Huge !0% increase to care home fees

pip895

Even without the cross subsidy issue the situation is indefensible.  Dementia is an illness and should be covered in the same way as other illnesses like diabetes etc.  I accept that higher taxes would be needed, but its exclusion is incredibly damaging.  Not only to those who get it but many others who live in fear of it.   

The level of desperation that it can engender was demonstrated to me a couple of years back when an elderly neighbour of mine resorted to shooting his wife and then himself after realizing his own deteriorating health meant he could no longer care for her and that she would need to be taken into care.  

Pollycat

Is there going to be a change in October 2023?
Or is it still in the discussion phase?

Adult social care charging reform: further details - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

From October 2023, the government will introduce a new £86,000 cap on the amount anyone in England will need to spend on their personal care over their lifetime.

In addition, the upper capital limit (UCL), the point at which people become eligible to receive some financial support from their local authority, will rise to £100,000 from the current £23,250. As a result, people with less than £100,000 of chargeable assets will never contribute more than 20% of these assets per year. The UCL of £100,000 will apply universally, irrespective of the circumstances or setting in which an individual receives care, making it a much more generous offer than a previous proposal in 2015. The lower capital limit (LCL), the threshold below which people will not have to pay anything for their care from their assets will increase to £20,000 from £14,250.

JillMcG

The cap has been postponed for 2 years and when it does come in,  it doesn't take into account what has been paid previously.
We have savings so we do not qualify for any assistance. All down to us to fund. 

Malthusian

pip895 said:

Even without the cross subsidy issue the situation is indefensible.  Dementia is an illness and should be covered in the same way as other illnesses like diabetes etc.  

If I have diabetes the government will pay for my insulin. It won't pay my grocery bills, my housing costs and for someone to get me out of bed in the morning and ensure I get some form of stimulation and social interaction, in order to subsidise my children's inheritances.

  The level of desperation that it can engender was demonstrated to me a couple of years back when an elderly neighbour of mine resorted to shooting his wife and then himself after realizing his own deteriorating health meant he could no longer care for her and that she would need to be taken into care.

We don't make policy based on the random whims of murderers. It is tragic that she wasn't taken into care long before. Their house wouldn't have been touched (even if it was in her name) and nor would any assets in his name. 

Pollycat

JillMcG said:

The cap has been postponed for 2 years and when it does come in,  it doesn't take into account what has been paid previously.
We have savings so we do not qualify for any assistance. All down to us to fund. 

OK, thanks.

And of course, if you (or your relative) is self funding in an expensive care home, it might not be possible for you to stay there once you've paid all that the Government says you should over your lifetime once the local council step in.

Clueless56

Even when the cap comes in, it will only cap the total amount paid out for care in the person's lifetime and will not cover the hotel costs, which are a large chunk of fees paid to residential and nursing homes.

NedS

Clueless56 said:

Even when the cap comes in, it will only cap the total amount paid out for care in the person's lifetime and will not cover the hotel costs, which are a large chunk of fees paid to residential and nursing homes.

Exactly, the proposed cap only covers 'care costs', and the vast majority of the OP's £70,000/year fees will not be for medical care, but for residential care which would not be covered. So anyone self funding is still going to end up selling the house to pay for it.

elsien

If you work, have your own property nd spent prudently and saved wisely having paid taxes and still paying taxes, you will have choices if you become very frail.

Corrected that for you. 

ETA and in case anyone is wondering a diy post has vanished. 

Clueless56

NedS said:

Clueless56 said:

Even when the cap comes in, it will only cap the total amount paid out for care in the person's lifetime and will not cover the hotel costs, which are a large chunk of fees paid to residential and nursing homes.

Exactly, the proposed cap only covers 'care costs', and the vast majority of the OP's £70,000/year fees will not be for medical care, but for residential care which would not be covered. So anyone self funding is still going to end up selling the house to pay for it.

I don't really understand this line of argument.  If you're permanently in a care home, you don't need your house any more to live in so it reverts to an asset (unless a partner or dependent still lives in the house, in which case it can't be sold).  What are people saving for if not a rainy day?  Why should the taxpayer safeguard inheritance?

Aretnap

Clueless56 said:

NedS said:

Clueless56 said:

Even when the cap comes in, it will only cap the total amount paid out for care in the person's lifetime and will not cover the hotel costs, which are a large chunk of fees paid to residential and nursing homes.

Exactly, the proposed cap only covers 'care costs', and the vast majority of the OP's £70,000/year fees will not be for medical care, but for residential care which would not be covered. So anyone self funding is still going to end up selling the house to pay for it.

I don't really understand this line of argument.  If you're permanently in a care home, you don't need your house any more to live in so it reverts to an asset (unless a partner or dependent still lives in the house, in which case it can't be sold).  What are people saving for if not a rainy day?  Why should the taxpayer safeguard inheritance?

In think you'll find that the most important moral principles in England are, in reverse order,

(3) People should stand on their own two feet, work hard for a living, only spend what they have earned and not expect handouts from other people

(2) The right of already wealthy middle aged middle class people to inherit large amounts of money purely through an accident of birth must never be questioned and

(1) Unearned wealth acquired as a result of ever increasing house priced must never be taxed.