AIBU to try and prevent care home fees? Advice appreciated

[Watermelonsuns]

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

@Watermelonsuns i work in social care this is happening a lot lately people are trying to hide assets but the council will soon label them as full cost as soon as they find out the property has been changed. You or the family will be left with the full cost of the care to pay then. We have had people transfer all their savings to have little left but as it was deliberate they then had to pay full cost of all care which surprisingly then couldn’t afford. It never ends well when you try to hide assets

It's easy to avoid care home fees. Care for your own parents.

So that's not easy to actually do or trending on socials either, but it's an option.

I struggle to understand the logic here. I too have saved to buy a house but why shouldn't it be sold to pay for my care and to give me a place to live? I wouldn't ask the tax payer to pay for me to retire in Barbados or to pay my rent if I have thousands in the bank so how is it different? Seems to make far more sense than leaving it to my children who haven't earned it (I do have a Marxist view of inheritance though as it perpetuates class inequality for generations)

This wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing as it would be immensely beneficial to the economy. As it is the rich elderly largely sit on their wealth so it helps no one until they die

One of my elderly relatives is in an awful care home due to her and other family members thinking they were being clever years ago and signing the house over to her much younger brother. Her brother died 13 years ago and the house went to his adult child. Because there are no assets, she had no say in where she had to go. She hates it there, it's depressing and massively under funded.

A different family member had to use all of the money from the sale of her house then her pension to fund her care but was looked after, well fed, had daily entertainment and generally happy there. The difference is worlds apart. Family are just glad she was getting good care right up until her last breath. We don't care that there was no inheritance, it is never a given and comfort and health of loved ones is much more important.

This is my basic understanding of it all, but YABU. Some one going into a care home is at end of life, so they don't need their home anymore. It makes sense for it to be considered an asset when it comes to care home fees.
They don't owe you their home, and you are not owed it.

Many parents don't want the indignity of having their children do their intimate care at the end.

This. My grandad had carers a few times a day. Refused his kids doing it. Wanted to maintain his dignity.

I agree with you to a certain extent but wouldn’t people just transfer the money into their children’s savings (7 year rule) and spend money on expensive holidays outside of the UK.

People can only speak of their own personal experience but what is so often unacceptable is the vast cost, relative to the quality of care provided. My mother in law’s care cost £1,200 a week. There was no evidence that anybody in that home cared two hoots about her as a human being. Horrible money making machine.

They are not end of life. Someone with dementia can live a long time in a care home

Break down the £5000 a month

Rent
Power
Water
Food
24hr care at £15ph
Admin costs of managing the care
Sundries like medication
Activities
Equipment like specialist chairs, beds etc
Staff training

The home has to turn a profit to pay for maintenance and upkeep.

So what would that break down if she lives home

£500 rent
£2500 care bill
Water £50
Power £50
Clubs £5 a time 3x a week
Specialist equipment - name your price
Home maintenance - put £200 a month away for the boiler breaking
Food - a company set up for elderly ready meals is £6 a meal, plus your breakfast and lunch so another £200 per month.
Taxis, because she needs to go to the doctor's, and the club's, and the hairdressers. £6 a day, another £150 a month.

You're looking at £3500-4000 just on those elements.

All the more reason for them to contribute financially to their care then, if they are able. One things for sure, they're unlikely to go back to living independently.

I meant, they wont be going home. That sort of end of life.

They might have if family at a later point can care for them. But they can't as their home is sold.

It also costs a lot because those paying the fees are subsidising those that don’t

It may be OK to pay for yourself
It may be OK for others who don’t own property to be tax payer funded

It is morally wrong for care homes to use money from someone’s savings and home sale to use to pay for those the Council are underfunding.

This isn’t just about paying for yourself.

And of course you do have a right to things you’ve worked and saved for, such as a home. @Xenobitch
Why isn’t artwork, jewellery and cars for example thrown into the mix as assets for those that don’t pay. If they have them then they have assets and should pay, surely
Is artwork and jewellery more important than a home ? ! Really !

Take it all or take nothing…isn’t that fairer

My parents have worked hard and paid taxes all their life, why shouldn't they be taken care of in comparison to those who haven't?

It's not as if they haven't got anything for their taxes so far though, is it? Every state provided thing they've used from the roads that we all need, to the NHS, your education, their state pension, funding the defence of our nation has needed paying for too.

A home is a pretty obvious asset. And if you are going into care, you no longer need it.

People talking on here of council funded nursing homes, there are no council funded nursing homes or care homes, the entire sector is private and not well regulated. My mum briefly had a Stint in a nursing home, paid £7K a month, it was marginally better than basic. My aunt spent the last 3 years of her life in nursing home, much nicer than the one my mother was in, paid maybe the same money. However be warned, the owners of some of these homes are grabby greedy and unscrupulous. The last year of my aunts life, the NHS took over her funding, the owner of the home was still charging my aunt her fees. We had no idea until she died. It was all reclaimed, but he was taking in £14K a month!

Yes there are good homes out there but I understand the need to try to avoid them as they really are not regulated anyway near as much as they should be and a good one is very hard to determine. My mother lives with me now and we pay for private carers as we just could not find a home that we were comfortable with.

Can’t imagine you would desperately need your car, jewellery or artwork either. What about that boat moored up, they are all exempt.

You have just said yourself it will be the same care home and the same staff. So yes, your parent will be cared for. You think they should receive better care than poorer people? Well you can pay for that too, if you can afford it. Or would you like to bring back the workhouse for the poor and elderly?

There has to be a line I guess.

If your parent/s are physically or mentally unable to look after themselves and need nursing care they should be in a nursing home and for that their assets will be used.
But as someone said that usually is about 11% of people and there is a good case to argue that they should continue to be looked after by the NHS as was assured when it was created ‘from cradle to grave’ . That ceased and is still being fought over. At present only those without assets are cared for by the state.

Then there are residential homes for the elderly which have never been in the remit of the NHS. They are the places where the old dreaded going as they lost all agency. In the past, ending just a hundred years ago, the old poor went to the state-run workhouses. Those who had the assets might become long term residents in hotels which fed them and took away responsibility of housekeeping but kept their independence.
Things changed a lot when Thatcher allowed the private sector to run homes for the elderly and infirm, and stopped nearly all state funding. (Thatcher stayed at the Ritz in her dotage).
In the northern city I live, the self funders pay much higher fees in the same homes than the council pay for their charges, in fact self funders are funding the poor not just themselves.
It is quite reasonable for the OP to question all this.
All animals, not just humans, like things to be fair. it’s a basic instinct. And the present system isn’t fair. Self funders shouldn’t be deprived of ALL their estate, there should be a cap and then perhaps people wouldn’t feel the need to try to avoid paying for fear it will take every penny. And it does place awful pressure on people to opt for assisted suicide which is so sad.
Another basic desire is to pass down assets to your children. We all worry what will become of them after we have gone and feel better knowing we have eased their lot and we have served our parental role. That should not be underestimated.