Care home cost assessment

paddedjohn

Torry_Quine wrote: »

They would be assessed as if they still have the money so if if they had for example got £100,000 for the house then they wouldn't get local authority support until such time as that would have been spent in the normal course of events. this means in reality that the money will have to come from someone else.

But in reality that's not going to happen, the authorities would get hung out to dry if they refused funding to a vulnerable oap, all the family would need do would feign enstrangement.

BigAunty

nicful1985 wrote: »

He sold his house 3 years ago after the passing of my Grandmother and gave the money from this to his children (my mother, aunt and uncle). The authorities have begun to assess his income to judge how much he has to pay towards his care but they have informed us that they intend to include the money from the sale of his house.

My question is can they do this? This money has not been his for 3 years and in fact no longer exists as the people he gave it to have spent it on various things!

Any advice will be greatly appreciated.

Google the term 'deprivation of capital' to understand why the giving away of a capital can later lead to issues with means tested benefits and means tested services like residential care.

It's a very complex area to understand but the general principle is that they wish to deter people from giving away their assets/capital and then popping up to say they are too poor to pay their council tax, rent or feed their kids.

When the authorities (such as the DWP) investigate potential deprivation of capital cases with means tested benefits like housing benefit, income support and so on, and find there has been a breach, they can then make calculations using 'notional capital'. Google that term, too.

It basically means that they will treat the claimant as if they still have the capital even though they've given it away. In those cases, I believe that the authorities will reduce or remove entitlement to the current and future means tested benefits using a formula that says 'the lump sum of x that they gave away would have reduced their entitlement to benefits by x percent for x period of time'.

Therefore they recoup the overpaid benefits that way, or perhaps treat it like an overpayment and come to an arrangement to pay it back (not totally sure on the options they use but your research in this area will identify how they deal with getting back benefits paid out when the person should not have been entitled to them).

Look at the Age Concern website which has information specifically advising of the risks of people transferring their properties, savings and investments to relatives and then claiming to be too poor to afford care home fees, however many years down the line. As far as I know, a council is free to look as far back in the past as they like to detect where this has happened.

Authorities are supposed to prove that the DoC for means tested benefits happened intentionally, with the desire that giving away their capital would make them eligible for benefits. This evidence may include a record of them having enquired how much in savings they could have before it affected their claim or having a claim refused before because they had too much capital.

Also, they look at spending patterns and what they've used the money for. Someone on benefits that comes into a lump sum through an inheritance who spends part of it on typical expenses like house repairs and replacement furniture, paying off a legally due debt won't have an issue with the authorities while someone who gave the money to relatives will.

Perhaps this is why the council have mentioned your Grandfather's existing infirm condition ahead of the sale of his property as a way of showing that he should have known his health wasn't good and shouldn't have assumed he wouldn't have care needs in the future. I don't know, just assuming.

I have outlined the techniques used by the DWP for benefits and assumed that a council's investigation has some similarity when it comes to means tested services. This is an assumption, not fact so do check it out in case there are major differences between how deprivation of capital is treated for means tested services instead of benefits.

That is probably why the council are not now excluding the original capital that now doesn't exist, they feel that it should exist and that's why they treat his application for a care home place as if the capital is still there (the concept of notional capital). I really still don't understand what their options are to recoup any of the fees your grandfather should be paying towards his care but now can't. I don't know how a council deals with a care home resident who had means but gave them away and is unlikely to come into means again - Age Concern can advise.

downshifter98

Perhaps they should take him to court and charge him with deliberate deprivation of capital and lock him up for a few years; he's elderly so it will be a pretty low risk prison ('open' prison?) and of course the authorities will still have a duty of care towards him. The cost of his imprisonment will have to be met by the taxpayer, of course but .... oh ..uumm...perhaps that's not such a good idea after all...perhaps he actually did the right thing for his family by giving everything when he did (family always come first etc etc) and perhaps the current crazy system encourages such 'selfish' behaviour by otherwise law abiding and moral citizens.

BigAunty

downshifter98 wrote: »

Perhaps they should take him to court and charge him with deliberate deprivation of capital and lock him up for a few years; he's elderly so it will be a pretty low risk prison ('open' prison?) and of course the authorities will still have a duty of care towards him..

I'm not aware that deprivation of capital is a criminal offence. I should think it is treated like an overpayment of benefit. Benefit fraud would involve consciously concealing capital and not reporting it to the benefit authorities as a change of circumstance. DoC is about the way the capital is spent to bring it down under the capital thresholds for means tested benefits.

In some ways, I assume the OP is arguing that his grandad was not aware he would have a future care home need and/or that the decision to give his capital to his children was made because they were ignorant that he would be responsible for paying for his future care needs with that capital.

Here's a link for the OP where they call it deprivation of assets and say how it can be appealed.

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/deprivation-of-assets-in-the-means-test-for-care-home-provision/

http://www.ageuk.org.uk/home-and-care/care-homes/the-means-test-and-your-property/


This includes how the council review the the timing of the disposal and the foreseeing of need when they make their decision.

downshifter98

I was only teasing - I'm sure he's quite safe from any type of conviction.

BigAunty

downshifter98 wrote: »

I was only teasing - I'm sure he's quite safe from any type of conviction.

Yes, I interpreted it as humour. However, you may have unwittingly touched on the fact that there are proposed changes to prosecuting benefit claimants with false claims that could result in longer sentences. I don't think this necessarily make DoC an offence.

I don't quite remember the exact change but think its to do with changing it to a matter of financial fraud which means it is subject to different sentencing guidelines, or process, or will take place in a different type of court.

EDIT - found a link here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24104743

cavework

1st question..
Where has Grandfather been living for the last 3 years?

Mojisola

nicful1985 wrote: »

My Grandfather has Parkinsons disease and his condition has recently deteriorated to the point where he has to go into a home. He sold his house 3 years ago after the passing of my Grandmother and gave the money from this to his children (my mother, aunt and uncle).

How did he expect to fund the rest of his life if he gave all his money away?

Didn't it occur to anyone in the family that this wasn't a good idea?

cavework

Please could OP tell me where Grandad has lived for the last 3 years , it may make a difference

troubleinparadise

If grandad needed 2 weeks of care 3 years ago, he was already struggling - I would assume one of his children has been caring for him since, especially as he was "his own home-less" since selling his house and giving away the proceeds to those children....