If people aren't owning homes how will the country afford care for the elderly?

[liltingleaf]

Saw on the news that less and less young people are getting on the housing ladder because of rising house prices.

However, I was thinking, at the same time a large proportion of people release assets from their home to be able to afford nursing care in their old age. If this cannot happen, how will people/the country afford nursing care for an increasing number of people without an asset to fund this?

If we lived in an affluent area and had a house worth upwards of half a mill, then a few years paying for care would still leave something in the pot for our children. We scrimped because we couldn't get a council house in the 70s (we'd moved to a new area and the rules were very different then), and even though we live in a cheapish part of the country, we weren't big earners and the 15% interest rates nearly did for us.

I'd like to eventually sell up, and move to an extra care facility, run by a housing association. I've visited a couple as part of my job, and I think they are excellent for various reasons. They provide independent living, self contained flats for which an affordable rent is charged. They are clustered round a central building with amenities that are available if and when required, and there are facilities for people to receive care, which they will pay for via attendance allowance, pensions etc.

People often struggle in too large houses as they age, and may end up in a care home because they are seen as the only option. Extra care prolongs the time they can be independent, they can leave hospital much more quickly, preventing bed blocking, and isolation is no longer an issue. The last benefit is the more older people move into such places, the more houses will become available, in all tenures, for families. Plus, those with houses to sell can afford the rent as well as having some money for a few comforts or to help their families out. Win win IMO.

I really think we need more of these: older people's co-op housing schemes (in this case a woman-only one):

inews.co.uk/essentials/older-women-built-pioneering-new-community/

Why on earth it's considered socially acceptable to deliberately avoid paying for your own care I have absolutely no idea.

Once all the current wealthy old people die, some of them living alone in huge houses, their properties will come back on the market and be sold to developers and turned into flats and then younger people will be able to buy them and all the problems will be solved. Probably utter bollocks but as good a guess as anyone elses!

you won't always get better care, a nicer room or better food if you pay for a private home, that is a myth. Many social service funded residents live in the same home as a privately paying resident, the private resident also pays over the odds to prop up the council.

Indeed retired, quite a lot of misinformation about what money can get you. Very often it gets you exactly the same as the person in the chair next to you who gets it mostly paid for.

And there is only a choice if there is no waiting list. Money doesn't mean you can just swan into any home you please. And to be frank, especially with dementia, it won't bloody matter what the home looks like as long as the care provision is good.

And to be frank, especially with dementia, it won't bloody matter what the home looks like as long as the care provision is good.

NOT TRUE!!!!!

My grandad certainly had preferences whilst having dementia! I would have hated to see him less than happy and comfortable. Good dementia care is important.

I did say the care provision must be good?

I should have clarified though that I kmeant in some dementia cases, my bad.

I just think good care includes things that might seem trivial such as own pictures or furniture. Little things like this can make a huge difference to people's quality of life. People with dementia still often notice these things. It can really brighten their day.

My Nanna who didn’t have a penny beyond her state pension and had lived in a Council house for the last 20 years of her life got excellent care in a lovely Care Home, with her own bedding and pictures from her Home. She could stay in her room or join in activities. She was only in the home for 5 months before her death but it was spotless and she was very comfortable. This new Home was built between two council estates so I imagine had a lot of local residents not paying for their own care. I’ve also visited through work a majority private care home in a more affluent area and it was a converted old building with tired decor and not purpose built so all ramps and stair lifts etc were add ons. I wouldn’t have said it was a nicer environment. It’s not a given it’ll be better. And as a PP mentioned having money does not give you total control over where you go if some homes/sheltered accommodation are full/have a waiting list. Often people go into a home straight from hospital and have to go where there is room to free a hospital bed, money or no money.

In general I am in favour of massively increasing council housing stock in this country and perhaps some kind of provision for far more council run and funded purpose built blocks of adapted flats with on site care for renters/council house owners who need it. More money needs to be put into the public sector basically. Higher taxes and a bigger state is always my preference!

I agree that more money needs to be put into the public sector, Bug. Part of my query with my initial OP was that what will happen if more people just can't fund their own care? At the moment, where people do fund themselves, it is usually as a result of the proceeds from selling their home. A house is often people's biggest asset. If there is less home ownership the government will undoubtedly have to fund more or leave people without care.

Well I suppose that the UK may become the next Japan-a lot of people would leave though in that instance.

Nearly all care homes allow personal belongings, especially dementia ones, they encourage it. When I say it doesn't matter what the home looks like I meant it doesn't matter if it's a renovated large 1930's house with dated furniture (normally no top up fees required) or one of these swish ones with a cinema/on site restaurant that look like a hospital (always require top up fees)

But if more people require the care homes that do not charge top up fees, due to not having a large asset (like a house due to less home ownership) to sell then something has got to give. The government will have to fund more or people will be left without care.

Again my Nanna in her poverty was in a brand new swish one that looked like a hospital. It’s not a given that having money gives you a better experience in a care home. Which is to be fair why so many people who own homes get angry about paying for their care when it is actually something the state provides to those who need it. Now if you had a million pound house you could have access to more choices. But own a bog standard semi that costs £130,000? You aren’t looking at luxury and you’ll be through that money in no time.

Yes, but people the fact that people are paying for care means there is less government funding needed, proportionately, for elderly care. If people stop funding because there are proportionately less home owners the government will have to fund more.

My point is not so much about perceptions of choice now through paying for care but more about what will happen in the future when less people can pay.

I mentioned top up fees because that's usually when they are charged - if the home has better facilities or more swish looking, top up fees won't necessarily get you a better standard of care (and they can't be paid out of a house sale anyway, the joke is they have to be paid by a third party, not the person needing care) And a local authority have to offer at least one care home where top up fees don't have to be paid......... think I confused things by mentioning them ignore me.

I get what you are saying, but don't forget that private and state pension and any other income and savings is taken, or a very substantial portion of it, from the person needing care. It's never free.

Loves I'm pretty sure an annuity paid for my grandparent's care. It was bought with the proceeds of a house sale.

Granny flats will have to come back. (My lucky children ).

if you have assets tied up in a home and you are moving permanently to residential care, then it's fair enough that you should use the money derived from your previous home to fund your next home
i'm inclined to agree

Sorry, like I said I confused things by droning on about top up fees. I only mentioned them because normally the only difference in care homes is some can look a bit fancier requiring top ups from those who aren't self funding.

Your GPs were obvs self funders, but having those funds wouldn't have necessarily got them better care, as Granny Smith in the room next to them may well have been mostly funded by the LA

Sorry I am co fusing things again I think, I'm sort of still responding to the poster who said more money = better choices of care. It really doesn't always mean that.

@Gran22 the extra care facilities that you describe sound really good!

I keep saying this, I've written to my mp about it, written to david cameron when he was in. Its going to be messy, we (renters) will be blamed for not saving enough & i don't expect to 'retire' in the current sense. But that housing bill will be MASSIVE

Extra care prolongs the time they can be independent, they can leave hospital much more quickly, preventing bed blocking
bedblocking is often blamed on relatives who dont make themselves available to care for a person who cant be discharged from hospital because this means going home alone to a large house.

Imo the fault is with the older person for not planning ahead and moving to suitable accommodation

I think people paid tax all their lives in the knowledge that the state would care for them in old age. Not fair for the govt to change the terms on them. If they'd known their houses would not benefit their kids, maybe more old people would not have bothered buying and would have blown it all on holidays when they were able to enjoy them!
I'm glad my gps had lots of fun rather than save and then have their house sold out from under them to fund care.