Fed up of reading threads asking how they can get out of paying care home fees.

[Nextdoortomeis]

As per the title.
I'm sure lots of people would like the state to pay care home fees.
But we don't live in a fair world.
Both mum and mil paid nearly £70k in fees
yes I didn't want to pay but I also wanted them to get the best care in their later years.

I second that!

£70k would last about 9 months. It could have been so much more.

They are absolutely NOT getting the best care money can buy at 2k a week.

They are getting the same substandard care as everyone else and the person sat next to them who is being funded by the LA.

Would you be happy to have no care then? Or just think everyone else should pay for you?

This indicates the nature of the problem, it really isn't as simplistic as a lot of people imply. We all know of people who have had similar incomes, usually because we have worked in the same job, but have had wildly different attitudes to life. Some have lived from overdraft to overdraft whereas others have been careful with the same amount of money. Those who have burned through every penny they earned will now expect to be supported by those who have been careful and made provision for their old age. That's the unfairness.

Haven't read the full thread.

What I don't understand is there seems to be this misconception that anyone having their care paid for by the state is somehow a scrounger and 'never paid into the system' yet is being subsidised by those paying full fees.

The second part of that is technically true; those paying full fees are subsidising those who aren't - but the first part just isn't. Many, many people whose care fees are being paid by the council have worked all their lives in low-wage jobs, have lived in council or rented properties so no home to sell, and have used up all their limited savings on care home fees and THEN had to have the state take over. What is the alternative once all their money is gone? The same will happen to those who currently pay the full whack, if they live long enough. No pot of money lasts indefinitely. My aunt was in a care home for 14 years after having a stroke. She was loaded, but the money from her house sale and savings still only lasted 6 years.

I will look to get around this by spending all my money or gifting it to my children in my 60s!

I will buy a 1 bed apartment for as cheap as possible!

I don’t care if people think my approach is unethical

The govt has done a few unethical things recently where my finances are concerned!

I empathise because euthanasia isn't an option. I've worked bloody hard to afford my home and I want it to go to my children.

Heaven forbid I get an awful, slow degenerative condition that will be drawn out for years, traumatise my kids, and cost thousands in care, from both my own and the public purse.

We afford the right of a humane death to animals, I'd like the option for myself too.

Sorry to sound flippant, I genuinely don't want to upset anyone or for anyone to think I think that their own relatives life isn't worth living, my view is purely down to how I view my own life and finances.

ETA - If the gov won't allow that option and insist on keeping me alove, they should pay for it.

And is that really how you can best serve your family? Are they really more concerned to have your money than to see your life continue while you are still well?

The problem is that you sell your house to pay for the care and then end up living longer than the house can pay for. When this happens, the state take over and you find yourself moved into poorer quality care. You are not funding high quality care until the end of your life and have no security. Most people want their assets to go to their children and are tired of constantly subsidising others with no return.

But you did care for your mother for 8 years - where many families don’t consider that an option.

"You didn't want to pay." Nor did you - they did. Your post sounds a little whiny. 70K is a lot of money but it could have been a lot more. That might only cover one yr of costs depending on where you are.

I hope my parents neighbours didn't think this when mum was in the street shouting. We begged dad to put mum in respite or FT care. He absolutely refused to the detriment of his own health. From what I know now he was incredible in what he dealt with on a daily basis and it breaks my heart. He had 2 reasons - he'd promised my mother he'd care for her, and being born to a single mother in the 1930s with no money his small bungalow that he owned was so important to him. He desperately wanted that money to come to his children. Whilst we desperately wanted more years with him. 😞

As the only reason to not take statins is becuase you are basically accepting death (not something I am against, dependent on your state of health) then it would make sense you can't get life insurance, nor should you be in a position where you need it. No travel insurance for medical risks is also an acceptable downside if you're that close to the end of your life.

I don't get why people feel its the government's/the country responsibility to pay for their care ?

Completely agree.

Also the same people who use tax loopholes to reduce their tax bill

You don't seem to understand what extortion means.
If you don't want to spend money on care home fees, then don't go into the care home. Otherwise, pay for the jolly expensive service that you are receiving.

There won't be a lot of choice if DH and I need care. We have a one bed flat with a very short leases that we can't afford to extend. There'll be sod all for our care and not a lot we can do about it.

This just not true! The 7 year rule is only for inheritance tax. As far as funding for care fees is concerned, the LA can dig around in your financesas much as they like.

I think that if you can guarantee the best possible care, then people would be happy to sell the family home and pay for aged parents to live out their final years in a lovely environment.

However, many care homes are not lovely. It is expensive to provide general care and comple medical care to an old person. And you want wipe clean surfaces and easy to maintain spaces which sort of contradicts a place full of lovely squashy sofas with doilies and floral arrangements. Paying a fortune doesn't always get you a better home, so some folk think may as well blow it all/hide it all now as you end up in the same shitheap anyway.

I know one old lady who paid a fortune to a care home that was worse than the dank and depressing hospital ward she had been stuck in. The home stank of urine, the staff were stressed and over worked and residents visibly upset by where they lived. And it was so expensive.

My parents have said they would rather be put in a bin, head for Dignitas or waste their cash now and stay in a council run and funded heap of a home than pay an extortionate amount of money to stay in that same heap of a home just with a nicer blanket on the bed.

And that's the main problem. The government doesn't allow you to order that your life should be ended at the point you no longer have capacity to make decisions, and then insists you pay to be kept alive and cared for, something that society is forcing on you unwillingly.

It’s the work all your lives v the take all the handouts argument. Work and pay, or don’t and be paid for

Is very hard to take

Because that information is incorrect

Councils can and do assess you as still having assets , a trust won't protect you

Are people who state that private clients are subsidising LA funded care certain it's a subsidy? Have they analysed care home accounts? Do LA payments not cover the direct costs, nor make any contribution to overheads?

Me too. Mine is in trust already as was my mother's.

I also plan on spending as much of my money as possible in the coming years. There maybe won't be so much to leave to my kids but I'll be paying for them to have nice experiences.