 80s."

I know, I started work in 1980, when income tax was at 33%. I had to wait for the building society to have the funds to give me for my mortgage, and was paying interest on my mortgage at 15%, when I first took it out.

I find it fundamentally unfair that people, who are unfortunate enough to develop dementia effectively have to pay almost 100% tax on the results of their lifetime's hard work; while people who say have cancer get care, costing possibly just as much get it for free - ie their rate of tax is in line with normal rates of tax on income, VAT, council tax, etc. Why not say people, who get cancer or type 2 diabetes have to pay for their care, by selling their house?

Not only is CHC virtually impossible to get; but the majority of elderly people leaving hospital have not even been told that it exists.

When my OH was about to be discharged from hospital after treatment for a fall and a fracture that left him further disabled, the social worker appeared at his bedside wanting to do a means test to work out how much he would have to pay for care at home. Legally they are not allowed to do this until it has been established that a person does not qualify for CHC payments and that their care is the responsibility of health.

I happened to know about CHC funding so said...hang on, this is not right. How many people who have had no dealings with this system would know that?

Often when people do know about it and bring it up, a member of staff will just say "Oh no, they do not qualify for that"

You really have to be tenacious, thick-skinned and determined to get through the CHC system. At a time when you are feeling vulnerable. It is pretty inhuman.

Yes, no one mentioned CHC to dh's family. Well, they might have to fil but he was starting to suffer from dementia too when mil was in hospital and was insisting that she was getting better and they could go on a cruise.

If you are a "first time consumer" of care you are f*d as you haven't the foggiest notion of the procedures.

When interest rates are not even keeping up with inflation you may as well spend it while you have it. And borrow too!

I get what you’re saying on a macro level, but I think it’s very short sighted and foolish for an individual to decide whether to save, spend or borrow based on the tiny percentage of free cash they’ll get back for saving. It’s such a strange way of looking at it. If I have £1k I can choose to spend it now or save it. If I spend it now I get the pleasure of whatever I’ve spent it on, but I know I’m leaving myself open to disaster later down the line if an unexpected expense crops up and I don’t have the money to pay for it, or if something appears I want to buy I won’t be able to get it unless I get into debt by borrowing. If I save it, it’s not because later down the line it’ll have grown to £1050, it’s so that later on I can use that £1k when I need to.

Like I’m sure adjusting interest rates for savings and lending does have some influence on whether the population as a whole saves more or gets into more debt, I just find it hard to see how that thought process works on an individual level. The people who are conscious of and take into account interest rates when deciding on their spending habits are unlikely to be those who are financially irresponsible in the first place, right?

I’m glad I don’t feel that interest on savings factors into my own money management, feels like outsourcing major financial decisions that affect primarily me alone to an outside entity. I guess like a squirrel storing ten hazelnuts in a hole in the ground for winter, they don’t do that so they can go back and find eleven hazelnuts, they do it so they have their original ten hazelnuts later haha.

An amazing update - just as we consulted solicitors about getting CHC for my mum we have been notified that although they declined originally she is eligible after all and she will get her costs backdated. They want to carry out another review so we’re not out of the woods yet but at least there’s something for her. For everyone looking at claiming, don’t be put off by the paperwork and keep at it, I’m sure that if we hadn’t persisted for the last 6 months it wouldn’t have happened

Yes - social workers told me DD wouldn’t get CHC funding and the CCG washed their hands of her (saying she was the responsibility of another CCG). I had to write to the Sec. of State for Health and persistently to NHS England to get their ruling on which CCG was responsible for her! It was our own CCG, as I thought all along!

It took me two years of letter writing just to get the stage of her being assessed under the Decision Tool! She was awarded CHC funding!

I know they’re short of money, and that the care my mum needs is expensive but it’s shocking how hard you have to work to get it. Before it went to panel we sat with the staff preparing her case and they initially dismissed pretty much everything but as we asked them to explain each decision they conceded on all categories that her need was higher by at least one level than they originally put. There must be so many people who haven’t got relatives fighting for them who should receive CHC but don’t.

I can’t believe it took you two years, that’s appalling - I thought 6 months was bad enough.