so what's yr take on having to sell yr house when old to fund yr care home?

[herjazz]

so in light of this what dyou reckon?

Whilst I think care for the elderly is pretty shoddy and needs looking into, I'm not against folk with reasonable assets paying towards it. Why do they need to own a house they are not living in? Why should inheritance be seen as an automatic right?

I could be due to inherit loads off my folks - but if they end up having to cash in their assets to pay for more appropriate housing and care requirements then surely that's just them using THEIR money as they should? I shouldn't be moaning their assets stay intact and untouched so I can cream off them once they are dead?

You can sign your property over 7 years in advance of your death to another party(unless that's changed)and if you have decent family, they will allow you to live in it until you die.

edam - what about if only one of a couple needs to go into a home?

What of the MANY that never bought a big swanky family home, but continued to live in modest homes?

Isn't it funny though - if an elderly person is fit and healthy and doesn't need care no-one bats an eyelid if they continue to live in their (owner occupied) homes until they die.

If someone suffers ill health then they're accused of being greedy/selfish/whatever because they're don't want to sell their home.

How many people do you here complaining about the fit and healthy elderly population living in their big family houses (I'm not talking about the social housing issue - that's different obviously) denying a young family the chance to buy a home?

edam - yes that is right. There are really two arguements here.

Arguement 1: is about whether it is fair that people who have just spent every penny on holidays, etc then just living on the state in old age compared to say a couple who have earned teh same but scrimped and saved and then get all that taken off the to pay for their care. In my view DEFINITLEY not far and a huge disincentive to anyone on low or middle income to even bother making provision for themselves.

Arguement 2: is about old people effectively accumulating untaxed wealth by hoarding houses they no longer need to live in and hence forcing young people to pay them a huge windfall plus a pension plus healthcare costs. That is an intolerable burden on the younger generation.

I guess that the introduction of inheritance taxes (that paid for the creation of the NHS) was designed to partly address this intergenerational problem but now the NHS allows too many people to live too long so we are back to inventing yet more taxes.

Well hopefully, my children will be of the same mind set as me(and my parents)and take care of my needs without the need for me giving up my own house.

My Dad has recently passed away and required care at home because he did not wish to die anywhere else. My parents are/were not well off at all and the only thing they have is their house. My parents both worked all their lives and their mortgage only ended when my Dad was 75 as they were late starters. Think how heartbroken they would've been to have to sell their home in order that my Dad got all the care that he did in the last couple of months of his life. Finish buying your house in December 2007 and sell up in 2008 to pay for carer's.
No, you can call me selfish all you like, but I'm not in on this one. I'd rather sell up now, rent and enjoy my small amount of equity.

Arguement 3: In rural areas holding onto large houses forces the property prices up for family homes as very few new ones get built.

Having said that it does not excuse the high price poor quality housing that elderly / ill people are being forced to live in because there is very little well designed properties for them to move to.

always - you raise a very valid point about what if only one spouse needs to go into a home. Appalling that the other spouse (or an adult child who has been a carer) should be forced out of their house. Clearly wrong.

But the line that 'not everyone who is old owns a house that is now worth hundreds of thousands more than they paid for it' doesn't really work when you are talking about a generational transfer of wealth.

Yes, many individuals are not sitting on expensive houses - but most people who owns their own home and bought decades ago are in a house worth shedloads more than they originally paid. Not their fault, just a function of the market, but the result is anyone starting out today has to pay many multiples of what the original owner paid.

My great-aunt died last year before SS nabbed her house - she was in a nursing home for less than a year (at the age of 95). Her house sat empty for that year because there was no requirement to sell it. Could have been used by a young family but it wasn't. (I didn't inherit a bean from her, and nor did I expect, so no personal axe to grind here.)

if a healthy elderly person stays at home in one of these house that has increased multifold in value until they die a young family will still be paying out shed loads of money to buy it.

Speaking as someone who had to remortgage her house to get life saving medical treatment I would nit have a problem with having to sell my house to pay for a care home or even having to sell and move somewhere smaller to pay for dp's care.

I see myself as very lucky to be in a position to buy a home, have a pension or savings. I have no objection to people who are not in that position getting more help .

The housing market usually follows the principle of if there are a few availiable the price will be higher for those that do come onto the market. If you have sole / dual occupancy of a large house it means that families will have to pay out more for the ones that come onto the market because there are more families bidding / willing to pay for a larger house. If more people moved out of large houses once they no longer need the space more of them would come onto the market so the priice would come down.

However there is a chronic shortage of housing for the elderly to move to.

Riven so someone who has worked all their lifes, bought a home and are still living in it paying for it's upkeep etc etc should sell it to let a young family buy it?

I can see the argument for elderly people in social housing (although that doesn't sit comfortably with me) - but for someone that has bought their own home and are still using it.

and as for the empty homes..............plenty of those around, second homes, run down council/social homes, homes owned by peple who move abroad but leave the "family home" empty just so they've got somewhere to stay when they come back to visit/live.

and tbh I think if you forced every elderly person in the country to move out to somewhere smaller it would make sod al difference to young families. They would probably end up moving into homes that young families can only just afford to buy, leaving........who? to buy their big family homes?? As most young families can't afford to get on the housing ladder at all let alone buy nice family homes!

Mind you I suppose it might work quite well some ways, you force them to move/sell up, they have to sell half their possession as they won't fit in a new smaller home, they're so traumatised by the enforced move that they pop their clogs quickly and you're left with all the small homes for families and a redcued care bill.

Sorted

It seems very unfair that someone can have a high old life and spend all their money and be looked after but the careful, saver is penalised. The answer seems to be to sell your house and spend the money travelling the world when fit enough!!

oh and lets not forget the people that sell their homes that then end up using social housing.

My parents sold their house "down south" several years back for a nice fat profit (it was a repossessed house in the early 90's) . They moved back "ooop north" to be closer to my dad's family. They rented for a couple of years (in a house that had 13 steep steps up to the front door with no hand rail - which kind of left my mum prety much housebound unless she was having a "good" day). They searched in a 50 miles radius of where they were living for somewhere suitable to live that could have a stairlift fitted, have space for my mum's wheelchair etc etc. They found absolutely nothing.

They then ended up on council housing list and were eventually offered a modified bungalow - and have now got no savings left, are using a council bungalow that could have been used by someone that has never had the money to buy their own home. When the time comes for my mum to go into a home (it's inevitable that it will happen at some point as my dad simply won't be able to care for her on his own) she'll get her care paid for and he'll get social housing still. Costing the tax payer a bleeding fortune.

Agree pisces.

I think the mindset of a lot of people in the UK is that they've been sold a lie. Work hard, save money, don't be dependent on the state and you'll be rewarded for it.

Bollocks!

DH and I both work full time. We have to pay towards our kids in college and Uni (helping out with rent - despite them working too)bus fares, etc etc, plus all our own bills, never had a penny of tax credits or benefits in our lives. And then the Govt expects us to sell off our only assets to fund care when we've spent our entire working lives paying into the bloody system. Fuck that!

piscesmoon - that is what I will advise my pensioner mother to do. When she starts getting a bit frail and needing some extra help, she should sell her home and go on a lavish cruise wherever she likes, come back broke and then move into a home. She already had to sell the family home to pay for my Dad's care and they had to go through a legal separation, so the state couldn't touch her half of the money.

It is an accute problem in rural areas - there are several famillies I know (3+ kids) living in 2 bedroomed houses, not because they can't afford larger houses, but because the larger houses are occupied, in the main, by 2 adults over 60 whos kids have now left. However the houses that the families are living in are not suitable for elderly people to live in ( think North Face if the Eiger stairs too narrow for a lift). As a consequence of draconian planning laws ( High Peak Borough Council and Peak Parks disagree on principle with each others decisions) we have very little new build housing going up. What does get built is snapped up at very high prices. 2 bedroom houses are about 90K ( we have a surplus of these), 3 Bedroom £300K 4 bed+ 750 to several million.

Many of the elderly people recognise it is a problem and would not have to be forced to move anywhere, but do not have suitable houses to move to. Our Parish Council would love more houses suitable for elderly people, we have invited housing associations and private developers to put houses up and are prepared to sell both parish land, but because of planning differences in our area it does not get planning permission.

I'm in the position now where me and my dd will potentially become homeless because of this very issue.

I moved back home to help care for mum when she retired (she had polio as a child and her mobility isnt up to much), effectively keeping her out of the care system.

She then, last October developed a urine infection, which wasnt treated (a whole other story) and developed dementia.

I have cared for her and my dd (3) and worked p/t for the last year because I couldnt quite honestly see any other way. I have now had to admit defeat and she is on a waiting list for a place in a care home.

Yes, she owns her own property, after scrimping and saving since my dad died 25 years ago, she worked till she was 67 to enable her to pay off the mortgage, she has NO savings and the house had got into such a state that 7 years ago I paid nearly £15,000 to have it re-wired, damp proofed, central heating put in, re-plastered, a working bathroom, new kitchen etc.

Unfortunately that all counts for jack shit and I am now in the enviable position of having to look for somewhere to rent (almost impossible here when you need to claim HB) or wait until I am actually homeless when I will be offered a place in a b&b until the council can rehouse me.

I appreciate that the care system is woefully underfunded, however mums house is not a mansion, (2 bedroom semi. The only plus to this situation is that mum has absolutely no idea what is going on. She would be horrified at the thought that all her hard work to provide for her children was effectively a waste of time

I wasn't going to comment, but here goes not all care homes provide quality care. Good care costs. It costs a lot. What the state pays for is terrible!

We have experience of this in our family. Long story short - my Nana has dementia, in the early stages (first 3 or so years after she clearly couldn't cope on her own) Nana moved in with my parents. Eventually, she went down hill too much and after a stroke needed nursing care my parents couldn't provide anymore.

social services found a home for her for post hospital - at the price the council will pay if you can't pay yourself. It stank of piss. The quality of care was good enough for the inspectors, but broke our hearts everytime we visited. My parents were able to move her to a more expensive care home; but that took a couple of months in which time she'd developed v bad bed sores.

Thankfully, there has been the money from the sale of her house to pay for this, but we've only got about another 18 months of money before it runs out. Unless it looks like she doesn't have long left, the council don't just take over paying the bill, they will move her to the sort of shit hole they put her in the first time round. Which is considered perfectly adequate.

HSMM - by all means tell your mother to spend all her money before going in a home, but perhaps visit some homes in your area that charge the level your council will pay and some the next price range up. You might be lucky in your area. I would never encourage an older person to be relient on what the government thinks is 'acceptable' care.

I think we'd have a lot less people talking about 'right to die' if all care homes were as good as the one my Nana is in now but then that's a whole different thread...

Anafrangapani,

Those families should not be having three children if they can't afford to house them.

I am finding this talk of elderly people cluttering up the housing system quite sickening. They are people who have feelings and deserve the fullness of life, just like anyone else.

"Those families should not be having three children if they can't afford to house them."

See, I know I will probably be flamed for this, but I think a big problem with our welfare-based society is that people are not encouraged to take responsibility for themselves.

When my friend (who is a single mother of 4, having her first child at 14) had her third child, she was rehomed in a 3-bed semi with a garden. If we had another child, we would need a bigger house, too - something we can't afford. So we aren't having any more.

People who contribute to a pension fund, buy their own homa and have savings are expected to give that up to pay for their own care. Those who have been less responsible expect find that the state has provided for them.

There's lots of talk about the "rich" helping the "poor" - but with an assets threshold of £23000, we're not talking about millionaires here. We're talking about poeple who have scrimped and saved throughout life losing everything thay have worked for - and for no apparent benefit to them

My parents are good example.

Dad 66, Mum 64. They live in a 4 bedroom house in 3 acres, a barn and numerous outbuildings. They bought that house 5 years ago. I begged them to not do it but no they had to have a 'big' house. The house is not isolated but my Mum cannot drive and she would have a lot of difficulty if my Dad died - who can drive.

They paid a the full stupid asking price for the house from a 60 yr old dentist who wanted to emigrate to Australia.

Net transfers of wealth all over the place but my parents house is ideal for a family and yet they live in 1 bedroom and the kitchen most of the time. Stupid.

My mother will not doubt end up on her own living in squalor unable to cope with such a ridiculous house and has virtually no pension. At the moment I live in a 6 bed house that was lived in orignally until a few years ago by a 90 yr old woman who is now in a nursing home. Madness.

My parents are good example.

Dad 66, Mum 64. They live in a 4 bedroom house in 3 acres, a barn and numerous outbuildings. They bought that house 5 years ago. I begged them to not do it but no they had to have a 'big' house. The house is not isolated but my Mum cannot drive and she would have a lot of difficulty if my Dad died - who can drive.

They paid a the full stupid asking price for the house from a 60 yr old dentist who wanted to emigrate to Australia.

Net transfers of wealth all over the place but my parents house is ideal for a family and yet they live in 1 bedroom and the kitchen most of the time. Stupid.

My mother will not doubt end up on her own living in squalor unable to cope with such a ridiculous house and has virtually no pension. At the moment I live in a 6 bed house that was lived in orignally until a few years ago by a 90 yr old woman who is now in a nursing home. Madness.

I remember when we were thinking of starting a family working out all our finances - what we needed to save to cover the maternity leave, the cost of a childminder etc.

We entered into parenthood responsible for ourselves.

When our house got too small for our growing family, we carefully considered our move up (into a wreck, basically).

We never, ever considered a handout from the state. We would have felt like failures and frauds.

We had several hard years of barely making ends meet, but hard work (promotion) meant that things did get easier.

We were never promised an easy life.

and the price your parents paid for their home. It's one that the average young working family would have afforded is it (bearing in mind we're talking a recent purchase here so not a transgenerational (or whatever the word that someone used was ) profit they're going to make.

On another note - I@m intrigued as to where this "they shou;dn't have children if they can't afford them" suddenly came from.

"there are several famillies I know (3+ kids) living in 2 bedroomed houses, not because they can't afford larger houses, "

we're talking about buying houses here, many families will never afford to buy a house in todays economic climate so I guess all those renters shouldn't be breeding

If you have an old couple and one of the ciouple can't look after themseves anymore and needs residential care - why should the other person of the couple have to have their home sold from under them to fund the care of the other? It isn't a case of children inheriting but the other part of the couple not being able to stay intheir own home when they cant look after their partner.

You are means tested - but the quotes and rules vary rom council to council and even the staff taking down the means to calculat don't know whether the person or couple will qualify.