can we avoid care home charges

spaniel_dog

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

spaniel_dog wrote: »

I've been on this site long enough to have that happen to me numerous times.

For clarity, you can give your assets away, although there might be tax implications. What you can't do is give them away IN ORDER TO claim means-tested Benefits, of which Care is one. If, as you say, you already have health problems, and then give away all your assets, and then need a place in a care home in the next few years, it will look mighty fishy!

When my husband and I gave our son the money two years ago, we were not (and still are not) claiming any means-tested Benefits and were in our early 60s with no major health problems, so if one of us is suddenly stricken down and has to go into care, there was no reason to suspect, at the time we gave the money away, that we would need a care home. It's the INTENT that is the problem, not the actual deed.

Signing your house over to your children, or selling it and giving them the money, when you already have health issues, will look like deprivation of assets in order to claim Benefits.

thanks, yes I have become aware thanks to some good information
early on in my post must admit I had never heard of the deprivation of assets it was such information I was seeking from this site certainly didnt expect all the vile comments, latest one calling me troll telling me to get back under the bridge
will find alternative site in future, thanks again

SueC_2

FatVonD wrote: »

It was fairly obvious that I was replying to a question but if it makes you feel better fill your boots.

But the point is, I don't need it, even though I'm entitled to it.

Just like I don't (thankfully) need the state to put a roof over my head.

As far as I'm concerned, to go out and deliberately get cancer (yes, I know that's not actually possibly, but bear with me for the point of illustration) so I could benefit from free chemotherapy would be as contentious as me giving away my assets so as to force myself into a financially disadvantaged position that meant I could take advantage of state provided housing.

And in the case of both medical care and housing, by me taking something I don't strictly need, I am reducing the capacity of those services to cope with the genuinely needy. No?

spaniel_dog

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

So, it's not you, it's the others, is it?

twisting everything I say just to argue then yes I would say its you and others

FatVonD

SueC wrote: »

But the point is, I don't need it, even though I'm entitled to it.

Just like I don't (thankfully) need the state to put a roof over my head.

As far as I'm concerned, to go out and deliberately get cancer (yes, I know that's not actually possibly, but bear with me for the point of illustration) would be as contentious as me giving away my assets so as to force myself into a financially disadvantaged position that meant I could take advantage of state provided housing.

And in the case of both medical care and housing, by me taking something I don't strictly need, I am reducing capacity of those services to cope with the genuinely needy. No?

Can you show me the post where I insisted on a place in a care home if I didn't need one??

For the benefit of SueC please preface all my posts with the words 'should I need to go into a care home' as apparently it's not clear enough!

FatVonD

spaniel_dog wrote: »

twisting everything I say just to argue then yes I would say its you and others

Dear God, would you give it a rest. I'm trying to present the acceptable face of the generation that had the rug pulled out from under it's feet here :rotfl:

And while you're about it, as the only person who offered you some constructive advice on this thread a 'thanks' (or even an acknowledgement) would be nice.

FatVonD

Person_one wrote: »

You do realise you may not even need full time care, don't you?

What if you'd spent all your money on ephemera before you hit 70 to avoid care home fees and then live till 90 in good health?

Sounds a lot like cutting off your nose to spite your face to me.

Do you mean me?

Hopefully that will be the case (and contrary to perceived opinion I won't be insisting on a place if I don't need one!) but I already have a plan (of sorts) to fund my care while still protecting the equity in my house. It may not be foolproof but it sure beats my Dignitas plan :rotfl:

Nicki

spaniel_dog wrote: »

twisting everything I say just to argue then yes I would say its you and others

This post and the ones which have preceded it is the best argument that has been put forward for the provision of "free" old people's homes for those who aren't prepared to pay for themselves, and a choice of different homes for those of us who are. Just imagine being stuck in a home sharing communal space with a resident whose repeated contributions to any conversation where anyone did not fully agree with her were along these lines :eek:

lostinrates

FatVonD wrote: »

Do you mean me?

Hopefully that will be the case (and contrary to perceived opinion I won't be insisting on a place if I don't need one!) but I already have a plan (of sorts) to fund my care while still protecting the equity in my house. It may not be foolproof but it sure beats my Dignitas plan :rotfl:

Actually, for some of us - dignitas plan takes some beating and while I absolutely would fight to the bitter death for the right NOT to have it, I feel pretty strongly those of us who want it should have it.

DH and I both want different things, for ourselves, and I feel strongly nothing beats the dignitas plan for me, WHEN the time is right. Just as strongly as nothing would be more abhorrent for someone who did NOT want that having no right to free at point of use care if they had no means to self provide and wanted natural end.

FatVonD

lostinrates wrote: »

Actually, for some of us - dignitas plan takes some beating and while I absolutely would fight to the bitter death for the right NOT to have it, I feel pretty strongly those of us who want it should have it.

DH and I both want different things, for ourselves, and I feel strongly nothing beats the dignitas plan for me, WHEN the time is right. Just as strongly as nothing would be more abhorrent for someone who did NOT want that having no right to free at point of use care if they had no means to self provide and wanted natural end.

I agree, LIR, nobody knows until the time comes but, if I reached the point where I actually needed a care home (as opposed to sheltered housing) I think I'd hate it and, for all that I joked about it, I still wouldn't rule out Dignitas.

spaniel_dog

SueC wrote: »

Chemotherapy is provided to cancer patients. Does that mean I'm entitled to some? I'd hate to miss out on anything that someone else is getting for free........

what an evil thing to say I am currently going through chemo and its not pleasant, are you sure you dont want a go