Deprivation of Assets before going into a care home

UnsureAboutthis

badmemory said:

I am worried by what he has been said.  I suspect that your uncle now has the same attitude to care homes as I have.  I will not be going in one.  It does not matter how good it is, unless it is a very temporary measure it is not somewhere I want to be.

Very true in most people's cases

Too often, people post about it can't happen ie when you need to go into a care home, you have to. You and I both know this is not quite true, especially if the person has the capacity to make decisions. Care can be arranged at home, and more so if you have someone living with you already who is able to a degree

Too many times, people on forums confuse a 'care home' with a nursing home.'

A lot of people need temporary care homes and manage well with home care until the end of their days.

All being good and a bit of luck, most people will rarely need a care home, nursing home, or high-intensity home care as they quickly pass. 
With the advent of cheap, small cctv.etc, we are seeing stories re abuse by staff - its not a new thing, but went unnoticed on the whole the days before the modern/cheap recording devices.

Depreciation of assets, councils are more desperate for cash by the day and they can't get money from those who have already spent most of it, living from hand to mouth and living in rentals, so the targets are people with their own proerty, and I guess more so, those with a property and savings.

HedgehogRulez

There are alternatives to living in a care home.

DRS1

The trouble is some places have rules that say you have to move out if your condition becomes more than they can handle.

bt7019

Firstly appreciate all the responses.

Regarding the actual care home, the staff & food & set up were fine but he’s reasonably good mind wise & whilst not on a dementia floor, there were people with a degree of dementia walking into his room, shouting they want to go home etc etc & luckily I told him to keep his authority rented flat a few weeks just in case he didn’t like the home. Thankfully this time he has a choice to live at home but next time his care needs may be different & he might not.  He needs better support so I’m going to look into the private ambulance response options instead if he has another fall as last time it was a 4 hour wait to be lifted up. 

with the will, yes he does have one & I’m the main beneficiary. I’m aware that I probably need to get him to change it to include the charities rather than simply ask me to as it’ll be better for tax implications on how much I can donate. All I’m  really trying to do here is try to get some charities to benefit now which avoids needing to change the will & guarantees that at least they’d benefit even if he ends up going into a home again in the future.

it was simply trying to explore what would actually happen in reality if he gives a large sum to charity then goes into a home & after a couple of years the funds run out & need the authority to take over (the home he was briefly in was one that the LA would take over funding for when self funding runs out). Giving away the money now shouldn’t affect the quality of care as it’ll be in the same home on the same cost level.

Marcon

bt7019 said:

Firstly appreciate all the responses.

Regarding the actual care home, the staff & food & set up were fine but he’s reasonably good mind wise & whilst not on a dementia floor, there were people with a degree of dementia walking into his room, shouting they want to go home etc etc & luckily I told him to keep his authority rented flat a few weeks just in case he didn’t like the home. Thankfully this time he has a choice to live at home but next time his care needs may be different & he might not.  He needs better support so I’m going to look into the private ambulance response options instead if he has another fall as last time it was a 4 hour wait to be lifted up. 

with the will, yes he does have one & I’m the main beneficiary. I’m aware that I probably need to get him to change it to include the charities rather than simply ask me to as it’ll be better for tax implications on how much I can donate. All I’m  really trying to do here is try to get some charities to benefit now which avoids needing to change the will & guarantees that at least they’d benefit even if he ends up going into a home again in the future.

Your aim is entirely laudable - and quite obviously not something you are trying to achieve to benefit yourself.

bt7019 said:

it was simply trying to explore what would actually happen in reality if he gives a large sum to charity then goes into a home & after a couple of years the funds run out & need the authority to take over (the home he was briefly in was one that the LA would take over funding for when self funding runs out). Giving away the money now shouldn’t affect the quality of care as it’ll be in the same home on the same cost level.

However, given how many LAs are not just cash strapped but effectively 'bankrupt', it would be risky in the extreme to assume that position will continue indefinitely, especially if someone is known to have handed over hefty piles of cash to a charity. The chances of your uncle being relocated to the cheapest dumping ground available would be hugely increased should he need residential care.

Keep_pedalling

Under the circumstances gifting money would be seen as deliberate deprivation of assets and would certainly not be in his best interests. With 6 figures in savings, if he does need to go into care, he will be self funding and will have a far greater choice of where he goes, and it sounds like he should avoid the last home he was placed in.

if he does not change his will their is nothing stopping you passing on some of your inheritance to the charity. If his estate was over £325k then you could do this with a deed of variation to avoid IHT, but as it is under that level you could simply gift it.

Perhaps more importantly if he does not have LPAs in place then sorting those out should be a priority.

Sea_Shell

I think what the OP is getting at is what actually happens to those who have been found to have DDA'd themselves and then needed care?

Are they left to rot in their own home, with no care provided?   Hard cheese!!
Are they evicted from care, if the money they do have runs out?   Hard cheese!!

Is pressure placed on family to stump up (even if they have not been the ones to receive the DDA cash)?
What if the person has no immediate family?

They might not end up somewhere "nice" and of their choosing, but do they get looked after "somewhere"?

dunstonh

it was simply trying to explore what would actually happen in reality if he gives a large sum to charity then goes into a home & after a couple of years the funds run out & need the authority to take over (the home he was briefly in was one that the LA would take over funding for when self funding runs out). Giving away the money now shouldn’t affect the quality of care as it’ll be in the same home on the same cost level.

Many homes cater for both private and local authority care.  However, typically, local authority care gets the lower quality rooms and may not have full access to facilities.    Not in terms of healthcare, but in terms of quality of life.

SouthCoastBoy

My mum and 3 out of 4 grandparents ended up in care homes, some were state funded others privately funded. However in their respective care homes there were both state and private funded residents. My grandmothers were in the same care home at the same time, one state funded one privately funded. 

badmemory

In the care home my mother was in the only difference in the care was how much was paid for it.  The carers had no idea who was who.  The payers, who included my mother, paid a lot more than the LA did for others.

What the carers did know was who did & who didn't have visitors.  So if you do have a loved one in a care home visit regularly & make your presence known.  Not by being awkward but ask how they are eating, sleeping etc.