Care Home Fees - family home being treated as capital??

fogartyblue.

Hi

I hope I am in the right place.

I have been posting on another part of this site and something has come up that has made me wonder if we are doing the right thing.

Facts:

Dad is in a care home suffering from Alzheimer's Disease. He has been there since early 2010.

He gets no help towards the cost from the NHS because he was assessed as needing care (social needs etc) and not nursing. I have no problem with that, that is par for the course with that disease.

Anyhow before he went there mum and dad lived in the family home for over 40 years. Dad was the only person on the deeds.

After dad was moved into the care home, mum just couldn't cope with living on her own so her sister who lives about 1/2 mile away suggested that she could stay with her for as long as she wanted.
All she needs is a bit of company as she gets down as it was the first time they had ever been apart.

Anyhow the council assessed her and because she said that she was at her sisters house for months on end, they have taken their home as being capital. That was in 2010. I have no problem with that as in that year she did spend most of the time with her sister.

In 2011 she then spent more time in the family home, but came and went to her sisters.

I'm hoping that she will eventually come to terms with living on her own, but who knows.

Can I ask the council to re-assess her capital position on a yearly basis if it can be shown that she spent more than 50% of the time in her own home.

The only asset (no mortgage) they have is the house which the council valued gross at just over £300,000.

I thought that the family home was always exempted whilst the wife/partner was alive and living there. Is it really down to how many days in the year that she sleeps in the home?

Dunroamin

fogartyblue. wrote: »

I thought that the family home was always exempted whilst the wife/partner was alive and living there. Is it really down to how many days in the year that she sleeps in the home?

I think it has to depend on how many days a year the spouse is living there or it would be a loophole a mile wide!

John_Pierpoint

So who is actually paying the care home fees at the moment?

Has the council taken out a charge at the Land Registry, secured against the house?

The house is not "exempt" but the council will not try to force its sale while a dependant through age or disability is living in it. [Yes it is see explanation below - not what they tried to tell my wife about her parents, but the grim reaper intervened after 4 weeks anyway]

Presumably there is still considerable equity in the property.

Who has power of attorney for dad?

JuneBow

The local authority are trying it on. It does not matter how many days she spends in the property.


Part 7.003 of CRAG states that

Wherethe resident no longer occupies a dwelling as his home, its value should stillbe disregarded where it is occupied in whole or in part by

• the resident's partner, former partneror civil partner (except where the resident is estranged or divorced from thepartner, former partner or civil partner)

Mojisola

The council managed to get fogartyblue's mother to sign paperwork saying that she was no longer living at the house. At the time, she wasn't, she was staying with her sister but all her possessions were still there and she was going back and forth to the house. She hadn't moved out.

I think it's akin to financial abuse to get an elderly, distressed lady to sign such paperwork without taking any outside advice, having anyone with her or explaining the full consequences of what she was signing.

As the house is in fogartyblue's name only, the council are going to take the whole value of the house, leaving his wife with nothing.

Dunroamin

Mojisola wrote: »

The council managed to get fogartyblue's mother to sign paperwork saying that she was no longer living at the house. At the time, she wasn't, she was staying with her sister but all her possessions were still there and she was going back and forth to the house. She hadn't moved out.

I think it's akin to financial abuse to get an elderly, distressed lady to sign such paperwork without taking any outside advice, having anyone with her or explaining the full consequences of what she was signing.

As the house is in fogartyblue's name only, the council are going to take the whole value of the house, leaving his wife with nothing.

Do you know something we don't?

Dunroamin

JuneBow wrote: »

The local authority are trying it on. It does not matter how many days she spends in the property.


Part 7.003 of CRAG states that

Wherethe resident no longer occupies a dwelling as his home, its value should stillbe disregarded where it is occupied in whole or in part by

• the resident's partner, former partneror civil partner (except where the resident is estranged or divorced from thepartner, former partner or civil partner)

Are you sure you're interpreting that correctly? To me, occupying something "in part" means a part of the property, not part time.

Mojisola

Dunroamin wrote: »

Do you know something we don't?

Previous posts by fogartyblue.

Mother was very upset because her husband had to go into care and was not managing life very well which was why she went to stay with her sister for a while.

Morrison117

fogartyblue. wrote: »

Anyhow before he went there mum and dad lived in the family home for over 40 years. Dad was the only person on the deeds.

After dad was moved into the care home, mum just couldn't cope with living on her own so her sister who lives about 1/2 mile away suggested that she could stay with her for as long as she wanted.
All she needs is a bit of company as she gets down as it was the first time they had ever been apart.

Invite the local authority to think again and to think with care.

Someone who has spent the last 40+ years of their life in one house - also known as their home - has the right to spend time with another family member, her sister in this case, when in need of company and support.

It doesn't matter whether her name is on the deeds. That's irrelevant and purely of historic relevance. Life has moved on since then; the law has moved on since then too.

Suggest to the local authority that they now try to remember that thing called care and compassion. If they cause you trouble, speak to your MP.

The local authority is indeed trying it on, as JuneBow said.

JuneBow

Mojosola, I did not realise the position about signingpaperwork which said she was no longer living there. However, the position remains the same. The assessment has been incorrect.

It is notoriously difficult to prove financial abuse ofelderly people and if it were me, I would not try to go down this route withthe LA at first as they may dig their heels in. I would go down the route of “You have made a mistake here and mum, inher distressed state has not realised” If they further resisted, then yes, go down the elder abuse route.

In terms of poster 2 & 7, no, this is not amisinterpretation. Whilst you are correct that resident in part can meanresident of only part of the property, it also has the meaning which I havedescribed.

Actually, this situation is not at all uncommon. A lot of elderly people with their spouses inresidential care go for extended holidays to the sun, their childrens etc. CRAG has no guidelines about how much timeshould be spent in the property. Forexample is it 52 weeks which would allow for a 2 week break, or can you haveanother break?

LAs are used to thissituation and this particular LA have either deliberately or recklesslyinterpreted the rules.

I have seen a couple of situations where the couple have twoproperties and both have been exempt. About a year ago I saw one where the husband who was not in care wasleft with the family home, a cottage on the coast and an apartment somewhere inSpain. None were taken into theassessment. Obviously it is rare forthis to happen because typically when people have multiple properties, theyhave sufficient cash to have to pay fees anyway. The couple who had the three properties wereon the verge of selling because they had insufficient cash in the bank.

Best of luck Forgarty. Let us know how you get on.

Mojisola

JuneBow wrote: »

I would go down the route of “You have made a mistake here and mum, inher distressed state has not realised” If they further resisted, then yes, go down the elder abuse route.

100% agree with this.

Actually, this situation is not at all uncommon. A lot of elderly people with their spouses inresidential care go for extended holidays to the sun, their childrens etc. CRAG has no guidelines about how much timeshould be spent in the property. Forexample is it 52 weeks which would allow for a 2 week break, or can you haveanother break?

LAs are used to thissituation and this particular LA have either deliberately or recklessly interpreted the rules.

I'm glad to see your comments because it just felt so wrong when fogartyblue described what had happened.

What's your opinion on the LA taking the full value of the house into account because it is owned only in the father's name? Shouldn't they be looking at only up to 50% of the value?