My mums continuing care

grazb75

My mother has had a stroke and is in hospital. She has had a continuing care assessment undertaken by a panel for continuing NHS funding. She did not pass the criteria and i intend to appeal.

In the mean time the local Suffolk social services are asking me for her financial details and have sent me a form to fill in on my mothers behalf as she is not capable of doing so herself. The form is called a Financial Declaration form.

She falls below the £23,500 threshold but has some savings. She does not own a property.

Unfortunately, I do not have power of attorney but am the next of kin.

I am very reluctant to tell the social services anything about my mothers finances, especially as I intend to appeal the decision. Also, I would have thought that under the data protection act I would be breaking the law if I give such information to them.

Have the social services any rights to enforce my giving them this information?

Thanks
Grahame

monkeyspanner

I am sorry to hear of your mother's illness.

I am unsure as to your exact legal position as you have no POA but the Data Protection Act applies more to computer databases and records. The alternative to providing the information could become expensive as the council might try to have a legal representative appointed in order to have your mum's financial affairs dealt with.

To put your mind at rest we disclosed all my MIL's financial information to the council and after a retrospective CHC award were repaid the money contributed towards care home fees plus interest and expenses involved in persuing my MIL's claim.

As your mum has savings below £23500 and no property it is likely that the council assessment will mean they assist with the fees unless your mum has a weekly income which is sufficient to pay the fees. Your mum will be allowed a minimum of around £20 per week (pocket money) but all the rest of her state and private pension income will be taken as her contribution towards fees. There is also a notional tariff weekly income assessed for savings between £14000 and £23500 of £1 per £250 of savings. Certain benefits are excluded from the assessment and if your mum is in receipt of attendance allowance this will cease 28days after going into the care home. If you need more information on the assessment have a look at the fact sheet on this site. www.counselandcare.org.uk

If you need more information on CHC please have a look at the CHC thread I started.

CHCscandal

Sorry to hear of your situation.

EPA generally for financial affairs, not for health decisions.
The social services generally want a relative to gain EPA/LPa so that they can 'deal' with that person re financial affairs, this may mean that the patient lacks capacity, if that is the case the EPA has to be registered if still under the old system, and if LPA the court of protection will have it registered hopefully for both health and financial.

Having said that, you are under no obligation to divulge this information, it is against the data protection act.

However, if the person doesnot have savings or assets/property the SS will have to fund, but the issue here is where is the correct quality of care for your mother.

Is it nursing or is it residential. whilst the 'authorities slug out 'who pays' your mother may be left with unmet needs and sub standard 'care' that she needs.

As she seemingly doesnot have assets for the NHS or SS to plunder, the authorities will be against each other for the cost of the care, this will put your mother and yourself in the middle of a 'funding fight' for Who Pays.

Whilst this is going on, your mother may be suffering and have unmet needs.

There is no doubt that the SS are responsible unless she can get CHC, this is the issue, not whether she pays or not.

A family member cannot be held responsible for any fees, this is the CRAG ruling, but the SS are the only authority that may request top up fees if their basic scale of fees is not enough for the home which is most suitable for your mother, with the SS you have the choice of homes, with the NHS, you do not presently, but they do have to consider what is best for the patient.

Beware the revised DST and Framework, the Annex E from 1/10/09 makes any eligiibility decision stand until repealed at appeal, whereas now to 30/9/09 it is the reverse.

Also trialling throughout the country in most PCT's are personal health budget schemes, the govt are trying to get direct payment type systems in place for health which theya re not allwoed to do presently, but will withdraw AA and DLA it seems, unless the coun try wakes up to what is happening to the break up of the current systems to provide 'markets' for private enterprise.

Most 'care' is farmed out to private companies, where the residents do not have any human rights unless placed and charged by the SS.
The SS are clsoing down their own homes at a rate of knots and all the shletered/warden schemes are under attack and being withdrawn whereever possible.

Personal Health Budgets pilot schemes:- http://www.dhcarenetworks.org.uk/

Also with the looming prospect of a successful Green Paper passing through, the private sector 'care' providers are getting together anonomously for now so that theya re not targetted, to take the councils to court for not paying enough for their placements and forcing the private care homes to double charge the 'self funders' to subsidise the council placed service users.

Fairer funding:-
http://fairerfeeforum.org/

The main aspect of your case is to ensure that each 'authority' is acting specifically within their guidance/directions/ the new framework and dst.

They can be faulted & challenged at all times by not following their own set in stone process and procedure, the rationale and eligibility decision is subject to some dubious decisions made form the followed process because it is merely an 'interpretation of the domains, which as we know throughout the country, scotland, wales and ireland, are all different to suit their own agenda.

In your case, it seems that the simple first process of a multi assessment has not been carried out correctly.
Ensure that if discharged a full assessment is carreid out, also check to see if the hospital have issued a sectionj 2 to the SS, passing the responsibility to them?

It may be useful to note, that the NHS are fending the New Framework off at the first hurdle, the checklist, this ahs become their ammunition it seems, presently, if denied at this stage a CHC assessment doesnot take place, big savings on their staffing costs.
The appeal process still has to be seen through.
Use this as your starting point to ensure the best quality care for you mother by either/each of these agencies whilst she is 'piggy in the funding muddle'

Errata

forcing the private care homes to double charge the 'self funders' to subsidise the council placed service users.

I'd be grateful if you could explain this a bit more. Does it mean that self funders will pay double the amount they currently pay ?

CHCscandal

Errata wrote: »

I'd be grateful if you could explain this a bit more. Does it mean that self funders will pay double the amount they currently pay ?

In some cases, simply yes.

I meant though 'Double charging', to mean self funders not only paying for their own care in full, but also when charged higher fees than council funded residents that they were not only paying for themselves but towards the care for someone else as well, to subsidise, supposedly according to the private care home sector, the overall underfunding of the 'market' caused by council's block booking policy where they 'drive down prices' to award a contract.

It's been a well known fact for some time, that private care homes charge self funding residents, more than council block booked residents.

Listed below various sites where information on this subject has been dicussed, reports written (CSCI) and pressure groups
i.e. Age Concern commissioning reports etc, but nothing so far has changed.

The CSCI report has disappeared! not appearing to be available from the CQC website, will source it and post it or a link soon as located.

The sites start with MSE favourite, recommended by many posters as the first stop for information when 'care' is required , counsel and care, many more discuss the subject.

[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.counselandcare.org.uk/assets/library/documents/Finding_and_financing_care_in_hard_times_-_14.01.09.pdf"]http://www.counselandcare.org.uk/assets/library/documents/Finding_and_financing_care_in_hard_times_-_14.01.09.pdf[/URL]

[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/6A7B639DE2F94AF3B95A5BC4A0E2B482.asp"]http://www.ageconcern.org.uk/AgeConcern/6A7B639DE2F94AF3B95A5BC4A0E2B482.asp[/URL]

[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/04/29/111413/a-fair-deal-for-self-funders.html"]http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2009/04/29/111413/a-fair-deal-for-self-funders.html[/URL]

[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/85851.php"]http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/85851.php[/URL]


[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.ecca.org.uk/index.php/news-index/138-fairer-fees-forum-fff.html"]http://www.ecca.org.uk/index.php/news-index/138-fairer-fees-forum-fff.html[/URL]
[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.ecca.org.uk/index.php/library/doc_download/35-scoping-paper-fairer-fees-forum-.html"]http://www.ecca.org.uk/index.php/library/doc_download/35-scoping-paper-fairer-fees-forum-.html[/URL]

[URL="mhtml:{648DC2E2-4F05-4994-9C5D-0F22C5857FA6}mid://00001615/!x-usc:http://www.politics.co.uk/news/health/older-people-getting-poor-deal-from-care-homes--$480063.htm"]http://www.politics.co.uk/news/health/older-people-getting-poor-deal-from-care-homes--$480063.htm[/URL]

Errata

Thank you. I think the case is that some care homes may have different fees for self funders and those funded by a Local Authority.

CHCscandal

Errata wrote: »

Thank you. I think the case is that some care homes may have different fees for self funders and those funded by a Local Authority.

Thank you, I take your point of view, but mine statement of understanding gleaned from a valuable source is:-

1. All privately owned care homes, in business for a profit, charge self funders more than council placed residents. (which includes deferred payment residents, whom the council class as self funders but charge back the block fee to the deferred account as they cannot charge a diffeerent fee as the lcoal authority has palced and charged, these people are covered by the human rights laws, direct self funders are not).

2. Charitable run private care homes, charge equal fees for council funded placements and direct self funders.

3. Council owned and run homes, charge self funders LESS, apparently, than the allowance for SS placed funded for residents!!

There seems to be two clear distinctions
A) those who run care homes, 3 types currently &
the fees funded by local authority placements in the care homes.

Not wanting to split hairs,the statement I endorse is:- I think the case is that care homes within the private sector which are privately owned, do have different fees for self funders to those residents placed and funded by the local authority, that charitable status run care homes, do not have different fees for self funders or residents funded by the local authority, finally, local authority owned and run care homes do have different fees for those funded by the local authority and residents who are classed as self funders paying directly for their care to the allocated amount for the local authority funded placement.

Link to the csci report:- http://collections.europarchive.org/tna/20081105165041/http://www.csci.org.uk/default.aspx?page=2205&key=

Errata

Thank you. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this.

sleepless_saver

CHCscandal wrote: »

Thank you, I take your point of view, but mine statement of understanding gleaned from a valuable source is:-


2. Charitable run private care homes, charge equal fees for council funded placements and direct self funders.

Not all of them. I have a relative living in a charity run private care home whose rates for self funders are £300 a week higher than for local authority funded residents.

dzug1

CHCscandal wrote: »

Having said that, you are under no obligation to divulge this information, it is against the data protection act.

Whilst you are under no obligation to divulge the information (after all, you are under no obligation to know it anyway) I really doubt if the data protection act has anything to do with it. If it has, then you are probably breaking the act by knowing it in the first place.

CHCscandal

Slightly off topic of the thread, but relevant subjects discussed within the thread, hopefully the stories in the links may eventually help the general public to 'wake up' to the injustices happening right now to our most vulnerable, sick, infirm, disabled, frail mostly but not always elderly people.

Yvonne Hossack, solicitor who works pro bono tirelessly to aid the sick, vulnerable, frail and elderly etc to the extent that councils hounded her for 'upsetting their apple cart' of care home closures and other detrimental actions against this group of people that seem to bear the brunt of any cuts and charges in the modern market/profit led world we now live in.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...y-1790022.html

Other items in the news yesterday, all topics being discussed in the main forum recently, i.e. the cost of care home places, top ups and the fact that self funders subsidise council placed and funded residents.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8262436.stm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...-age-care.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...hcare-timebomb