Care home fees

[Dementiadad]

I want to preface by saying I have no issues about paying care home fees...

however...

my dad has dementia and until a year or so ago was just about managing to cope at home with carers coming in three times a day for an hour a time. He lives alone as my parents are divorced.

Last autumn he started wandering and getting lost. We got a tracker and for a long time my sister and I would find him and bring him home. We kept on at social services for help as we were exhausted from it - his last care call was at 9pm and often he would go out again afterwards. No help was forthcoming, we were told just to call the police. The police were involved on numerous occasions, each time they refused to take him home as he would be alone and they deemed him at risk and so we would have to go get him/ have him dropped to our houses (where he cannot stay long term for several reasons). Social services still maintained he was capable of living at home and would not agree to him going into a home unless he agreed (which he would not as he has no clue what is going on). We were basically on our knees begging for help but got nowhere.

It has just got worse from there culminating in him getting lost in torrential rain in May, no tracker on, social media, police all looking for him - he was found bloodied and bruised from an apparent fall 6 miles from home a day later and taken to hospital.

The hospital refused to release him home, he was kept in for a week before it was decided to move him into a home. Social services found a place and he has been there 5 weeks.

He now moves into self funding as he owns his home and has some cash savings. His income is £18k a year pre tax.

I have just received the form re financial assessment. The letter attached says the home has been charging the council £650 a week. My dad will be charged £1,700 a week as a self funder.

I asked why the difference and the home basically said that is all the council will pay and they charge self funders more to make up the difference.

We looked around at other homes, pretty much all in the area charge the same and he is settled now and so I don't want to move him.

I am disgusted by this. Not only will all his savings and home be gone within 2 years or so we then have to hope that the council will let him stay there - the care home says it will all depend on whether they have any council places when the money runs out. I hope that because the council moved him here that they will agree he stays here (the risk of moving him is that they say we chose to go elsewhere).

I just don't feel it is right - that dad is not only paying for his own care but also doubly subsidising those with council places (he still pays tax)? If the fees were £1,200 a week (which is probably nearer the true cost) there is a better chance of him outliving his money.

AIBU? The council should be paying the true cost and not making the unlucky ones pick up the tab?

@Pinkbits there are lots of schemes in my LA because the council has invested in them.

I was suggesting it to the poster who's nan doesn't have dementia. I agree they are not necessarily suitable for someone with advanced dementia. Limited mobility shouldn't be a reason for someone not to consider them. With appropriate equipment lots of people can use the kitchens, and of course there's a communal dining room for the main meal of the day.

I am surprised the Council would not pay the care home and you pay them back. I work as a SW in the Northwest and if the council places someone and is a self funder , then the family can decide to let the council pay the care home and the council then bill the resident to repay back to the council with a yearly administration fee . This is cheaper than going directly as a self funder.
Maybe LA's all have different rules.

Dont think that practice is standard at many LAs as it robs the care home of revenue.

My husband and I are in our late 40's. I posted earlier about my dad's situation, similiar to OP'S post. We are considering changing the ownership of our home to tenants in common from joint tenants, this would mean should the local authority put a charge on the house should one of us go into care and we are not able to self fund then only half the value would be taken if the other should die before them. Meaning the deceased could leave their half to family. I'm not sure of the correct legalities of this but it is something we will ask our solicitor. Sorry if I am wrong on this we would do this very soon, so not deprivation of assets iff we did this later in life. My father's wife not my mum died and the house passed to him, as joint tenants, all the money has gone on his care there is nothing left apart from 23k. Should they have been tenants in common she could have made a will leaving her half to her children. Again please don't flame me for this post as I need proper legal advice.

Yes it's shit that self funders not only have to pay for themselves but others as well.

My Dad worked all his life from leaving school to retirement, national service, paid into a pension, paid tax which went towards helping others & fuck me when he gets dementia & needs full time care he's still bloody well paying for others!

It would have broken his heart to know that the house that was his pride & joy was sold for this & not left to his kids.

Honestly if he had known that he was paying full fees plus more besides he would have wondered what he'd been paying for for all those years if it wasn't to be looked after in his old age.

Obviously when he went into a care home he didn't need his house to live in & it was right that that was sold to pay his fees-but not other peoples.

It is very difficult to simply die. My FIL had advanced demetia. He went into the local cottage hospital to recover from a fall at home. He developed sepsis and was sent to the main city hospital. They got it under control and he was sent back to the cottage hospital. This happened over and over, week after week. In the end my husband spoke to the consultant at the main hospital and asked him what was the purpose of putting FIL through drips and drugs( none of which FIL understood ) when he was in such an advanced state of dementia. The answer was that they were a hospital so they had to attempt to treat. To simply allow him a dignified death was just not on the radar. In the end the cottage hospital didn't call an ambulance when sepsis reared its head yet again and a member of staff sat with him until he died ( middle of night. Children travelling up). He thought it was 1958. He thought my husband was a pleasant volunteer who visited him. He had no knowledge of anything. It was pointless, appalling and cruel and used up huge resources to no purpose. He used copious hospital beds,nursing hours, drugs, ambulance hours. He didn't collapse or stop breathing so a DNR wouldn't have helped/ allowed him to be at peace. The system is so stupid.

Many care homes make huge profits. They can set their own fees, so many charge outrageously (my relative used to be charged a £25 medication fee to be given a tablet - he took it in 5 seconds). The people caring for him were on just over minimum wage.

It is awful but everyone self funding is in the same boat. My MIL is paying nearly £1K per week but the council (AKA us Tax Payers) only pay £650 for funded placements.

To add insult to injury, the £1K doesn't cover the cost of basics like shower gel which we, the family, have to provide. Not to mention the mysterious loss of hearing aides, glasses, false teeth that all need replaced at our cost despite it being the care home who keep losing them.

The care sector needs a total revamp along the lines of everyone having to pay into a care pension from the age of 18 and if you never need it, you can leave it to someone in your will.

So if you work hard, save money and buy your own house then you end up subsidising the people who haven’t bothered. Sickening. Such a pity Boris went before he passed his cap on care home fees.

It's more than a 'bit of a fight' to qualify for CHC, it's a miracle if you get it.

My grandmother worked incredibly hard. She lost her husband when she was 51. He also worked very hard. They both worked for the NHS but could never afford to buy a house. They lived in a (private) rented house.

Why do you assume people who rent don't work hard? My son is one of the hardest working people I know. He is nearly 30 and very unlikely to ever be able to afford. to buy a property. As a result he lives in a shared house.

You might think the system of care home funding is unfair, but it's also unfair that hard working people have no housing security because they have been priced out of the market.

i think it’s important to be aware as I know these threads can be really worrying for people that if the property is still lived in by the spouse or partner of the person needing to go into a care home it is completely disregarded for financial purposes. There are other mandatory disregards as well

age uk have an excellent factsheet which explains it all

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs38_property_and_paying_for_residential_care_fcs.pdf

This is a subject that comes up regularly. The choices are that your father sells his property to fund his care, you care for him to protect your inheritance or as seems to be the case on MN that all should be funded by the government/local authority.

Going against the grain here but someone has to pay.

Council places are for people who can’t pay for themselves. Pushing it into general taxation means that more and more people face higher income tax charges so that someone else can get an inheritance. Thats hardly fair either.

I’m saying this as someone with assets that would be at risk if I ended up in a carehome. Thats the reality, we can’t keep pushing more away from the private individual onto the state without really screwing working people.

I think part of the problem as well is that if I were mentally competent in my 90’s and declined cancer treatment that would be fine. If I had dementia in my 60’s and repeated infections it seems HCP’s would be obliged to try to keep me alive. It seems a bit mad tbh. I’d like the option to decline all life saving treatment in the event of a dementia diagnosis.

I think this needs to be looked at.

I don’t think you understand how a DNR works. If you have, say, dementia and end up needing to go into a home, you will be fed, looked after, communicated with etc. A DNR would only be applicable if you had something like a heart attack where you would not be resuscitated or placed on a ventilator. If you had a chest infection, you would still be given medication because to withhold it would be cruel.
My grandmother lived with dementia for 5 years, had no physical illness in that time and died a very peaceful death at 101.

Like I say, I have no problem with my dad's money being spent on his care. I do object to the rate he is paying being deliberately inflated so that a) the care home can make a huge profit and b) the LA can pay a reduced rate.
All that and the threat of being moved just because his money has run out.

edit to add: why are only those with dementia forced to pay? There are plenty of other illnesses that require NHS treatment and the cost is shared by all taxpayers. Get dementia though and you are screwed.

Capping would be grossly unfair and just benefit the rich. If people aren’t prepared to pay more tax (which they generally aren’t) they’ll have to pay for their care. Simple as that.

The Tories have been very clever at selling the narrative that the rich are hard working and the poor are lazy. My sister has been a nurse all her life and doesn’t own her own home - she works a damn sight harder than many of the high earners I know sitting on assets worth over £1 million. It’s an utter nonsense to equate hard work and wealth.

Ask SS for a deferred payment to pay the fees. Then a charge gets added to the house and money is paid back when sold... and the council pay the home and you pay the council. So you get the council rate.

I just can't see how it can be made fair - the richest will be able to shove everything into a trust and already avoid IHT, they would find ways round it but ordinary people wouldn't.

It really needs looking at though because at the moment it is like a pyramid scheme.

@Dementiadad the cap on fees was going to be something like £81k so those with a small amount to pass on would lose everything but those with several hundred thousand or millions would lose a fraction of it and then get to keep all their money. Johnson was a useless prick and had no idea what he was doing. We can’t have low taxes and free care - unless we’ve found the elusive magic money tree.

Hope your dad is ok x

Ah so the same problem would be there, just when he could get moved changes.

Thank you. I think sometimes you have to stop and remember these are real people affected here.

The only blessing about dementia is that he has no idea what is going on - he would be so upset at his home going too, his family lived there from the 1950's.
I hate all the rhetoric about "hard working families" - you only have to read on here how hard people work and how that does not equate to how wealthy you are.
Life can just deal you a bad hand, nothing is guaranteed.

My dad died with dementia in a care home during Covid so you have my every sympathy on all levels. It’s a cruel disease and a cruel end.

The wealthy will always be fine - they wriggle their way out of paying fair taxation at every turn. Life is unfair but those of us who can pay will have to pay as those with no assets (which is many people) have no choice. Social care fully funded would involve a huge tax hike - I have no issue with that but I’m in a small minority sadly.