Jump to content

Paying for the care system


oowee
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

1 minute ago, discobob said:

But if you want a decent one - YOU will have to pay more - read the small print


Ye … and you have to pay a top up / third party contribution if it’s more expensive than the one the Local Authority can find for cheaper. 
 

Our LA was very fair, if we found one for £900 a week and the family wanted one for £1000 a week they would only have to pay a £100 top up. 
 

 

Many LA’s have an imaginary figure of around £600 PW and if you want a home that costs £1000 and the cheapest they can find is £900 they’d still make you pay £400 top up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:


Your going to pay ‘another £100/month NI’ ? 
 

It must be nice to be earning over £100,000 a year. 

2CAEE87E-C671-4B83-9D41-219F061A9A1E.jpeg

Yeah, and 40% income tax on a sizeable chunk of that, exceed the £100k and they claw back the tax free allowance too....easy target, so yeah I resent that NI hike.

Back when I worked in a garage (time served apprentice) in the 1980s that there was no correlation between how hard you worked and what you got paid.   I didn't need a fancy degree or anything of that order I just needed to leverage the knowledge I had in an industry that paid rather better - and that was IT, 33 years ago.



 

 

 

Edited by Cosmicblue
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Bigbob said:

Her family provide for her weather she got pregnant accidently or deliberately 

But that’s not what you said. You advocated that to prevent young women from deliberately having babies, in order to live a state funded life, those babies should be take from them and put up for adoption like ‘back in the day’. So how do you prove it was a deliberate act, who proves it was so, and who takes that baby off that girl? 

Edited by Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scully said:

But that’s not what you said. You advocated that to prevent young women from deliberately having babies, in order to live a state funded life, those babies should be take from them and put up for adoption like ‘back in the day’. So how do you prove it was a deliberate act, who proves it was so, and who takes that baby off that girl? 


Its just a nonsense idea, like most of the quick fix ideas spouted off by people down the local with the typical “I could sort this country out if they put me in charge!” … 

 

The fact that the person has never been in charge of anything makes little difference. The fact they would break numerous laws and likely make situations far worse than they already are don’t seem to matter either. 
 

The key point is, these people can claim that they could easily sort the system out, because they never have to put their money where their mouth is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

The key point is, these people can claim that they could easily sort the system out, because they never have to put their money where their mouth is. 

The problem is we have to keep putting our money where the politicians put their mouth who.....

35 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

The fact that the person has never been in charge of anything

 

36 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

The fact they would break numerous laws

Change the laws..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lloyd90 If Doris does not know the day of the week why does she demand a better care home? Is it mostly just the family requirement? Are the basic homes really bad? 

Under this new system. I have to pay an additional 1 1/2 % tax and I have to pay for my care home living costs from my savings. Is that right? 

What happens if one of a couple has to go in a home?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Scully said:

But that’s not what you said. You advocated that to prevent young women from deliberately having babies, in order to live a state funded life, those babies should be take from them and put up for adoption like ‘back in the day’. So how do you prove it was a deliberate act, who proves it was so, and who takes that baby off that girl? 

I dont think i did what i advocated was if a single girl has kids and doesnt have the means to provide for them rather than being paid to have children by being given a free house contents and money from the state the parents or relations have to look after them thats going to cut the housing lists goverment spending and help thoose who really need it 

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:


Its just a nonsense idea, like most of the quick fix ideas spouted off by people down the local with the typical “I could sort this country out if they put me in charge!” … 

 

The fact that the person has never been in charge of anything makes little difference. The fact they would break numerous laws and likely make situations far worse than they already are don’t seem to matter either. 
 

The key point is, these people can claim that they could easily sort the system out, because they never have to put their money where their mouth is. 

Like the politians who if they make a mistake the usual answer is taxes will pay for it . When will the public hold them to licence why should hard working people always pay more to bail out the country because the politians cant do there job 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, oowee said:

@Lloyd90 If Doris does not know the day of the week why does she demand a better care home? Is it mostly just the family requirement? Are the basic homes really bad? 

Under this new system. I have to pay an additional 1 1/2 % tax and I have to pay for my care home living costs from my savings. Is that right? 

What happens if one of a couple has to go in a home?


Yes it’s always usually issues with the family. 
 

I wouldn’t say the homes are bad. As always it’s down to the staff in the home. At the moment around Bristol and the big city there are a number of big care homes having been built which are very nice to look at, modern etc, but it depends entirely on how good the staff and the manager are IMO … you could go to a much older (or more run down) care home but get a lot better care if they have a good staff team who really care about you or your relative. 
 

Most of the issues are around distance, Bristol was a nightmare, families kicking up huge fuss because they don’t want to drive 30 minutes to visit Mum, why can’t they have the care home down the road, it’s only 5 minutes away but they don’t care if it costs £500 more per week!! 
 

 

 

 

I’m not sure how the new system will effect you personally, I could give you a good idea if you want to tell me what you have in assets, savings, cash in the bank etc. Most people want to keep that private understandably. 
 

In the current system even if you needed care in your own home if you had over £23,250 in assets (not inflicting your home) you had to fund 100% of your care yourself. 
 

If you went into a care home but your partner lived with you in your own house then they wouldn’t count your house as an asset. It’s not yet clear if this will remain the same in the new system. 
 

 

It will be interesting to see how the sliding scale on the new system actually works. If you have over £100,000 in assets then you will be 100% self funding any care you need. 
 

If you have between £20,000 - £99,999 you will get some support but on a sliding scale, I’ve not yet seen what that scale will be. 
 

However if you go into a care home at £1000 a week it will also be interesting to see under the new system how much of that is classed as care, and how much is classed as food and accommodation. This will be new so someone is going to have to work out how to divide these. I have a feeling only things like physically changing, washing, dressing people etc will count as care, which will mean it will be a small amount where as accommodation will make up the main part of the bill (which is not capped!). 

3 hours ago, discobob said:

They put a charge on the house - to be repaid when sold or on death of the occupant

 

oh - and more than likely interest as well


That is not how it works under the current system, and as far as I can see if someone is still living in the house (your husband/wife or partner) then it is likely the property will not be counted as an asset, as it currently stands. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bigbob said:

I dont think i did what i advocated was if a single girl has kids and doesnt have the means to provide for them rather than being paid to have children by being given a free house contents and money from the state the parents or relations have to look after them thats going to cut the housing lists goverment spending and help thoose who really need it 

 

You are quite correct, it was another 'bob' by the name of 'disco'. far too many bobs on here! 

My mistake for which I apologise. I really can't be bothered to go through all this again, suffice to say he hasn't, and didn't think it through. My mind is scrambled at times by some of the comments made on here....some folk just doing have a clue. 

7 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:


Its just a nonsense idea, like most of the quick fix ideas spouted off by people down the local with the typical “I could sort this country out if they put me in charge!” … 

 

The fact that the person has never been in charge of anything makes little difference. The fact they would break numerous laws and likely make situations far worse than they already are don’t seem to matter either. 
 

The key point is, these people can claim that they could easily sort the system out, because they never have to put their money where their mouth is. 

And this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

I hope it’s not the main reason as Bobs talking nonsense and giving out incorrect facts / advice. 

Maybe I am and maybe I am reading this the wrong way

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/care/paying-for-care/paying-for-a-care-home/do-i-have-to-sell-my-home-to-pay-for-care/

The bottom section is the most pertinent

 

@Scully- sorry what do you think I was saying is so totally wrong - are you referring to the adoption bit - I said it was the last resort but it does have to be there but I also listed exclusions to this....

Edited by discobob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, oowee said:

 Are the basic homes really bad? 

Yes some are pretty poor, and the services are very basic to keep down costs. It is a price sensitive industry.

We were actively looking for somewhere for my mum earlier this year and we looked into and spoke to quite a few. Highest price was over £2000 per week and average was around £1400. This was Oxfordshire/ Wiltshire. Unfortunately she got an infection and died before we could move her

The other thing is if you live in one of the London Boroughs and the council have to put you in a home its likely to be somewhere like rural Lincolnshire. Its all driven by price, the council is required by law to seek the best price it can get. So effectively its like a Dutch Auction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Surfer said:

Does anyone have an idea where the money we were sending out to the EU has gone? You know the one on the side of the tour bus the figure eludes me but I am sure it was enough to cover a lot of services 

regards 

We are no doubt still sending it to the EU, in the way of the so called divorce bill 💰💰💰

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Surfer said:

Does anyone have an idea where the money we were sending out to the EU has gone? You know the one on the side of the tour bus the figure eludes me but I am sure it was enough to cover a lot of services 

regards 

Boris has more than honoured the promise on the bus

Funding for health services in England comes from the Department for Health and Social Care's budget. Planned spending for the Department of Health and Social Care in England was £212.1 billion in 2020/21, up from £150.4 billion in 2019/20.24 Mar 2021

And this week he has just pledged another £34 billion

Edited by Vince Green
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/09/2021 at 20:47, clangerman said:

when theres 80mil to squander on a clock millions to waste in afghanistan and endless foreign aid i don’t want to hear gump and co crying pauper why should the young pay for the mistakes of idiots 

You forgot the HS2 white elephant?

That will end up 10 times over original budget?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

Boris has more than honoured the promise on the bus

Funding for health services in England comes from the Department for Health and Social Care's budget. Planned spending for the Department of Health and Social Care in England was £212.1 billion in 2020/21, up from £150.4 billion in 2019/20.24 Mar 2021

And this week he has just pledged another £34 billion

Does some of that not come out of council taxes 3% ?

6 minutes ago, old man said:

You forgot the HS2 white elephant?

That will end up 10 times over original budget?

 

6 minutes ago, old man said:

You forgot the HS2 white elephant?

That will end up 10 times over original budget?

Ah yes forgot about that a Massive money sponge 🧽 that won’t even relieve freight on the roads in the driver shortage that will not ever recover due to poor conditions and pay 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...