Grandmother losing EVERYTHING!

masonic

Archi_Bald wrote: »

You do realise that if everybody in the country had your new-found opinion, there would be no money at all for the support of truly needy people.

In fairness, New York No1 fan doesn't say (s)he'll then go on to be a burden to the state in old age. Perhaps the plan is a trip to Dignitas when things start to take a turn for the worse?

pelirocco

She won't be losing anything she will be gaining the care she needs

I think what you meant is her heirs will be losing everything

New_York_No1_fan

masonic wrote: »

In fairness, New York No1 fan doesn't say (s)he'll then go on to be a burden to the state in old age. Perhaps the plan is a trip to Dignitas when things start to take a turn for the worse?

Definitely Dignitas all the way. But thats a different topic entirely.

New_York_No1_fan

Errata wrote: »

It isn't £79pw.
standard rate is £110.89 per week
higher rate is £152.61

I stand corrected. dad got £109.79 (I knew there was a 79 in it).
In any case if Grandma gets this allowance, as she is entitled, it helps.

onlygoingforward

tracked wrote: »

why should she pay the costs, when those who have spent their money during their lifetimes get it for free....?

Why does everyone think its free?

Only if you are fully health funded or have s117 aftercare entitlement is it free, everyone else pays a cost even if that is only their state pension less personal expenses.

I spend most of my day explaining that someone else isnt getting the fees paid in full when i am explaining the charging procedure for residential care to families.

And if we all hide our savings in the future and sell off assets before needing care then who is going to keep funding people in care?

gadgetmind

onlygoingforward wrote: »

I spend most of my day explaining that someone else isnt getting the fees paid in full

But your wording above suggests that no money is coming from any source other than the government, which sounds very much like the same thing.

talexuser

I think onlygoing makes the point that people think you get the state pension or benefits as well as "free" council funded care, whereas the truth is not that simple.

In any case after finding a place for my mother (who has developed alzheimer's) in an "expensive" home with plenty of activities and great carers, having visited quite a few homes for the selection, the last thing I would want is one of the homes at the lower end of the market that the council use where there is nothing more than sitting in a chair all day. The adage you get what you pay for does apply in this area.

I give thanks she has enough private pension and isa income to cover this for the foreseeable future, and am grateful I've enough investments if it ever got to that stage myself.

DiamondLil

Grandmother isn't "losing everything", but rather she is simply buying herself a better place (for her) to live in.
That's my view as a grandmother myself.

pimento

kidmugsy wrote: »

The O/P is keen that the taxpayer should pay for his granny so that his father (and perhaps eventually him) can inherit the loot. I'm not keen: why should I pay for his granny? I've already got my work cut out saving to pay for my widow.

In principle I agree but the taxpayer should pay for everybody or nobody.

Steve_xx

pimento wrote: »

In principle I agree but the taxpayer should pay for everybody or nobody.

I'm a taxpayer. I don't have kids, but part of my taxes goes to those who do. Therefore I pay for their schooling and I pay for their Child Benefit. Their parents can earn upto 50k each before they lose their Child Benefit. Doesn't sound like the best of deals to me, nor does it sound right, but there it is.