take your house away to pay for your care in the uk

Brock_and_Roll

My family work in the care home sector so I am well aware of how emotive an issue this is. Obviously it is good news that we are living longer than ever but the bad news is that the care bill will get ever larger.

There is no easy solution but one way of looking at the current system (which is far from perfect is as follows:

A large proportion of the wealth tied up in the parents property is likely to be "unearned income" i.e. simply the product of significant rises in the property market in recent years. So you could argue that the parents have not "earned" a significant proportion of their paper wealth.

Secondly, if the parents could be viewed as having not earned it, the children certainly have not. So if the money has to be raised, which it does, then you could argue that it is better to "tax" such unearned income, rather than pass the burden on to general taxation, where it will act as a disincentive to productivity generally.

seven-day-weekend

Good point Brock and Roll, I'd not looked at it that way before.

We paid £3k for our family home in 1976. Whatever it's worth now, is not much to do with anything we've done, other than general improvements.

mazza111

benjo wrote: »

People in residential and nursing home care who pay cash out of their own pocket are entitled to do as they wish with their DLA award wouldnt you say?

People who do not pay cash out of their own pocket for nursing/residential care ie they get it *free* via social services etc have their benefits/state pensions/DLA used to form part of the weekly payment for that care. They are then given a nominal sum - around £11 pw which they can use how they like - but many nursing homes insist that residents buy their own toiletries, clothes, tv licence etc. Perhaps it is different in Scotland, but thats roughly how it works in England.

Also worth note, you cannot make a first claim for DLA after the age of 65, so if you become disabled and in need of care after your 65th birthday... you dont get it.

*free social care*.....



it isnt free, social services do NOT pay for it. The government do NOT pay for it. YOU pay for it, I pay for it, WE pay for it. The government/social services collects OUR money each week and shuffles it to either banks, armed services, NHS, Education, nursinghome/residential care, MP's expenses, whatever the government do - they do NOT give away free money.

I am misunderstood by my post, I spoke about people receiving care at home. Not in a home. Of course people should contribute to their care packages. I just don't see how they can give a free care package one minute and take it away the next (for the under 65's in Scotland) And by free I mean that the service user is receiving it free.

benjo

Yes Mazza, I had misunderstood that you were talking about home care - my bad. I dont know the situation in Scotland, but in England people who receive home care packages are expected to make a contribution from their DLA (if they are in receipt of it).

There are however changes afoot or social care reforms - the proposal is that Local Authorities will become DLA gate keepers, incorporating DLA into the personalised budget.

Originally DLA was meant to 'refund' the extra cost of disability and help overcome the social barriers to equality, the extra transport costs, heating costs, laundry costs - in theory to give disabled people a little extra money to allow them to be able to afford to fully participate in society on an equal footing to those without disability.

It allowed people to work or to study, lets face it, if you were on a basic wage you might decide you have to walk to work to make it worth your while taking a low paid job - if you cant walk and had to take a taxi then you might decide that it isnt worth working, thats the kind of idea behind DLA. (well, that was certainly the theory when it was introduced).

Im going very off topic here but DLA was never meant to supplement and underpin the existing social care budget. Many of the people who are affected by the issue raised by the OP ie loosing their homes to pay for social care/nursing home care will have become disabled through older age ie after 65, therefore cannot claim DLA anyway.

Conrad

Well lady

Are you happy for your family to pay more in taxes to fund such a system then? Presumably you are'nt one to bemoan all the tax you pay, wink wink.

Remember when you say the government should pay, what you're saying is you should pay more tax now so others can have decent care.

Gorgeous_George

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Good point Brock and Roll, I'd not looked at it that way before.

We paid £3k for our family home in 1976. Whatever it's worth now, is not much to do with anything we've done, other than general improvements.

It is a good point but the problem is that some people chose not to buy their home, perhaps opt to live on benefits when they could have worked.

These people also need care in their old age and rightly or wrongly, there is resentment when they get for free what somebody else who has worked all their life, bought their homes and paid their taxes etc., but are then forced to sell their homes to pay for their care.

I don't know what the answer is. Any political party that suggests a fairer system would never be voted in because of the way our 'democratic' voting system works.

GG

Ladywriter1968

mazza111 wrote: »

The way the free care is working atm in Scotland is weird.

My aunt got care in her home free for the past 4 years, after having several strokes, mini and major, crohns disease, and several other ailments. She weighs about 5 stone. She took an ulcer on her throat and while she was in hospital, they cut her care package, because they have made this change they can now charge her for it as she is under the age of 65 (she's 62) and has been receiving free care for 4 yrs.

I think it's really unfair to take the care off her now after receiving it for so long, but also believe that new claimants should be contributing something to their care. After all isn't this what they get the care component of DLA for? Am gonna take cover for this one... and hide.. from the flaming...

Well as it turns out it wasn't an ulcer on her throat but cancer of the esophagus (sp) so her care package is more important than ever for her.

Hi your poor aunt, its bad the way she been treated.

Errata

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Good point Brock and Roll, I'd not looked at it that way before.

We paid £3k for our family home in 1976. Whatever it's worth now, is not much to do with anything we've done, other than general improvements.

It is a very important point for people to understand and I finally got my stepdad to look on the 'profit' that his house made as 'free money' for which he and my ma didn't have to lift a finger.
At the end of this year the total residential care costs for my ma, now dead, and my stepdad will be £180k. Some of this funded by the sale of their property and the balance funded by state pension, AA, private pension and savings.
I hope the total continues to increase, as that would mean my stepdad continuing to live a contented life with the care that he needs.