Over 60 resident relative. How to avoid losing the family home to care home fees

Bogof_Babe

enthusiasticsaver wrote: »

The quality of elderly residential care homes is very patchy across the country. The thing is though as your mum was self funded she had a choice. For those who are not self funded where they get put is a lottery.

Actually with mum it boiled down to finding somewhere that had a vacant place, as many of them were full or had closed down. Sadly several more have closed down since she passed away in 2011 (this is the North West, specifically Merseyside) so I imagine there is a looming if not present crisis these days.

As for inspection and standards, don't the CQC still operate? Once when we were visiting mum there was a surprise inspection, including asking the visitors as well as the residents about the standard of care they were receiving.

MightyWhitey

MightyWhitey wrote: »

I've taken the feedback related to the OP, and have emailed the financial assessments team of the council who deal with this, with my circumstances. My hope is that they can issue an advice based on that without the need to involve a solicitor at this stage. If there are any objections it may start to frame things better.

I'll provide some details to help others if they are in similar circumstances.

I received a reply from a senior member of the county council financial assessments team stating:

"the information you have gathered so far and your circumstances, leads to the conclusion that the property may be disregarded".

In a clarifying email, it was stated that the circumstances described would need to be "evidenced".

I've got some comfort from this, though everything depends on what happens at the time, and if circumstances change.

Perhaps the key takeaway from this exercise is to ensure folks put their questions in writing to council and get the same in reply, which they appear to do if you get through to the financial assessments team members. Initially I appear to have spoke with an unqualified council person which set my concerns in motion.

Hopefully this thread helps others in similar circumstances.

Malthusian

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

My mum was self funding and received exactly the same care and had the same type of room etc. as the council funded residents.

And plenty of social housing is good quality with lovely salt-of-the-earth neighbours. It doesn't mean it's a good idea to try to give all your money to your children and spend the rest of your life being housed by the Government. There is literally no difference.

lisyloo

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

As for inspection and standards, don't the CQC still operate? Once when we were visiting mum there was a surprise inspection, including asking the visitors as well as the residents about the standard of care they were receiving.

CQC does operate.
When we were looking we were told to take it with a pinch of salt.
For example they might have a bad mark for management, but the manager has since changed.
So anything could have changed since the date of the CQC report unless it’s very recent.

We did still use it but bore in mind that dated reports might no longer be true.

lisyloo

enthusiasticsaver wrote: »

I am wondering how many people actually realise there is a massive difference in some areas between a council run residential care home and a private care home.

I don’t think many people are aware of the standards, only those who’ve had reason to look.
The LA also wanted to split up my MiL and FIL after 60 years of marriage when a place was available in the same home (where MiL was already funded).
I don’t think people realise that they might be split up or away from family either.

lisyloo

fifeken wrote: »

The OP is trying to take a bit more than any entitlement, he's proposing lowering his mum's standard of care and taking her house for himself.

Absolutely.
My point was that many people think they are entitled because they paid in and in many cases (around 60%) they are net takers.

I’m glad my MiL has nursing available 24/7 and is in a nice place.
Inheritance isn’t an entitlement anyway but certainly not whilst they are still alive.

Spreadsheetman

lisyloo wrote: »

CQC does operate.
When we were looking we were told to take it with a pinch of salt.
For example they might have a bad mark for management, but the manager has since changed.
So anything could have changed since the date of the CQC report unless it’s very recent.

We did still use it but bore in mind that dated reports might no longer be true.

There was a snap unannounced CQC inspection in the short period that my Father was in a home. They interviewed Dad and me and certainly asked lots of quite probing questions.

There is also the question of what the reports are actually saying, just looking at the headlines isn't sufficient to have a real idea of what a home is like. There can be marks lost for management process etc. which can reduce the overall rating, but the home can still be very friendly, caring and safe.

woolly_wombat

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

My mum was self funding and received exactly the same care and had the same type of room etc. as the council funded residents. It was a very nice place, everyone seemed very happy there and the meals were lovely. Lots of activities, and a general air of being a home not just a care home.

My mum received NHS continuing healthcare in a nursing home alongside self funding residents.

The standard of care was wonderful, indeed it was far better than the care she received in the NHS hospital from which she was transferred. The manager was a proper old style hospital matron.

It is a complete fallacy to suggest that publicly funded care is worse than privately funded care.

My sister and I visited several homes. One of them was superficially very posh, i.e. smart magazines on the coffee table in entrance lobby, but we were prevented from interacting with any of the residents even when a very well spoken elderly man tried to engage us in conversation. The clincher was when the manager mentioned her previous employment at a senior level in the NHS hospital in which mum had received inadequate care following a severe stroke. Our smiles remained fixed but we beat a hasty retreat.

Don't be taken in by superficial niceties.

Malthusian

woolly_wombat wrote: »

My mum received NHS continuing healthcare in a nursing home alongside self funding residents.

People eligible for NHS continuing care are an entirely separate issue from people who aren't eligible for continuing care but aren't able to live wholly independently either. If they have their own money they have to pay for that care for the same reason they have to pay for their own food, water and shelter.

If you become eligible for NHS continuing care then you may no longer have a money issue, but that isn't a practical solution to any problem because you can't make yourself eligible for NHS continuing care without bashing your head against the wall a few times or some other kind of highly inadvisable DIY neurosurgery.

The standard of care was wonderful, indeed it was far better than the care she received in the NHS hospital from which she was transferred.

As you would expect as NHS hospitals are designed to cure the sick, not provide elderly care.

It is a complete fallacy to suggest that publicly funded care is worse than privately funded care.

Sometimes it isn't. Often it is. If you have your own resources you get a choice. If you don't you don't.

Social housing is often of equal or better quality than private rental but it doesn't mean it's a good idea to try to give away all your possessions (in such a way that deliberate deprivation doesn't apply) and then spend the rest of your life in wherever the council chooses to house you.

My sister and I visited several homes. One of them was superficially very posh, i.e. smart magazines on the coffee table in entrance lobby, but we were prevented from interacting with any of the residents even when a very well spoken elderly man tried to engage us in conversation. The clincher was when the manager mentioned her previous employment at a senior level in the NHS hospital in which mum had received inadequate care following a severe stroke. Our smiles remained fixed but we beat a hasty retreat.

If your mum was being paid for by the taxpayer and the LA wanted to put her in a home run by someone who formerly administered a failing hospital, then you wouldn't have had the option of beating a retreat. Not without very focused and determined advocacy.

Private care homes are often crap in the same way that private rentals and owner-occupied homes are often crap. The point of having money is not that everything you have to pay for is brilliant, the point of having money is that you can choose. If you have no money you have no choice, all you have is luck.

The fundamental issue is that there is no reason why somebody who has spent their entire life working to give themselves a choice should suddenly decide to give their money away and trust to luck.

Mojisola

woolly_wombat wrote: »

It is a complete fallacy to suggest that publicly funded care is worse than privately funded care.

In your experience - in our area there is one home that accepts council-funded residents. All the other homes require third party top-ups to the council rate.

Having NHS funding could be a different matter as I understand that is higher than the council rate.

Like you, we were put off by a couple of the more expensive homes - they looked like 5-star hotels but the care didn't seem to be there.