protecting property from long term care

Paulfromdartford

MY father seems to be losing his memory. He doesn't have a diagnosis yet but we all know that he is suffering from dementia and seems to be deteriorating rapidly. My mum is still ok and they are living together quite comfortably for now but we have read that, should my father need to go into a care facility the government or local council are able to deduct the cost from his estate when he dies. Does anyone know if there is a limit to this amount or if there is any way of avoiding this outcome?

xylophone

See https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs39_paying_for_care_in_a_care_home_if_you_have_a_partner_fcs.pdf

Stubod

I don't think they can touch the property if there is somebody else living there. Or at least that's how it was when my parents were in the same situation a few years ago (in Wales). I think this only becomes an issue if the remaining partner passes while the other is in care, and then I assume they can take up to "their" half...and there is not a lot you can do about it.

I am sure you would want them to benefit from what is actually their money to give them the best care possible?

lisyloo

Sorry to hear that.
Does he sometimes have the mental capacity to make decisions?
Has he set up a lasting power of attorney (LPA)?
If the answers are yes and no then this should be done as priority.
I have recently obtained a court order for someone who’s lost capacity (the only option if LPA is not done), the delay was 6 months, there was loads of paper and costs associated.

If you father needs help or your mother needs help with his care or respite then the first step would be to get carers to visit the home. If this is the case get In touch with social services. There are other things they can help with like day centres (my MIL loved it and it was free). Charities might also be able to send a volunteer to read, play cards or whatever he likes. Alzheimer’s society is a good one.

Whilst he’s at home fOnly his income will be taken into account for social care and IME he will only have to pay if he income is over £300 per week. Our carers were £15 per hour should he need to pay.
Does he qualify for attendance allowance (not means tested).
Is your mother claiming carers allowance?

At the present time if he needed to go into a home then the marital property would be disregarded as your mum lives in it.
Is it in joint names?

If he has other assets e.g. shares, then he would have to pay if he has more than £14k. If there are joint accounts then it would only be his 50% that counts.

He would have to pay his income (not hers) minus £25 for personal items like clothing.

Hope that helps

elsien

It's not as simple as saying it won't be touched if someone else is living my there. Relationship, disability and how property is owned are also factors.
Spouse is a mandatory disregard if they already live there.

https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/factsheets/fs38_property_and_paying_for_residential_care_fcs.pdf

If link doesn't work, it's their fact sheet 38

Other assets may be taken into account depending on how they are owned.
So do you not think your comfortably off father should pay anything towards his care at all?

lisyloo

There is no way of avoiding the house being used to pay for care if it was empty at this late stage e.g. mum died, dad is care, home empty.

There are ways to set up wills, trusts etc. but you would have needed to have done this BEFORE you knew he might need care. If you want more info the term is deliberate deprivation of assets (no judgment just advising the term for further research).

lisyloo

elsien wrote: »

So do you not think your comfortably off father should pay anything towards his care at all?

Why it is necessary to judge when someone is having a hard time and merely asking questions?

We don’t know the OPs attitude and they have quite clearly been thrown into an unfamiliar and unpleasant situation and are asking questions around it.

I would add though that I’ve visited a number of nursing homes and the ones that the local authorities would like to use are often of a diabolical standard.

Paul - Get that LPA done ASAP if he still has capacity as you may have to fight for a good nursing home on his behalf (as we did).
Otherwise start the ball rolling on the court of protection although you may well need a formal diagnosis.

The first step though is getting care at home and respite for your mum.

Keep_pedalling

lisyloo wrote: »

Why it is necessary to judge when someone is having a hard time and merely asking questions?

We don’t know the OPs attitude and they have quite clearly been thrown into an unfamiliar and unpleasant situation and are asking questions around it.

I would add though that I’ve visited a number of nursing homes and the ones that the local authorities would like to use are often of a diabolical standard.

Paul - Get that LPA done ASAP if he still has capacity as you may have to fight for a good nursing home on his behalf (as we did).
Otherwise start the ball rolling on the court of protection although you may well need a formal diagnosis.

The first step though is getting care at home and respite for your mum.

Unless self you can self fund care, that fight is becoming more and more difficult, not just the choice of care home but in how decrepit you have to become to qualify for funding.

My worse nightmare would be to need significance support but not have the resources to keep control of who and where by self funding, which is why we have money ringfenced in our saving to allow that to happen without the need to sell the house unless we both need it.

As others have said the house will not be included in the assessment while his wife is still living there, but any other saving he have or 50% of joint savings will, and there is nothing that can be done about that at this late stage.

lisyloo

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

Unless self you can self fund care, that fight is becoming more and more difficult, not just the choice of care home but in how decrepit you have to become to qualify for funding.

I agree to qualify for state funded 24/7 care you need to be in a bad way because you can get 4*1 hour visits per day at home and that is regarded by most people as better.
You can also go to day care if you are mobile and have visitor/befriender from charities.
You generally only go into a home if you can’t be managed in the 4*1 hour visits e.g. are in danger of falling or setting fire to the house.
Clearly someone on their own is in a very different situation to someone with a capable family carer although the carer will need respite, so may familes still have outside carers come it.

For taxpayers I’d say it’s correct that people only go into care home when they need it and there is definitely increasing financial stress in the system. Fortunately that generally coincide with what people prefer and what is best for them as it’s generally best for people to maintain as much independence as they can for as long as they can.

but any other saving he have or 50% of joint savings will, and there is nothing that can be done about that at this late stage.

There Are two thresholds (England)
Below £14250 you don’t pay anything out of savings.
Above £23250 you pay it all.
In between you make a contribution.
All income is taken minus £25.

For care at home my experience (did it twice) is that you don’t pay below £300 per week although it depends on your exact expenses (for example incontinent people get extra allowance for laundry).

The priorities should be getting LPA (if mentally capable) or COP (if not), getting a diagnosis and then getting social services involved to help.

Note that they may qualify for a council tax exemption post diagnosis.

Keep_pedalling

lisyloo wrote: »

I agree to qualify for state funded 24/7 care you need to be in a bad way because you can get 4*1 hour visits per day at home and that is regarded by most people as better.
You can also go to day care if you are mobile and have visitor/befriender from charities.
You generally only go into a home if you can’t be managed in the 4*1 hour visits e.g. are in danger of falling or setting fire to the house.
Clearly someone on their own is in a very different situation to someone with a capable family carer although the carer will need respite, so may familes still have outside carers come it.

For taxpayers I’d say it’s correct that people only go into care home when they need it and there is definitely increasing financial stress in the system. Fortunately that generally coincide with what people prefer and what is best for them as it’s generally best for people to maintain as much independence as they can for as long as they can.



There Are two thresholds (England)
Below £14250 you don’t pay anything out of savings.
Above £23250 you pay it all.
In between you make a contribution.
All income is taken minus £25.

For care at home my experience (did it twice) is that you don’t pay below £300 per week although it depends on your exact expenses (for example incontinent people get extra allowance for laundry).

The priorities should be getting LPA (if mentally capable) or COP (if not), getting a diagnosis and then getting social services involved to help.

Note that they may qualify for a council tax exemption post diagnosis.

My experience was with my mother, care visits at home were good until we got to the 4 visits a day stage. By that point she really needed residential care, but that only came about 6 months later than she really needed it, and it only happened then after a hospitalisation when the discharge team made the decision she was not safe at home.

I dread to think what happens to those people with no advocates to look out for them.

I hope never to need residential care, and if I ever need access to a carer 24/7 my first choice will be live in carers, something the LA are never going to pay for.

lisyloo

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

My experience was with my mother, care visits at home were good until we got to the 4 visits a day stage. By that point she really needed residential care, but that only came about 6 months later than she really needed it, and it only happened then after a hospitalisation when the discharge team made the decision she was not safe at home.

I agree.
If you are dependent on tax payer then you are only going to get it when you really need it. Hospital (about £3k a week in a normal bed) is more expensive than a nursing home, so yes there is inevitably an economic element here as well.

Out of interest did you ask for reviews during that 6 months?

We have always tried to do the best for our parents, but some of us don’t live nearby (and can’t just give up our livelihoods) and other have children to care for so it’s not always easy to do as much as you’d like.

I dread to think what happens to those people with no advocates to look out for them.

Me too, although I think I know. They end up in overmydeadbody grove.
We have fought twice and won both times (but in both cases it worked in our favour that expensive hospital beds were being paid for whilst there was delay disagreement).
MILs needs were complex and some of the cheaper Homes were dreadful. We fought and won to get her into a nice and more expensive place.
Second time when FIL needed care, there was a place available with MiL but LA wanted to split them up after 60 years of marriage to save costs. With one being bed bound and one being in a wheelchair they would not have seen each other very much due to obvious transport issues.
We provided strong advocacy and won but as I say the bed blocking did help both times as LA get fined for heavily for that. If they had not had the strong advocacy she’d be in overmydeadbody grove and she would have been able to see him very little before he died.

I hope never to need residential care, and if I ever need access to a carer 24/7 my first choice will be live in carers, something the LA are never going to pay for.

I agree, You won’t get it long term on the tax payer as it’s very expensive.
We did discuss it as a possible temporary measure with social workers so it is possible temporarily (weeks not months) but unfortunately we had to concede a recovery was highly unlikely.