To think it's unfair to sell your home to fund care when older while others pay nothing.

[SonnyHoney]

I provide healthcare services to older people, which means I regularly visit care homes. It’s something I find quite upsetting at times. I see individuals who have worked hard all their lives, paid off their mortgages, and are now facing care home fees of around £2,000 a week.

Meanwhile, others are living in the same care homes with their costs largely covered, aside from a contribution from their pension.

I say this as someone from a working-class background and daughter of an immigrant (El salvador) who has had to work incredibly hard to get to where I am financially. I’m also very aware that one day my own parents may have to sell their home to fund their care.
My mum, for example, has run a cleaning business for years, she’s up early every morning and has worked long, physically demanding hours. She hopes to pass something on, but realistically, I feel it will likely be used to cover care costs .

Before anyone says “Why don’t you just care for her yourself and keep the house?” And of course, if I’m in a position to do that, I will. But the reality is that with older age, there can come a point where needs become too complex, and care at home is no longer possible.

Obviously, those who don't have houses to sell need care and have to go to a care home, but my point is it just feels unfair, really.

The current system isn't particularly 'fair' and there are anomalies and problems with it. What are the other options though? As far as I can see:

Either we all pay more tax (which no-one ever wants to do), or we pay some sort of hypothecated social insurance- as they have introduced in Germany. You could then have all care paid by the state, or leave people with a much larger amount of savings before state funded care kicks in.

Or you remove the state altogether, and everyone pays. If you can't afford it, tough. But how would you feel if your mother's successful cleaning business went bust suddenly, shortly before she needed care? Or if she lives longer than anticipated and is turfed out once the money is gone?

A big problem, of which this is a symptom, is that life chances are now so tied to parental or family wealth and inheritance. So to lose out on an inheritance can be life changing, and can seem very unfair.

A lot is unfair in this life but that’s just how it is. People can live off benefits for life and when/if they reach old age and have care needs this care will be provided at no real cost to them. People who work hard, pay taxes, build up a pension and buy a home are penalised.

That's because the NHS is free at the point of use so nobody pays.
Its not like people with money in the bank are charged a fee to see the GP.

In England, if you have over £23,250 in savings and assets, you are classified as a self-funder and must pay the full cost of your care. This threshold includes savings, investments, and property (excluding your primary home if you still live there). When your assets fall below this limit, you may qualify for council support.

Key Details on Care Funding Limits

• Self-Funding (£23,250+): If your savings and assets (including property) exceed £23,250, you are responsible for all care costs.
• Between £14,250 and £23,250: You might qualify for some help. The council will calculate a contribution of £1 per week for every £250 you have over £14,250.
• Below £14,250: You will not have to use this capital toward your care costs, though you will still need to contribute from your income.
• Asset Depletion: If your savings fall below £23,250, you should ask your local council to conduct a new financial assessment.
• Property Considerations: For residential care, the value of your home is usually included in the means test, unless a spouse or qualifying relative still lives there.
• Independent Advice: It is recommended to seek independent financial advice when paying for a care home to ensure you do not run out of money.

But then what’s the motivation to work and climb the ladder. Without motivation we’d all just live on benefits 🤷🏻‍♀️

Surely its up to them?

Exactly.

Why shouldn’t I pay for a service if I can afford to pay for it?

Seriously? You really don’t get that as living costs and pensionable age have got higher, than many people can’t be carers for their parents as they are still working?

I get it OP. Dads in a care home and on the dementia wing to boot. He initially self-funded but now can’t do that so council are means testing to see what contribution he can make and they’ll pay the rest. He has worked his entire life and by having money he at least had choice of which home to go into (he is a 10 min drive away).
If council had to pay from the start they could have placed him anywhere in the county, the impact being a potential 2.5 hr round drive for family to visit him.

So, savings give choice.

I was just going to say the same to @Onemoremakesthree .

In an ideal world care would be paid by the state but the state do not have enough money to pay for this!! So the reality of it is that you have to pay for your own care.

I realise this is a hugely controversial thing to say, and I preface it by saying I'm only speaking to my own and my immediate family's perspective. I also mean no upset to those who have differing viewpoints.

I can't imagine a scenario where I'd want to end up in a care home instead of going to somewhere like Dignitas. My mother has also warned my family that we should expect her to choose voluntary euthanasia oversees at the first sniff of reduced capacity (I do recognise this is not as simple as she believes, in that her capacity to recognise may also be impaired).

Do you think, as more countries debate the ethics and legalities of assisted dying, we will reach a place where society can choose to end their lives and therefore retain a large proportion of their amassed wealth to pass onto their children, instead of having it eaten away in care fees?

Is this the case if the home is owned as tenants in common?

Exactly my thinking.

Yep, and plenty do.

Yes there is no regulation as to the max you can charge. If everyone is charging sky high rates and your parent with advanced dementia needs care you just have to pick one and then use your power of attorney to set up the standing order from mum’s bank account.

My mum recently had to move from a residential care home to a nursing home as her dementia worsened. I looked at two homes I was recommended by her previous care home.

The first was a care home used a lot by the council. It was incredibly basic in decor - literally white walls with no pictures, no side tables etc - in a converted building although looked clean. The second was bright and cheerful in decor, purpose built so the dining room and lounge were combined which is better for people with low mobility, more comfortable seating, seemed to have more staff and also was very clean. The second care home was only £100 a week more than the utterly basic one. My mum is now in the second one.

Yes. Even if the house had been solely in the mum's name, its value would have been disregarded.

I’m not sure this is true. Perhaps it depends on authority. When my mum needed care (no assets) I visited half a dozen care homes in the area. They were a mix of private and council run. But I believe the private homes were still funded largely by the council. Her fees were £750 per week several years ago. Her pension of £330 per week funded half of it, the council paid the rest. It was a privately owned care home.

The assumption that people who have their care costs covered haven't also 'worked hard' is certainly unfair.

What are you talking about? They got to the end with a good life, a secure house until it wasnt needed, and all the benefits that person in question has had from being better off.

Are you one of the people that thinks living with little or on benefits is the good life and the same? If so go for it and live that life instead. Nobody is making that choice, when it is a choice.

The whole ‘we’re not rewarding hard work’ goes the other way too.

Work hard at school? Tough, you’re still going to have to go massively in debt to go to university, which you will never pay off, so why bother unless your parents can pay for you.

get a good job? Tough, you’re never going to be able to pay those loans back, pay private rent and save for a deposit, let alone afford a house that’s 7 times your income, unless your parents help you out or you inherit.

This whole ‘we worked hard for our money and deserve the rewards’ and ‘you shouldn’t get something for nothing’ seems to go out of the window when discussing young people.

So sell your home, let a young family buy it and don’t expect them to pay for your care home fees on top with extra taxes.

If people can give up careers to look after family, that is certainly an option. Not many can afford to do so though.

Also, there are possible complex medical reasons for needing care. Dad has dementia and needs 24hr care. He’s doubly incontinent, bed bound (although tries to escape it) but still has lucid moments. He needs more care than family could give him.

Absolutely this

Does that apply to cancer patients too? Dementia is an illness just like cancer is. It just kills you a hell of a lot slower.

I believe cancer patients get free care dementia pay.