Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to try and prevent care home fees? Advice appreciated

1000 replies

Watermelonsuns · 21/01/2025 08:47

So my parents are elderly, both have health issues but managing well at home. My mum in particular would struggle if something happened to my dad. Recently a friend's parent had to go into a care home and as the parent owned their own house and savings they are self funding and the fees are crazy.
AIBU to try and find a way to protect my parent's property and savings in order its not all gone in care home fees in the last years?
Someone has suggested moving their property into my name but surely that would be an obvious way to avoid fees and would look dodgy? Is there another loop hole im missing? Aby advice from someone working in this area would be appreciated thanks

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
JoyousGreyOrca · 22/01/2025 17:10

Yep have fun before you die.

CarliLove35 · 22/01/2025 17:15

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:01

The same as anyone else if you sell up or downsize or have it in cash anyway then
Restaurants
Days out
Clothes
Hair
Holidays
Nice food
Luxuries
Hobbies
Just like a lot of people who save up.
To enjoy life.

Well said. DH and I are oldies, he's already retired, I am intending to next year. Our life isn't going to stop. We've already downsized and moved to the coast - we did give the DC some money from the proceeds of the sale of the family home, then we bought our little house by the sea for cash. We have a motor home and go on regular little adventures in the UK, we travel abroad to see family and for holidays regularly, we go on city breaks, we both drive and have a car each - nothing flash, a Fiat 500 and a Nissan Micra. We have a pretty good life and it's only going to stop when old age and infirmity kick in. When that happens, we'll have enough equity in the house for a care package should we need it.

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:16

JoyousGreyOrca · 22/01/2025 17:10

Yep have fun before you die.

Airplane Skydiving GIF by Skydive Maia Paraquedismo

Do all those things you never had time to do
Exciting times!

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 17:20

CarliLove35 · 22/01/2025 17:15

Well said. DH and I are oldies, he's already retired, I am intending to next year. Our life isn't going to stop. We've already downsized and moved to the coast - we did give the DC some money from the proceeds of the sale of the family home, then we bought our little house by the sea for cash. We have a motor home and go on regular little adventures in the UK, we travel abroad to see family and for holidays regularly, we go on city breaks, we both drive and have a car each - nothing flash, a Fiat 500 and a Nissan Micra. We have a pretty good life and it's only going to stop when old age and infirmity kick in. When that happens, we'll have enough equity in the house for a care package should we need it.

I fancy that. Sell up, rent somewhere small and buy a motorhome. Which would be in someone else's name of course, not sure if motorhomes count as assets to sell..

Scammersarescum · 22/01/2025 17:25

You are right to point out that those who fritter away their money get free care compared to those who are prudent.

I know someone diagnosed with dementia. Her and her husband lived very very frugally and put money in private pensions. The council have already said they will be charging them for at home care despite their very modest lifestyle.

A family member also lived incredibly prudently and put a little money aside and managed to pay off a mortgage on a tiny terrace. Never ate out, never had holidays, never had the money to convert the tiny original kitchen to a modern standard. Every penny he had went to the state. Yet one of the care workers at the home revealed he was the only privately funded patient.

The mumsnet morality police aside, a vast swathe of people who haven't bothered to save will get free care and the very wealthy take advice on how to keep their loot. Only the squeezed middle will be expected to be "moral' and pay their way and every one else's.

See a solicitor, a friend's gardener did and has managed to ensure that none of his and his wife's assets went to pay for her care home. They now rest with their daughter who was a struggling single mum but can now enjoy a more secure future. Why should the very wealthy get to preserve their assets while the rest of us suffer? Perhaps a society that taxes properly and doesn't allow individuals and families to amass obscene amounts of wealth is a better way forward.

Also write to your MP protesting for profit care homes. I know someone who owns multiple homes and she disgusts me. She will quite literally shove her latest diamond in your face whilst complaining about having to pay staff minimum wage. She constantly brags about all of her cash. Her biggest issue in covid was that her residents were dying and she was losing revenue. For profit care homes need banning, no one should be allowed to profit from society's most vulnerable.

westisbest1982 · 22/01/2025 17:25

chargeitup · 22/01/2025 15:29

@westisbest1982

Very old and poor, but living in a country (the U.K) where the welfare state will look after you, at least these days.
Yeah you do you but I for one am very much convinced my life in old age will be immeasurably more pleasant if I have money and not living purely off the state. I'm pretty sure no one living off the state alone in old age is having a whale of a time. Heating/eating

This isn’t my plan either (and I don’t like you implying it is). But the unpalatable truth is that some people don’t care about holidays, cars and various trappings, as long as their basics are covered by someone else.

The thought of ending up in a perfectly fine care home paying a fortune to do so, alongside some others who’re being funded, feels aggravating (to put it politely). It’s all about balance and being strategic. The other thing of course is that some of us won’t reach an age where we need to go into a care
home. Also, the state pension will probably be means tested within the next ten years, so that complicates things.

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:25

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 17:20

I fancy that. Sell up, rent somewhere small and buy a motorhome. Which would be in someone else's name of course, not sure if motorhomes count as assets to sell..

Art, jewellery and vehicles are not included in the Care assessments
🤔
There was a tea clipper for sale moored at St Katherine’s dock recently
Im off to rightmove….😀

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 22/01/2025 17:26

funnelfan · 22/01/2025 16:53

What do you have assets for in your old age if not to pay for all the help and care you need? What else are you going to do with them? Shrouds don’t have pockets.

To have something to leave to family/friends/charity etc, @funnelfan.

Though, as I have already said, dh and dbil want their dad to use the savings/assets he has to make his life comfortable - they don’t care if that means little or no inheritance. But as a parent I absolutely understand wanting to leave our kids a decent inheritance.

funnelfan · 22/01/2025 17:26

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:01

The same as anyone else if you sell up or downsize or have it in cash anyway then
Restaurants
Days out
Clothes
Hair
Holidays
Nice food
Luxuries
Hobbies
Just like a lot of people who save up.
To enjoy life.

That’s what the newly retired will spend their money on, if they have it. Do you know many elderly people in need of care? Because once you get to the stage of needing someone to help you get washed and dressed, or to make sure you take your medication, or to help with toileting, those nice things are not your priorities any more. And if anyone gets to that stage with significant assets then I could expect them to use those assets to pay for that care and help.

this is not 1948. Much as I admire the achievements of the Attlee government, society has changed significantly since then. The current social contract, creaking at the seams, is that those who are able to look after themselves are expected to do so, to enable the taxpayer to support those who are unable to look after themselves.

Voluntarily putting yourself in a position where you no longer have assets because you want the state to look after you is to my mind morally wrong. And to be honest, bonkers, because the way society is changing there is absolutely no guarantee that the current safety net will exist in the same form in 10/20/30 years time. My financial planning assumes that the state pension will be means tested/much reduced by the time I get to that age, and so I am saving like mad to ensure I have choice and security in my old age.

JoyousGreyOrca · 22/01/2025 17:28

There will always be a safety net even if it is very basic. I will stay at home with carers, I am not going into a home even if it kills me.

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 17:30

'Voluntarily putting yourself in a position where you no longer have assets because you want the state to look after you is to my mind morally wrong'

No, it is common sense.

Rosscameasdoody · 22/01/2025 17:38

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 17:30

'Voluntarily putting yourself in a position where you no longer have assets because you want the state to look after you is to my mind morally wrong'

No, it is common sense.

No, it’s morally bankrupt and putting more pressure on an already broken system. How could you possibly think it’s common sense to dispose of assets that could fund your care and then rely on those who self fund from their own hard earned assets to subsidise you ?

LordEmsworth · 22/01/2025 17:40

Paganpentacle · 22/01/2025 16:19

...and why should people who have worked hard all their lives and managed to buy property to pass onto their kids end up losing everything... when those that didnt bother, never worked .... have everything paid for?
I get you OP.
I'll be looking to sign the house over to my kids well in advance of care home fees.

Do you really believe that 50% of the UK's population live in rented homes because they haven't worked hard enough?

Presumably there are a lot of homeowners who'd be happy enough if renters were to end up dying in the street, rather than having taxpayers' money spent on providing care for them. That's what you deserve when you can't be bothered to afford a mortgage...

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:42

funnelfan · 22/01/2025 17:26

That’s what the newly retired will spend their money on, if they have it. Do you know many elderly people in need of care? Because once you get to the stage of needing someone to help you get washed and dressed, or to make sure you take your medication, or to help with toileting, those nice things are not your priorities any more. And if anyone gets to that stage with significant assets then I could expect them to use those assets to pay for that care and help.

this is not 1948. Much as I admire the achievements of the Attlee government, society has changed significantly since then. The current social contract, creaking at the seams, is that those who are able to look after themselves are expected to do so, to enable the taxpayer to support those who are unable to look after themselves.

Voluntarily putting yourself in a position where you no longer have assets because you want the state to look after you is to my mind morally wrong. And to be honest, bonkers, because the way society is changing there is absolutely no guarantee that the current safety net will exist in the same form in 10/20/30 years time. My financial planning assumes that the state pension will be means tested/much reduced by the time I get to that age, and so I am saving like mad to ensure I have choice and security in my old age.

I expect everyone to be treated the same in a country that has laws against discrimination.

So ALL pay
or no one does.

If people want to enjoy their savings they can and have that right at any time in their life.
If the system was fair and everyone was paying the same and some weren’t subsidising others then I think we’d find more buying in to that system.
Currently it isn’t though.
It’s the same people paying twice again.

Rosscameasdoody · 22/01/2025 17:44

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 16:51

I'm not talking about disabled people, we have a disabled relative who receives frequent hospital care.

I'm talking about those with lifestyle related illnesses the smokers, drinkers, overeaters who understandably require frequent hospital visits. It is all free, great. What about those who live long and healthy lives but require a care home place in their old age, why should they have to sell their assets to pay for it?

So how do you determine to what extent someone’s lifestyle has affected their health ? It’s a very slippery slope.

RawBloomers · 22/01/2025 17:44

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:42

I expect everyone to be treated the same in a country that has laws against discrimination.

So ALL pay
or no one does.

If people want to enjoy their savings they can and have that right at any time in their life.
If the system was fair and everyone was paying the same and some weren’t subsidising others then I think we’d find more buying in to that system.
Currently it isn’t though.
It’s the same people paying twice again.

We don’t have any laws against discrimination on the basis of ability to pay.

Onlyme234 · 22/01/2025 17:44

My mum's doing this to my Nana. She's 94 and desperately needs to be in a care home as she's got dementia. Instead, she has carers go round twice a day to check on her.
I've spoken to my mum and it's because she doesn't want the inheritance to be wasted on care home fees. Feels quite greedy to me but you do you.

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:45

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 17:30

'Voluntarily putting yourself in a position where you no longer have assets because you want the state to look after you is to my mind morally wrong'

No, it is common sense.

Not to mention half of people in care homes do this
with the other half paying in cash towards the care of the non payers

Thats the disgrace here ! !

Deeleycat01 · 22/01/2025 17:46

Having just been through this there is a real big difference in care between self funding and local authority. I have very recently lost my mum to cancer and there was no chance of a hospice bed. There are very few of these so the majority of people of end of life care need to self fund or go into the home provided by the local authority. In my case we self funded and the care difference and home was huge.

We were not given a choice of home by the council. Just told that their was only one home with space for her. We did visit. The place was falling apart, viable leaks, tiny rooms with only a toilet and no shower. There were hardly any care assistants and nobody looked happy. By this point my mum was bed bound and you could see that she would just be left for hours and hours as they couldn't cope with the residents they had.

In the private self funded home she had true 24 hour assistance with a private ensuite room. She had a dedicated care assistant to help with all meals to ensure she actually got food and they closely monitored her fluid intake to stay in top of this for her.

JoyousGreyOrca · 22/01/2025 17:46

Onlyme234 · 22/01/2025 17:44

My mum's doing this to my Nana. She's 94 and desperately needs to be in a care home as she's got dementia. Instead, she has carers go round twice a day to check on her.
I've spoken to my mum and it's because she doesn't want the inheritance to be wasted on care home fees. Feels quite greedy to me but you do you.

That is greedy. You can report your concerns to Social Services. If they agree they will force the matter.

Gloriia · 22/01/2025 17:46

Rosscameasdoody · 22/01/2025 17:38

No, it’s morally bankrupt and putting more pressure on an already broken system. How could you possibly think it’s common sense to dispose of assets that could fund your care and then rely on those who self fund from their own hard earned assets to subsidise you ?

It is morally bankrupt to demand some people sell their possessions to fund care when others don't have to sell anything and get it free.

funnelfan · 22/01/2025 17:47

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 22/01/2025 17:26

To have something to leave to family/friends/charity etc, @funnelfan.

Though, as I have already said, dh and dbil want their dad to use the savings/assets he has to make his life comfortable - they don’t care if that means little or no inheritance. But as a parent I absolutely understand wanting to leave our kids a decent inheritance.

Surely though you wouldn’t want to leave them a financial inheritance at the cost of struggling yourself in your own old age? And actually being more of a burden on them rather than buying in the help you may need?

Rosscameasdoody · 22/01/2025 17:48

LordEmsworth · 22/01/2025 17:40

Do you really believe that 50% of the UK's population live in rented homes because they haven't worked hard enough?

Presumably there are a lot of homeowners who'd be happy enough if renters were to end up dying in the street, rather than having taxpayers' money spent on providing care for them. That's what you deserve when you can't be bothered to afford a mortgage...

Hard agree. Not everyone has the same ability or opportunity to be a homeowner, or to otherwise acquire assets needed to self fund. To imply that someone hasn’t worked hard enough throughout life just because they haven’t acquired property or have savings behind them is typical MN bullshit. Life isn’t a level playing field, let’s not pretend it is.

RandomButtons · 22/01/2025 17:49

If you want to avoid fees you’d better be prepared to care for them yourself, in your home, 24/7.

I’ve got a relative doing this at the moment for their mother, and it’s incredibly hard, and currently the physical care is still minimal.

DrPrunesqualer · 22/01/2025 17:50

RawBloomers · 22/01/2025 17:44

We don’t have any laws against discrimination on the basis of ability to pay.

It’s got nothing to do with ability to pay
Its discrimination by age
Obviously

As soon as you reach the ‘non working age category’ you are discriminated against
Here, in social care
and other things like

disability payments
carers allowance, see @Rosscameasdoody s post above on that!

Age discrimination is against the Law

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.