Can a Local Authority Retrospectively Claim for Care Costs After Sale of Property.

Spendless

Malthusian said:

If the care resident still has money left, they will pay it.

If not, the recipient of the gift will pay. From the Government's Care and Support Statutory Guidance:

Where the person has transferred the asset to a third party to avoid the charge, the third party is liable to pay the local authority the difference between what it would have charged and did charge the person receiving care. However, the third party is not liable to pay anything which exceeds the benefit they have received from the transfer.

The carehome.co.uk article is correct strictly speaking. The recipient can be compelled to pay up for local authority care, but they can't be compelled to sell the property so they can pay for you to go to a nicer care home, which is the risk that paragraph is warning of. 

Thank you. That's more along the lines of what I've seen posted before. 

Spendless

Sea_Shell said:

As I understand it, many families are put under extreme pressure to pay "top up fees" even when there is no legal basis to oblige them to do so.   

Yes, this happened to my parents. My Nan was a self funder (property to sell) and my Mum was incorrectly told that her and Dad were liable for 3rd party top up fees so Mum wouldn't be able to put Nan in the care home she was interested in. My parents - past SPA themselves but still working contemplated paying them, but my Mum said with my other Grandmother alive (and still is) what if she needed care too at some point, they couldn't possibly afford 2 lots, so looked for somewhere that only charged the LA rate

I believe I posted about it at the time, and another MSE'r told me the LA were incorrect, because they'd also had experience of this happening. Was it you @Mojisola ? 

Gavin83

This thread is far from clear but I assume him and his wife lived together in their jointly owned home until he entered care and at that point she effectively washed her hands of him. If that is the case then the property will be disregarded. This'll potentially change if she sells up, dies, enters care herself or they divorce.

Malthusian said:

If the care resident still has money left, they will pay it.

If not, the recipient of the gift will pay. From the Government's Care and Support Statutory Guidance:

Where the person has transferred the asset to a third party to avoid the charge, the third party is liable to pay the local authority the difference between what it would have charged and did charge the person receiving care. However, the third party is not liable to pay anything which exceeds the benefit they have received from the transfer.

The carehome.co.uk article is correct strictly speaking. The recipient can be compelled to pay up for local authority care, but they can't be compelled to sell the property so they can pay for you to go to a nicer care home, which is the risk that paragraph is warning of. 

This is the best advice on here for this scenario. Despite what some LAs might say they won't refuse to fund a care placement. They have a duty of care to their residents and there's no way they'll leave them alone in their house to die.

However they will chase the recipient of the gift. As you might expect it's quite common for the relatives of someone entering care to dispose of assets, normally a property. I have seen on several occasions a LA take someone to court for their relatives care costs due to them taking the property, even if there is technically no money from the property left. I've seen it mess peoples lives up. Be careful if you dispose of assets because it can massively backfire.

Spendless said:

Sea_Shell said:

As I understand it, many families are put under extreme pressure to pay "top up fees" even when there is no legal basis to oblige them to do so.   

Yes, this happened to my parents. My Nan was a self funder (property to sell) and my Mum was incorrectly told that her and Dad were liable for 3rd party top up fees so Mum wouldn't be able to put Nan in the care home she was interested in. My parents - past SPA themselves but still working contemplated paying them, but my Mum said with my other Grandmother alive (and still is) what if she needed care too at some point, they couldn't possibly afford 2 lots, so looked for somewhere that only charged the LA rate

I believe I posted about it at the time, and another MSE'r told me the LA were incorrect, because they'd also had experience of this happening. Was it you @Mojisola ? 

If someone is self funding there are no top up fees. The top up fees are in effect paid by the resident themselves out of their assets. The LA should fund the placement in the interim until the property is sold at which point they'll recover what they've paid out. Some care homes are also open to the idea of a deferred payment agreement. 

Spendless

Gavin83 said:

This thread is far from clear but I assume him and his wife lived together in their jointly owned home until he entered care and at that point she effectively washed her hands of him. If that is the case then the property will be disregarded. This'll potentially change if she sells up, dies, enters care herself or they divorce.

Malthusian said:

If the care resident still has money left, they will pay it.

If not, the recipient of the gift will pay. From the Government's Care and Support Statutory Guidance:

Where the person has transferred the asset to a third party to avoid the charge, the third party is liable to pay the local authority the difference between what it would have charged and did charge the person receiving care. However, the third party is not liable to pay anything which exceeds the benefit they have received from the transfer.

The carehome.co.uk article is correct strictly speaking. The recipient can be compelled to pay up for local authority care, but they can't be compelled to sell the property so they can pay for you to go to a nicer care home, which is the risk that paragraph is warning of. 

This is the best advice on here for this scenario. Despite what some LAs might say they won't refuse to fund a care placement. They have a duty of care to their residents and there's no way they'll leave them alone in their house to die.

However they will chase the recipient of the gift. As you might expect it's quite common for the relatives of someone entering care to dispose of assets, normally a property. I have seen on several occasions a LA take someone to court for their relatives care costs due to them taking the property, even if there is technically no money from the property left. I've seen it mess peoples lives up. Be careful if you dispose of assets because it can massively backfire. - Thanks, I knew I'd seen posts explaining something like this before. 

Spendless said:

Sea_Shell said:

As I understand it, many families are put under extreme pressure to pay "top up fees" even when there is no legal basis to oblige them to do so.   

Yes, this happened to my parents. My Nan was a self funder (property to sell) and my Mum was incorrectly told that her and Dad were liable for 3rd party top up fees so Mum wouldn't be able to put Nan in the care home she was interested in. My parents - past SPA themselves but still working contemplated paying them, but my Mum said with my other Grandmother alive (and still is) what if she needed care too at some point, they couldn't possibly afford 2 lots, so looked for somewhere that only charged the LA rate

I believe I posted about it at the time, and another MSE'r told me the LA were incorrect, because they'd also had experience of this happening. Was it you @Mojisola ? 

If someone is self funding there are no top up fees. The top up fees are in effect paid by the resident themselves out of their assets. The LA should fund the placement in the interim until the property is sold at which point they'll recover what they've paid out. Some care homes are also open to the idea of a deferred payment agreement. 

Yes, my parents were incorrectly told they were liable for 3rd party top ups. They weren't because Nan had a property to sell (and the council took deferred payments) Today I'd be aware of that.  

ProbateNewbie

We were also told we would have to make top up payments if they were needed. Luckily we found a good home within the LA rates.

My Mum was self funding but because there was no POA in place, the LA paid the nursing home fees & will need reimbursing once probate is granted & we can access her funds.

elsien

ProbateNewbie said:

We were also told we would have to make top up payments if they were needed. Luckily we found a good home within the LA rates.

My Mum was self funding but because there was no POA in place, the LA paid the nursing home fees & will need reimbursing once probate is granted & we can access her funds.

That isn't strictly accurate although I'm not surprised it was the impression that you were left with. 

The third party top up is voluntary and no-one can be forced to pay it - sometimes people choose to do so because it can mean a more preferred place for their relative.
However the local authority does have a duty to meet assessed need. So if it can  be demonstrated that the cheaper places cannot meet the assessed needs and there was no option but to use a more expensive place then the local authority would have the pay the additional amount themselves. 
Top ups also don't apply to self-funders so there is no need to stick to LA rates as they know they will be getting their money back anyway. 

tooldle

Spendless said:

Sea_Shell said:

As I understand it, many families are put under extreme pressure to pay "top up fees" even when there is no legal basis to oblige them to do so.   

Yes, this happened to my parents. My Nan was a self funder (property to sell) and my Mum was incorrectly told that her and Dad were liable for 3rd party top up fees so Mum wouldn't be able to put Nan in the care home she was interested in. My parents - past SPA themselves but still working contemplated paying them, but my Mum said with my other Grandmother alive (and still is) what if she needed care too at some point, they couldn't possibly afford 2 lots, so looked for somewhere that only charged the LA rate

I believe I posted about it at the time, and another MSE'r told me the LA were incorrect, because they'd also had experience of this happening. Was it you @Mojisola ? 

Do you mean, Nan was expected to be  a self fundedrwhen her assets were liquidated, but was not self funding when she entered the care home? Otherwise, top up fees have no relevance. To self funders, the fee is the fee. Or was this about looking to the future if Nan had only enough funds to cover a shortish stay?

Gavin83

tooldle said:

Spendless said:

Sea_Shell said:

As I understand it, many families are put under extreme pressure to pay "top up fees" even when there is no legal basis to oblige them to do so.   

Yes, this happened to my parents. My Nan was a self funder (property to sell) and my Mum was incorrectly told that her and Dad were liable for 3rd party top up fees so Mum wouldn't be able to put Nan in the care home she was interested in. My parents - past SPA themselves but still working contemplated paying them, but my Mum said with my other Grandmother alive (and still is) what if she needed care too at some point, they couldn't possibly afford 2 lots, so looked for somewhere that only charged the LA rate

I believe I posted about it at the time, and another MSE'r told me the LA were incorrect, because they'd also had experience of this happening. Was it you @Mojisola ? 

Do you mean, Nan was expected to be  a self fundedrwhen her assets were liquidated, but was not self funding when she entered the care home? Otherwise, top up fees have no relevance. To self funders, the fee is the fee. Or was this about looking to the future if Nan had only enough funds to cover a shortish stay?

To be honest this is about the only situation the LA should resist placing a self funder in such a home. They’re well aware elderly people don’t move well and they don’t want to be facilitating that a few months after placement.

Some family members will push for this with the expectation that the LA will pay the top up fees but this isn’t how it works.

Spendless

tooldle said:

Spendless said:

Sea_Shell said:

As I understand it, many families are put under extreme pressure to pay "top up fees" even when there is no legal basis to oblige them to do so.   

Yes, this happened to my parents. My Nan was a self funder (property to sell) and my Mum was incorrectly told that her and Dad were liable for 3rd party top up fees so Mum wouldn't be able to put Nan in the care home she was interested in. My parents - past SPA themselves but still working contemplated paying them, but my Mum said with my other Grandmother alive (and still is) what if she needed care too at some point, they couldn't possibly afford 2 lots, so looked for somewhere that only charged the LA rate

I believe I posted about it at the time, and another MSE'r told me the LA were incorrect, because they'd also had experience of this happening. Was it you @Mojisola ? 

Do you mean, Nan was expected to be  a self fundedrwhen her assets were liquidated, but was not self funding when she entered the care home? Otherwise, top up fees have no relevance. To self funders, the fee is the fee. Or was this about looking to the future if Nan had only enough funds to cover a shortish stay?

Nan went from hospital to an assessment centre for several weeks (for which there was no charge) and then it was decided by the relevant staff (ie it wasn't my parents decision) that she was not capable of returning to her own home (where she lived alone but had carers twice a day). My Mum was told to look around care homes.  Mum  found one that she really liked and mentioned it at a meeting my parents attended with several staff in various capacities. Mum said she'd seen a care home she really liked and was told by the 'panel' (for want of another word) that that wouldn't be possible without my parents  paying the  3rd party top up fees. My parents decided they couldn't afford it. My parents  were told wrong. They weren't liable for 3rd party top up fees. Nan had a property to sell (plus a few thousand in the bank) and  half of my (late) Grandad's private  pension  . She lived for a further 8 years and at the point she died had around £21k left in the bank - so was capable of funding her own care for several years.(You go to part funded care between £14,250 and £23,250 but Nan hadn't been at that point for long before she died just weeks before her 99th birthday) 

Nan had mixed dementia and was 90. Once she went into a care home she was never going to come out. The day she left her flat to go to hospital she never returned to her own home. The timeline was late Nov/early  Dec - from own property taken to hospital - Dec 24th moved to assessment centre - Feb 14th moved to care home - remained there for 8 years until death in Feb last year. 

I did a thread about it at the time because I struggled for info but I believe it was in the now defunct discussion time otherwise I'd supply a link.

Someone on here told me my parents had been told incorrectly, they had been told the same, but at the time, all our heads were in a spin over it.  

tooldle

Nobody is liable for 3rd party top up fees. Family can choose to top up their relatives ‘allowance’ if the cost of their preferred facility is higher than funds available. I’m wondering if this happened as your Nan was not in a position to pay on entering the home and was maybe reliant on LA to ‘lend the funds’ until her house was sold? In those situations, does the LA lend up to their own allowance only?