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.

They charge you for the cost of your care and take you to court if you don't pay it.

They put a charge on the asset you disposed of and claim it with interest when it's sold.

If every single homeowner needed to sell the home to pay for end of life care, and nobody ever inherited anything, it probably wouldn't be an issue (although people would still moan about those who for various reasons never became homeowners). The reason people are unhappy about this is because by sheer bad luck a small minority will need end of life care and spend their entire life savings and house proceeds on it. Meanwhile, the children of those who don't need it will inherit the full amount and in almost all cases pay no inheritance tax on it. That's what's inequitable.

in a sense no different than asking about tax etc if its legal to do then some will want advice to do

So what's your solution?

How?

If you jointly own a home with someone then the council will only consider your half of rhe house for funding purposes.

Unless that person is your partner/spouse or over the age of 65 and habitually living in the property then the house will be sold for your half of the cash and they will get their half of the cash from the property sale.

The downside is that if they get married and get divorced, or get taken to court for debts, or plain just decide they want their half of the money out now then they are legally the other owner of the property and could force you to sell your home to pay them/their ex spouse the money from the property.

Yes. Both terrible illnesses that can go on for years. The only difference is that funding dementia care strikes those in charge as too impossibly expensive to contemplate - never mind that it's necessary.

I would certainly be happy to see some of my taxes going to fund HMRC so they can tackle the problem of tax evasion from higher earners.

You mean like the top 1% of earners who already pay 29% of all income tax? 🤔

Like what?

I'm not 50+ and still have teenage kids. Moved out of home because my parents were not pleasant to live with and I have never been able to scrape together a deposit. Parents aren't wealthy either so it's not like they could ever help out. And house prices have just continually moved further out of reach. People forced out of London by housing costs have moved into my area in large numbers, causing housing prices to go nuts here as well. So it's been neverending. I always thought if I worked hard and was sensible with money I would get there sooner or later, but the prices just go up too fast

What happens if an adult child is still living at home with their parents as they can't afford to move out? My cousin and her two kids live with her parents and I can't see her ever moving out, will she have to sell their house to pay for their fees if needed?

I have no idea of her financial circumstances but I have always wondered.and don't dare ask her!

In the UK, care home fees can be substantial, often depleting an individual’s assets over time. While there are legal ways to reduce or avoid care home fees, these must be approached carefully to avoid accusations of deliberate deprivation of assets. Below are some legitimate methods available to the general public:

NHS Continuing Healthcare (NHS CHC)

• If a person’s primary need for care is due to a significant health condition, they may be eligible for NHS Continuing Healthcare, which covers care costs in full.
• Eligibility is determined through an assessment by the NHS, based on the severity and complexity of the individual’s health needs.

Local Authority Funding

• If a person’s assets (including savings and property) fall below £23,250 in England (£50,000 in Wales, £32,750 in Scotland, and £23,250 in Northern Ireland), they may qualify for local authority funding.
• A means test determines how much financial support the local authority will provide.
• Certain assets, such as a main home, may be disregarded under specific circumstances (e.g., if a spouse or dependent relative still lives there).

Property Disregard Rules

• A person’s home is not counted in the means test if:
• A spouse, partner, or dependent relative (e.g., a disabled child) continues to live there.
• They are in temporary care and intend to return home.
• This can help preserve the property for family members rather than it being used to fund care fees.

Deferred Payment Agreements (DPA)

• If a person owns a home but cannot afford care fees, they may be eligible for a Deferred Payment Agreement with the local council.
• This allows them to delay selling their home by borrowing against its value, with the council recovering costs from the estate after death.
• This is not an avoidance strategy but can delay financial hardship.

Gifting Assets (With Caution)

• Some individuals consider transferring property or assets to family members to reduce their wealth before needing care.
• However, if a local authority believes this was done deliberately to avoid care costs, it may count the value of the gifted assets in the means test ("deliberate deprivation of assets" rule).
• Gifts made well in advance (e.g., many years before requiring care) may be less likely to be challenged.

Trusts for Asset Protection

• Placing assets (such as property) into an irrevocable trust may protect them from being included in means testing.
• However, this must be done for legitimate estate planning reasons, not solely to avoid care costs, as local authorities can investigate the timing and intent of the transfer.
• Discretionary trusts, where control of the assets is handed over to trustees, are a common tool but must be set up well in advance.

Joint Ownership of Property

• If a home is jointly owned as tenants in common, rather than as joint tenants, each owner has a distinct share.
• This can prevent the full value of the property from being assessed when one partner moves into care, as their share may not be automatically transferred to the other owner.

Lifetime Annuities

• Some individuals purchase a care fees annuity, which provides a guaranteed income to cover care costs, reducing the risk of depleting assets.
• This can be a financial planning tool for those with sufficient assets who want to ensure predictable care payments.

Using Income Rather than Assets

• Some people use their pension income, rental income, or savings interest to cover care costs rather than selling property or assets.

Family Care and Alternatives to Care Homes

• If family members can provide care at home, this can avoid or delay the need for a care home.
• Live-in carers or home adaptations (e.g., stairlifts, mobility aids) can also be cost-effective alternatives.

I think the poster is referring to the lack of an effective taxation system on the assets of the wealthy (by which I mean those with assets in excess of £10 million). Work is heavily taxed, as you refer to, but wealth isn't. That seems to be the crux of the problem, meaning that the wealthy accrue ever more assets and the workers pay more and more tax and suffer declining living standards because they cannot compete with the wealthy for the assets, which increase in price.

I think we need to tax wealth. Society will become more and more unequal unless we do.

I think people get pissed off when they see feckless Doris down the road, who spent her dotage living with her children and going on cruises, having to pay not a penny whilst they pay thousands for the same care home as they have been sensible with savings. This is what happened to our family.

There needs to be compulsory savings for care (a bit like the workplace pension) which is paid into all your life. If you don’t need care, then the family get it.

People don't like the perceived unfairness. So if you work hard, buy your house and have assets you pay. If you don't have assets you don't pay. Private or self payers in effect subsidise people paid for by the local authority because there isn't enough money in local authorities to pay more. It's a shit system but no government will take on the reform of it. It's too huge a task.

Just get the prescription but don’t take them? Wasteful, I know, but if they’re backing you into a corner like that . . .

Blackbookofsmiles1 · Today 10:06
Our home will be going into trust for my, kids, I’m not paying care home fees whilst others who never sacrificed monthly (FOR DECADES) to pay for a property like I have, get it free!
......
Was it enjoyable sacrificing monthly for decades?

I know we were hard up for a long period, paying mortgage, bills etc, but I never thought of it as a 'sacrifice'. It was just part of life, plenty of others in the same boat, no choice really. It doesn't last forever, things eventually get easier.

Those who 'get it for free', if indeed it is completely free and I don't know enough to judge, often didn't earn enough to be able to pay a big mortgage but they still paid tax and did their best, hopefully brought up contented children who have grown into unselfish adults, people who are not waiting for their parents to die in order to inherit.

I am quite happy for my tax to contribute to the welfare of those in need, that's what the welfare state is about. It could have been me. As a pensioner I don't pay much now but every little helps.

Assuming all assets in the UK by that point (unlikely), IHT can be avoided by giving away assets more than 7 years before death. If HMRC is satisfied that no tax is due, I imagine it’s quite difficult for a LA to show deprivation of assets (?) Most LA’s couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery ime, so the idea that our LA is poised to whisk inheritances away with stealthy efficiency is pretty laughable.

We’ve got a UK trust set up for disabled DS as well as plenty of assets/money abroad. I hope to spend anything left over on the things he will need when we’re gone, long before the care home calls.

Edited for typo.

Am in the middle of selling my mum's fairly modest home to fund care home fees.

If her care was taxpayer funded, then my sister and I would inherit over £100k each when mum dies. Whilst that would be very welcome, it would only happen at the expense of other tax-payers...

My father has been in a care home 11 years now. It’s financially crippling the family.

Tenants in common can will their half of the house to someone other than the shared occupant and on their death it goes to the other person in form of a trust that cannot be used for care fees for the remaining person as they don't own it.

Personally I would rather forfeit my inheritance than have the responsibility of caring for my parents.

I saw my Mum do it and it destroyed her. The responsibility was massive and not worth any amount of money she got from a house sale. My Nana also never got the care she deserved either. She refused a home right until the end.

I agree. A friend of mine has two very elderly parents (well up in their 90s) both with dementia, both now in care homes. One has been in and out of hospital recently. There is a DNR notice in place and my friend and sibling have POA and have been very clear that their parent should be getting end of life care only. In spite of this the HCPs keep on treating the various conditions - to what end? The parent no longer has any quality of life. It's not what I would want for myself or anyone I love.

Yes, I totally agree. Which is why the reference to “earners” stuck in my craw a bit, as I’m currently in the 60-odd% tax no-mans land and have already maxed my pension. The gov needs to find a better way than never-ending fiscal drag for anyone working, that’s for sure.

It's the same story. People who are living off the state constantly, not just a stop gap. No mortgage or standard rent prices. Car on motability even though their condition has improved enough they no longer need high rate care. Call out for free repairs when needed.

All the rest of us mugs who scrimp and save while working extra get stuck with nothing.

I honestly feel like an idiot sometimes when I see the life some people have when they know how to play the system.

I do not mean people in genuine emergency need. I mean people who know full well they are better and absolutely scam the system.