Savings & Pensions

dunstonh

NottinghamKnight said:

Albermarle said:

Jhuds72 said:

I realise that but she was advised that by selling her house and giving the money to her children, she’d need to keep some to cover possible care home costs or the government will want a load of money.

AS she has  some financial reserves , then the reality is that once she ( and family ) will see their first council run care home , she will be happy to pay privately for something better anyway . So this issue of the 'government wanting a load of money ' will never apply anyway .

I know it's fashionable to say that but in truth there is a huge range, and many well run council homes and terribly poor private homes. Your location in the country is probably far more important in fact.

I think you will find it is a regional variation as you suggest.  In our area, the old council run homes have been closed or sold off. They were very very basic and not somewhere you would want to spend your days in.   Now the private homes are used but the cheaper rooms and facilities are used for local authority care.     The same care workers cover the lot. Its just that those that pay more get more.

NottinghamKnight

The other issue is the best homes will be full and so admission isn't guaranteed even if people can afford it unless a 'vacancy' pops up. There seems to be very little capacity in many areas as well as staff shortages, it's an area that needs more planning and thought especially after the issues around covid. 

kangoora

Morbid thought, but I expect there are more vacancies in care homes at this time due to Covid-19

NottinghamKnight

kangoora said:

Morbid thought, but I expect there are more vacancies in care homes at this time due to Covid-19

Possibly but not an opportunity the homes are necessarily able to benefit from. Many are reluctant to take new people in due to the threat of transmission, and staffing comes under pressure when individuals have to self isolate. I'm not sure how this is resolved economically if resident numbers reduce though.

Albermarle

NottinghamKnight said:

Albermarle said:

Jhuds72 said:

I realise that but she was advised that by selling her house and giving the money to her children, she’d need to keep some to cover possible care home costs or the government will want a load of money.

AS she has  some financial reserves , then the reality is that once she ( and family ) will see their first council run care home , she will be happy to pay privately for something better anyway . So this issue of the 'government wanting a load of money ' will never apply anyway .

I know it's fashionable to say that but in truth there is a huge range, and many well run council homes and terribly poor private homes. Your location in the country is probably far more important in fact.

I did not know it was fashionable to say that , just my own experience with my Mother . It was some years ago so as other posters have said things may have moved on in the meantime.
I think the main point though is that we regularly get posters on the forum who are planning ( or already have ) to hide assets or make certain financial plans based on a fear that the local council will strip their relatives of their assets in old age . In most cases they are doing this based on misinformation and have not thought through what could actually happen in practice.
In the end an older person with good finances will probably in fact want to use them anyway to get a better standard of care, so the council issue never comes into it . 

NottinghamKnight

I'm not sure fashionable is the correct term to be honest but it's often quoted on here and elsewhere. Numbers in care will continue to rise as life expectancy increases but that is matched by a reduction in quality of life, it's a moral dilemma that politicians, doctors and others are refusing to address. I'd agree that the elderly should retain their assets to use as best for themselves, though in practice whilst there are a minority of greedy relatives the vast majority of children would prefer to see any inheritance used to maintain the parents quality of life. The numbers going into care is obviously based on historic data, the closest analogy I can think of is that used for taking a degree, the premium for the latter obviously has and will reduce as the numbers increase and the same will be true for people as they live longer. Council provision is also minimal in many areas as budget cuts have continued

semiplural

dunstonh said:

Jhuds72 said:

I realise that but she was advised that by selling her house and giving the money to her children, she’d need to keep some to cover possible care home costs or the government will want a load of money.

That is probably down the fear that the benefits agency would treat that as deprivation of assets (which is likely as it stands out like a sore thumb).

My understanding of this (possibly limited and flawed) is that they do not necessarily (and probably cannot) look back too far in time, so if a possible care home issue is still some time in the future it may be best to act now, rather than later. Also if Inheritance Tax might be a future issue, then again distributing funds early makes sense.
Of course if she does want to maximise the amount she has available to choose the best care home if and when this becomes an issue, she should keep the lot. Unless the children are prepared to guarantee to cover future care home costs (ie making it an informal loan that may or may not need to be repaid).
There is I think quite a lot that can be achieved if there is total trust between parent and children.

dunstonh

My understanding of this (possibly limited and flawed) is that they do not necessarily (and probably cannot) look back too far in time, so if a possible care home issue is still some time in the future it may be best to act now, rather than later. 

Legally, there is no timescale set on how far they go back.   They could go back 20-30 years if they wanted.  However, time does dilute record keeping and information gathering.   The key is intent.   If the reason for doing it is related to care then they can disregard all action taken.   If there is an alternative reason and it just happens to be coincidence then they will not treat it as deprivation.

Albermarle

dunstonh said:

My understanding of this (possibly limited and flawed) is that they do not necessarily (and probably cannot) look back too far in time, so if a possible care home issue is still some time in the future it may be best to act now, rather than later. 

Legally, there is no timescale set on how far they go back.   They could go back 20-30 years if they wanted.  However, time does dilute record keeping and information gathering.   The key is intent.   If the reason for doing it is related to care then they can disregard all action taken.   If there is an alternative reason and it just happens to be coincidence then they will not treat it as deprivation.

 I presume by 'they ' you mean  the local council ?
In which case there will probably be huge variation in their attitude/willingness/ability to pursue any deprivation of assets suspicions, depending on where you live ? Or do they all follow similar protocols?

dunstonh

Albermarle said:

dunstonh said:

My understanding of this (possibly limited and flawed) is that they do not necessarily (and probably cannot) look back too far in time, so if a possible care home issue is still some time in the future it may be best to act now, rather than later. 

Legally, there is no timescale set on how far they go back.   They could go back 20-30 years if they wanted.  However, time does dilute record keeping and information gathering.   The key is intent.   If the reason for doing it is related to care then they can disregard all action taken.   If there is an alternative reason and it just happens to be coincidence then they will not treat it as deprivation.

 I presume by 'they ' you mean  the local council ?
In which case there will probably be huge variation in their attitude/willingness/ability to pursue any deprivation of assets suspicions, depending on where you live ? Or do they all follow similar protocols?

There are protocols but it is very much hit and miss.    I have seen means tested benefit applications dig deep and far requiring multiple bits of additional information and others barely scratch the service.