Care home fees

[amateur]

3 minutes ago, loriusgarrulus said:

Wouldn't it be cheaper to employ a full time housekeeper to look after someone in their own home than pay £6500 per month.

Alas, sometimes medical or physical needs require the facilities of a care home that a housekeeper can't deliver. Certainly that was the case with my late parents.

[Lloyd90]

1 hour ago, loriusgarrulus said:

Wouldn't it be cheaper to employ a full time housekeeper to look after someone in their own home than pay £6500 per month.

A live in carer could easily be £1000-1500 a week and you have to account for the fact they need to have breaks and time off so you probably need two for a 24/7 setup.
 

God forbid your mobility declines and you need to be hoisted or moved about with 2x carers at once. Then you’d need 4. 

1 hour ago, Scully said:

Mate went through similar a few years ago now. 
Both parents needed round the clock care and the cost was 1500 each per month. I’m not sure how he did it ( probate?) but with the help of a solicitor sold their house to pay for their care and bought another house before their care went with his inheritance. He still has the house which he rents out. 
Another mate in very similar circumstances packed in full time employment to become his parents full time carer. His parents stayed in their home until their time was done, and it didn’t cost him anything. 

How many years did that take? 
 

Good thing he didn’t account for the lost wages …

[Bobba]

9 hours ago, loriusgarrulus said:

Wouldn't it be cheaper to employ a full time housekeeper to look after someone in their own home than pay £6500 per month.

This is an option. I know of a 90+ guy and those who manage his affairs have  for some years now arranged a live in carer. I understand the cost to be in the region of £1,200 a week. A slight saving over £6,500 per month with the advantage of staying in your own home. But whichever way you look at it, quality care costs are expensive.

[Scully]

8 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

How many years did that take? 
 

Good thing he didn’t account for the lost wages …

I can’t recall now for certain; maybe five or six years? His mother was still alive when he came back to work, but with his Dad gone his Mother was pretty straightforward to care for. 

He is a multi skilled bloke but not money orientated anyhow, so the lost wages meant little to him. 
When both his parents had gone he sold up and spends most of his time travelling now, mostly South Island of New Zealand where his daughter lives, living the dream. 🙂

I did the same with my Mother, and moved in with her, ( I did nights my sister did days ) but that was short term palliative care in which we tended to her needs and administered pain relief for lung cancer as she had turned down chemo’. 
I couldn’t stand the thought of her spending her last days in a hospital bed surrounded by people she didn’t know. 

[rbrowning2]

10 hours ago, team tractor said:

My feelings exactly. My parents should be able to gift me the house when ever they need without a worry as it’s their money .

Then do it before either of your parents are diagnosed with any illness or old age that results in them needing any care as once a care need is identified from that time on the assumption can be made by the LA that they gifted their house to you to avoid current or future care costs.

Speak from personal experience as sadly the LA do not see it as their money to do as they please.

And with rising care care costs, rising demand and lack of budgets the LA’s look to be getting more aggressive in their pursuit of recovering money.

Edited December 10, 2022 by rbrowning2

[yates]

Have you read your Mother's contract with the care company.  Will they agree to accept the Council funding which will be significantly less that her current weekly/monthly rate. They may ask your Mother or another third party to make up the difference between the private rate and that of the council. Failure to do so may lead to her eviction or transfer to a lesser room

[rbrowning2]

2 minutes ago, yates said:

Have you read your Mother's contract with the care company.  Will they agree to accept the Council funding which will be significantly less that her current weekly/monthly rate. They may ask your Mother or another third party to make up the difference between the private rate and that of the council. Failure to do so may lead to her eviction or transfer to a lesser room

if his Mother has more than £23,250 in savings or assists the council will not fund or contribute towards care costs until less than £23,250 or care of a very significant, demanding medical need is identified.

However if Mother and Father own their house and the father is still resident in the house they are unable to consider the house as an asset towards paying for his mothers care.

 

[team tractor]

1 hour ago, rbrowning2 said:

Then do it before either of your parents are diagnosed with any illness or old age that results in them needing any care as once a care need is identified from that time on the assumption can be made by the LA that they gifted their house to you to avoid current or future care costs.

Speak from personal experience as sadly the LA do not see it as their money to do as they please.

And with rising care care costs, rising demand and lack of budgets the LA’s look to be getting more aggressive in their pursuit of recovering money.

I was talking about this with my partner. I’d move my mother or father in with us . With everything concerned it’s best part a £million so I’d care for them . They’re already oldish . 
my mum picked her room at my house years ago 🤣. My son won’t be happy 😂😂😂

[miki]

15 hours ago, ditchman said:

christ on a stick what sort of care home is she in at £6500/mth ?

 

A good one, a bad one an average one .... that's what they cost, my father is in one in the Midlands.

It's a real money spinner for sure where the private 'resident' is heavily subsidising the LA's residents
basically if your parent has any asset (cash, savings or a home) the 'home/LA' ring fence that for thier fees.

In my fathers case, it is the best place for him, he is well cared for, well fed and has a level health care and interaction with the staff
and other residents that would not be availavble to him if he was 'at home'.

Am I happy it's costing 6K a month ?
Yes and No
"No" cos it's a **** load of money but "Yes" as it's the best place for him.

We moved my father to Warwickshire from Wales, it was cheaper in Wales but to far from his family.
We also had to move him about until we found a 'good' home.
I could write a book on this but the main reasons were that 'some' care home operators, in my experience, were more focussed on the money than the care.
The worst of the bunch was Runwood Homes. They are a largish organisation based in Essex with 20 or more establishments dotted ouround the country.
"Too big to care" should be their motto.
One of their 'conditions of acceptance' was that I had to prove my fathers assets covered 5 years of expenses (ie £337600,00) by submitting recent bank statements
and a notarised house valuatuion, without that Runwood Homes would not accept my father as a resident.....

Anyway it's about my fathers comfort and well being, it's not about the money/inheritance.
When my fathers assets dwindle the care home will get paid by the LA.
He's 97 and failing so as I said " it's the best place for him."

[old man]

15 hours ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

Your so right 

Very sadly this seems to be where we have ended up?

A total imbalance here to match up with the rest of it?

Social engineering at it's finest?

[yates]

1 hour ago, rbrowning2 said:

if his Mother has more than £23,250 in savings or assists the council will not fund or contribute towards care costs until less than £23,250 or care of a very significant, demanding medical need is identified.

However if Mother and Father own their house and the father is still resident in the house they are unable to consider the house as an asset towards paying for his mothers care.

 

I mean when his mother's assets are below the £23,500 threshold.  Up until October 2022 I have been manager of at least 10 residents/nursing care homes for differing private care companies. However I have now walked away from the industry due to the very issue mentioned by the OP. Decisions are made corporately and not in the interests of an individuals care requirements. My last company contracted every privately paying resident before admission with a clause insisting that the person receiving care or the person signing the contract on their behalf would continue to meet the full cost of the room at the rate they paid on admission plus the yearly increase for the duration of their stay. For example if the person was paying a privately funded weekly fee of £2,000 and their assets fell below the threshold and the council agreed to fund the placement, the company would still expect to be paid £2,000 a week for the room. The local authority would pay their agreed rate which in my area at the time was £780 per week. The person who signed the contract on admission would be expected to pay the difference between the companies private rate and the rate that the council were prepared to fund from their own pocket. Therefore the third party would be expected to find £1,220 per week. More often than not the third party would be a family member of the person receiving care, in most cases the son or daughter with no income other than their own pensions.  Also if a person was admitted initially on a council funded placement the company would only agree to admit the resident with a third party top up, normally £150 a week above the council rate. 

[old man]

2 hours ago, yates said:

I mean when his mother's assets are below the £23,500 threshold.  Up until October 2022 I have been manager of at least 10 residents/nursing care homes for differing private care companies. However I have now walked away from the industry due to the very issue mentioned by the OP. Decisions are made corporately and not in the interests of an individuals care requirements. My last company contracted every privately paying resident before admission with a clause insisting that the person receiving care or the person signing the contract on their behalf would continue to meet the full cost of the room at the rate they paid on admission plus the yearly increase for the duration of their stay. For example if the person was paying a privately funded weekly fee of £2,000 and their assets fell below the threshold and the council agreed to fund the placement, the company would still expect to be paid £2,000 a week for the room. The local authority would pay their agreed rate which in my area at the time was £780 per week. The person who signed the contract on admission would be expected to pay the difference between the companies private rate and the rate that the council were prepared to fund from their own pocket. Therefore the third party would be expected to find £1,220 per week. More often than not the third party would be a family member of the person receiving care, in most cases the son or daughter with no income other than their own pensions.  Also if a person was admitted initially on a council funded placement the company would only agree to admit the resident with a third party top up, normally £150 a week above the council rate. 

Well blow me down, not more crooks around surely?

[Vince Green]

22 hours ago, ditchman said:

christ on a stick what sort of care home is she in at £6500/mth ?

That's not unusual these days. It's legalised robbery. But if you say cobblers we will go else where you will find that the others are all charging the same.

We were experiencing similar levels of charges when we were looking around for my mother a couple of years ago.

Having had two relatives in care homes in the past decade we are well used to the tactic of ramping up the price after they old person is in and settled.

It's a cynical trick because they know it would be almost impossible at that stage to move them so you are trapped into paying.

[Vince Green]

19 hours ago, amateur said:

Alas, sometimes medical or physical needs require the facilities of a care home that a housekeeper can't deliver. Certainly that was the case with my late parents.

A full time live in carer for my mother in law was quoted at around £1600 per week depending on what you want them to do.

But they still won't do cleaning, laundry or shopping and you still have all the running expenses of the house.

Also the house has to have gas and electricity safety certificates and be inspected. The carer has to have own room with TV .

We dropped that idea very quickly

Edited December 10, 2022 by Vince Green

[Mungler]

The answer is:

1. if your mum is compos mentis / has all her own marbles, then she can do whatever she likes with her money, but 

2. If the old girl is looking to clean herself out in anticipation of care home fees coming over the horizon then those transactions are highly likely to be attacked and reversed.

3. You are where a million people find themselves and unless the old girl sensibly cleaned herself out of assets years and years ago (over 7 years ago is a good start) then no chance

4. My experience is that Indians, Jewish people and people with strong family ties will happily move money generationally to meet a legal test of being dispossessed of their assets but safe in the knowledge that it if they need the money back, then whatever they need will be made available to them from within the family. 

 

[Lloyd90]

13 minutes ago, Mungler said:

 

4. My experience is that Indians, Jewish people and people with strong family ties will happily move money generationally to meet a legal test of being dispossessed of their assets but safe in the knowledge that it if they need the money back, then whatever they need will be made available to them from within the family. 

 

 

There are a LOT of people out there that have been cleaned out by family members… and lots of siblings, cousins etc who’ve fallen out cos one of them spent the relatives money and the other didn’t get any! 

[Vince Green]

1 hour ago, Mungler said:

The answer is:

1. if your mum is compos mentis / has all her own marbles, then she can do whatever she likes with her money, but 

2. If the old girl is looking to clean herself out in anticipation of care home fees coming over the horizon then those transactions are highly likely to be attacked and reversed.

3. You are where a million people find themselves and unless the old girl sensibly cleaned herself out of assets years and years ago (over 7 years ago is a good start) then no chance

4. My experience is that Indians, Jewish people and people with strong family ties will happily move money generationally to meet a legal test of being dispossessed of their assets but safe in the knowledge that it if they need the money back, then whatever they need will be made available to them from within the family. 

 

While the old person is still fit and able they sell the family house and put it in a bank in Israel. Then they rent a really nice retirement flat for a few years

 

[Mungler]

11 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

 

There are a LOT of people out there that have been cleaned out by family members… and lots of siblings, cousins etc who’ve fallen out cos one of them spent the relatives money and the other didn’t get any! 

We see that a lot too, however, it’s far far rarer in the non-white demographic. 

Note the cleaning out is in the majority consensual in any event ‘they might as well have it rather than the government, because when I’m gone they would be getting it anyway’.

With most immigrants those that arrive first tend to group and stick together in family units and then have large families and breed the support structures they need. That’s not me going all UKIP but me reaching back to Geography lessons at school 😆

 

9 hours ago, Vince Green said:

While the old person is still fit and able they sell the family house and put it in a bank in Israel. Then they rent a really nice retirement flat for a few years

 

That’ll do it. 
.

 

Edited December 11, 2022 by Mungler

[discobob]

On 10/12/2022 at 08:27, rbrowning2 said:

However if Mother and Father own their house and the father is still resident in the house they are unable to consider the house as an asset towards paying for his mothers care.

Your Father can still still live there - but they put a charge against the house to be repaid when sold....

[Gordon R]

Quote

There are a LOT of people out there that have been cleaned out by family members… and lots of siblings, cousins etc who’ve fallen out cos one of them spent the relatives money and the other didn’t get any! 

Tell me about it. Been on the receiving end of a sticky fingered sibling. Church goer, pillar of society, but couldn't resist dipping into the till. Only came to light when my mother died sooner than expected.

[amateur]

3 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Tell me about it. Been on the receiving end of a sticky fingered sibling. Church goer, pillar of society, but couldn't resist dipping into the till. Only came to light when my mother died sooner than expected.

Yup, I've got a sibling like that.