MCCarthy Stone- what's your view?

[Flyhigher]

Elderly parents in law thinking of a McCarthy Stone place. What do you think?

Is it good or bad? Are they financially worth it?
Do you lose money?

Oh yes, I have seen that one whilst I have been researching. A bit far away from where I am currently based, as I'd like to stay closer to home, but looks lovely. Good to hear of some positive experiences of these kind of places too. Thank you.

It does seem that the current system is quite heavily reliant on family stepping in, especially as I mentioned, during that 'in-between' period when you need some help, but aren't at the stage of needing a residential or nursing home. However, as you point out it can be a real burden on family members, and as people live longer / have children later / have no children, it's difficult to see how this 'model' can continue to function.

I do really like the retirement village concept with different levels of care that you can move between as needs change. It would be reassuring to be able to age in one place.

I'm glad I have a good pot of savings and plenty of time to build up more to be able to afford to live in this kind of environment. But the government will have to address what can be done for those who aren't in such a fortunate financial position. It's really difficult to see where the money is going to come from to support an aging population.

But M&S flats are nothing like care homes. For a start there's no care provision. If you need a care home, don't look at a flat with no on-site care!

M&S flats do have care provision. My MIL lives in one and she has a carer for 15 minutes in the morning and evening. It's good because if the carer is on holiday or off sick it is their responsibility to find a replacement, and also really flexible, so she can cancel the care if she doesn't need it (eg if a family member is available to help her that day) or book extra help (in 15-minute chunks) if necessary.

One can "buy" care as a supplement.

Mum brought some care i.e 15 mins in the morning and evening however she needed to committ to it rather than just cancel it at the last moment. As we know care isnt that easy to organise overall.

Most of the women working there had alredy worked in care homes. They were lovely and there seemed a very low turnover of staff.

I do think a lot of people get mixed up with care home and retirement complexes. You can buy care but they wont pick you off the floor. That is a common misundertanding. I was called when Mum first fell and DH and myself tried to pick her up and she was like a dead weight and of course she could have broken something but people do often think that is something they do.

If the person dies or has to move to a care home, the very hefty service charges still have to be paid, however long it takes to sell the place - which can be ages, and often at a substantial loss.
That’s what would bring a firm No from me.
My DM did once look at one, but was put right off by the fact of no dishwasher in the (new build!) kitchen, and seriously affronted by the saleswoman saying, ‘They didn’t think old people would want them.’ 😂

@GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER

If the person dies or has to move to a care home, the very hefty service charges still have to be paid, however long it takes to sell the place - which can be ages, and often at a substantial loss.

That's just your due diligence to check before you buy. Totally obvious really. Pretty stupid for someone to sign up in the first place not realising that's how it works. Service charges cover things like cleaning communal areas, communal facilities like swimming pool maintenance, garden maintenance, exterior window cleaning, etc etc. The costs don't change whether the resident is there or not. Why would you think you don't have to pay just because there's no one living there? Would you expect all the other residents to pay more because there were fewer people living there sometimes?

Fair enough if you're meaning extra services, like laundry, meals, etc where there "may" be a saving if someone isn't living there, but even then, it's only a marginal saving, as making a meal for 19 people costs the same as making a meal for 20 people - the savings would be pennies. Likewise with an on site laundry, doing a few less pairs of pants, a few less pairs of trousers, a few less blouses or shirts and one less set of bedding every week won't save the onsite laundry any money. Even if "care" is provided and the place have some on site care workers, it's likely they'll still be working the same hours if they are "caring" for 19 people instead of 20 - maybe at best, save the odd hour of wages here and there if they're part time paid by the hour but no savings on overhead time, uniforms, equipment, training, recruitment, etc etc.

@Badbadbunny, I wasn’t commenting on the rights or wrongs, merely stating facts, so no need for that accusatory tone.

@GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER I do think this is a fine balancing act - many of the very fancy places especially newer do have very large service charges indeed but good facilities- but older blocks don’t -same goes for any flat blocks to be honest though , it’s not just over55 developments- the biggest issue I feel though is this wouldn’t be so much an issue if they were easier to sell and by the very nature of a restricted market that means they can be much harder to sell- however some who inherit these places or need to sell on behalf of their still living parents in care homes do themselves no favours by trying to sell very dingy places, with kitchens circa 1991, grubby carpets and a place that needs a quick update/refresh .

if I was in that position I would buy one of the fancier places second hand or on shared ownership like platinum skies or Rangeford as the places and apartments are so much nicer , better communal facilities and yes higher service charges but far less likely to totally devalue.

I agree that a lot of the cheaper ones are cheap because they're run down and need a lot of modernisation - the individual flats I mean, not the development itself.

I've been looking at some and have Rightmove notifications turned on, and probably half the ones coming on the market in over 55s developments probably need £25k or so spending on them to bring them up to a modern standard - some have clearly had no work done to them (no decoration, no new carpets, no new kitchens or bathrooms) for decades, probably since they were first built really. It's usually clear that someone bought them 20/30 years ago, got old in it, and wasn't capable of updating it. Need complete rip out. It's not just the cost, it's the time/stress of getting tradesmen etc, so it's no surprise that the children/beneficiaries think they've made a loss when they don't sell for what they were bought for.

Not particularly McCarthy & Stone, but similar places have the same kind of problems. I've not looked at too many McCarthy & Stone because the place I like locally is relatively modern, so very little "used" ones have been on the market and none have yet become "old and tired" so will still command a decent price when they do, although still a slight reduction on advertised prices when new as McC&S were definitely over-charging for new (but probably lots of deals/discounts behind the scenes like most new build developers).

A few years ago, before I started looking, a neighbour of my MIL bought one and it took him around six months before he moved in - it seemed strange at the time, but he said it needed completely gutting, apparently, mould growing all over the kitchen, food/milk left in the fridge (for years!), etc., "stains" all over the bathroom floor. He was very happy with the price he paid for it, which was something ridiculously cheap, like £50k for a two bed flat - hardly surprising when very few people would want to take on a challenge like that, especially older people! He was "only" 60 so was up for a challenge!

There's another one I've been looking at which has been reduced, not M&S, initially from £100k then down to £80k and currently £70k. I really like it's location, ground floor which is what I want as I want my own external door, but, sheesh, it's awful inside. The block is only around 25 years old and it's hard to understand how it's deteriorated so much - at a guess, I'd say it was only lived in for a couple of years and has been empty for the last 20+ or so, and, yes, mould everywhere in the bathrooms, kitchen, carpets, etc - clearly no one had bothered going in to ventilate it. Definitely a need for full hazard suit when you go in it - estate agents have said as much that they're not encouraging any viewings and hope that people will make offers based on the photos alone!

People really can't expect homes to always appreciate in value, especially when they've been ignored and allowed to deteriorate for long periods of time either because the resident has lost the ability to deal with tradesmen, lost the interest, gone into a care home, or died. Perhaps the relatives/beneficiaries complaining about it should have spent more time ensuring their inheritances were being looked after properly and not being allowed to get into a state of disrepair.

@Badbadbunny I couldn’t agree with you more - as an example there were 2 came up recently not far from us in Bradford on Avon - lovely old historical building , sensible service charges ( around £280 a month) as no real fancy things ( pools/restaurants etc) both had been kept very nicely , newish kitchens, clearly newish carpets, redecorated etc - both around £160k for 2 bedders in an attractive in demand town - both sold relatively quickly ( several months - but not years)

Interesting points there. I do wonder
though how many don’t have local family around to keep an eye on the place? A lot of the incentive is around joining a community, particularly if you don’t have local family support.
And then being able to afford to refurbish it when it does go on the market. If all the money is locked up in the property, how many people could afford to pay £10-25k for refurbishment so it looks nice to sell?

@EmotionalBlackmail I agree that is an issue

@EmotionalBlackmail it’s one reason I think it’s a bad idea to use all your money on buying one - it makes more sense if you have involved family still to keep a fair bit back, buy secondhand at a good price if possible and allow for the fact you might need to spend £15k upgrading ‘at some point’ - personally I think more need to be built ‘to rent’ at sensible money too with secure tenancies - but factoring in a service charge clearly - I don’t think all older people would be anti renting at sensible prices , if they can bank any cash they may have, tenancies are secure and they aren’t depressing hovels. I think I posted one earlier in the thread as an example of a nice one.

I agree; no one should be using all their capital to buy one. You need to have sufficient liquidity to fund possible care requirements later in life with needing a quick sale!

@Tryingtokeepgoing it’s one reason when my FIL bought his bungalow earlier this year after downsizing he went £160k below what he got on his house -so it allowed some flexibility if he needed to buy in a bit of care at any point or at least fund some residential care before his home was sold etc - I mean no one can predict how long someone might need that for and we haven’t all got endless amounts of cash but it’s easier if at least initially there is liquid cash to make choices-

When I read this thread, it reinforces to me that Mcarthy Stone will never change its business model until forced to by the government. Having seen how they operate with my late Mums retirement flat, I would nether want to buy a flat with them in the future.

I hope the government doesn’t remove the choice from me to live in something like a McCarthy Stone development in later life. I understand the cost, like what they offer and don’t want to be forced into some local authority, housing association or government run accommodation just because some people make choices they (or their relatives think…) they can’t afford.

It's not about stopping such places existing it's about tackling the current scam that is MS and similar.

I agree, the concept is a good one, but there needs to be a lot more regulation and scrutiny.

Much of this is buyer beware to an extent though. The development my parents are moving to has a steady turnover of properties at the right price. The ones with arguably the nicer view onto the gardens are priced to sell far higher than the ones with the view onto the (bit grotty) road on the other side, but it's the cheaper ones on that side which seem to sell more quickly.

My parents will have a fair chunk of capital left from their house sale, so should be OK. My sister and I are essentially writing off the cost of the flat (under £100k for a 2 bed flat in a seaside town centre in the NW) from the estate. But we're fine with that. It's what mum and dad need right now and should give both of them a new lease of life. We're all looking forward to the move happening and will deal with the re-sale issue when it arrives.

The one we're buying has had a new kitchen put in recently, as well as the bathroom and second loo replaced (original suites were sludge-coloured and they're now white). The walk-in shower put in is a really nice one. It's also nicely decorated (recently). Some of the others we looked at were far cheaper, but terribly run down.

As long as you appreciate the terms of the lease and that you may have to sell a bit below your purchase price for a quick sale, the model is great for those who need a bit more assistance in life, but definitely don't need a care home (at £1.3k a week each).

@NoWordForFluffy that to me sounds a good option - mentally write its value off with extra to cover service charges for a fair old chunk and I think they can be a good option -

You'd need to upgrade any property, (house, flat or whatever) if you wanted to sell it at top price. M&S flats are no different. Try selling any run down "in need of modernisation" flat or house and you'll find the value is tens of thousands less than a similar one close by that's in good condition.

It's not a scam as they're not trying to hide anything or fool you. Do you due diligence and all the fees/charges, lease lengths, restrictions on use/resell are all clear in the documentation. A scam is where a fraudster deliberately tricks you by lying etc. Completely different.

What did they do that your Mum didn't know about when she bought it? What did they deliberate hide? If she bought something she didn't understand, then she should have asked questions, checked things. It sounds more like her solicitor is at fault if they didn't flag up any restrictions, "hidden" charges, etc.