60 + property - why?

shykins · 19 April 2018 at 3:29PM

kittie I am sure you are right in some cases (not in mine!!) but then wouldnt they be the same children who dont visit anyway regardless of where their parents live?

badmemory · 19 April 2018 at 4:30PM

kittie wrote: »

they are very good for the children, who don`t want to worry because neighbours will keep an eye out for each other. Can be a cop-out for relatives, saves them visiting and/or phoning regulasrly

gets tin hat and runs, now tell me I am wrong. Put the parent in a safe place, duty done

To a certain extent I agree. My mother wasn't in one of these but had absolutely fantastic neighbours & we knew that if there were any problems - like the curtains not being opened at the normal time, milk not taken in - one of us would know very quickly. When I was working it meant I could just do one long visit at the weekend (actually a 10 hour collect feed & return) and a shorter one during the week & just rely on phone calls the rest of the time & my sister would do a medium visit during the week. It is a massive relief to know that you needn't be permanently on edge hoping nothing's gone wrong. We believe she only spent about an hour and a half on the floor with a broken hip before a neighbour realised something was amiss as opposed to the almost 12 hours before one of us would have found her.

Savvy_Sue · 19 April 2018 at 5:57PM

kittie wrote: »

they are very good for the children, who don`t want to worry because neighbours will keep an eye out for each other. Can be a cop-out for relatives, saves them visiting and/or phoning regulasrly

gets tin hat and runs, now tell me I am wrong. Put the parent in a safe place, duty done

But clearly this is a solution which SOME parents choose for themselves - certainly you wouldn't have been able to 'put' my late mother anywhere she didn't choose to be. Our preferences were completely irrelevant! And the frequency of our visits and emails (she couldn't use the phone) would not have changed had she chosen to move into something like this.

She did not WANT us to have to worry about her. She did not WANT to move in with any of us. She did not WANT any of us to have to care for her.

Larac · 20 April 2018 at 12:56PM

shykins wrote: »

my mum lives in a McCarthy & Stone development. she bought her flat second hand at a good price (less than half it was when new) and it is now actually worth significantly more altho still hasnt reached the price it would have been new

its been the making of her as she lived a fairly solitary lifestyle before, now she is surrounded by new friends and activities. I also dont need to worry as the manager checks on her everyday and her friends soon notice if they havent seen her

yes there are management fees but when you add together what she gets for them and it also includes, water rates, house insurance, a fully fitted launderette and peace of mind I dont think it is excessive

definitely a very positive move

When my Mum brought the Mcarthy Stone flat, the running costs were alot less than that of the family home that she was in after my Dad died. They do have a small community that look out for each other and arrange activities etc. I also think that if you have failing health (physically) , they work well as easy for carers to come in and out and are relatively secure. Sadly my Mum developed dementia and started wandering in to the corridors at odd hours, so had a few calls from 'careline', so moved in with me for a period of time before the dementia spiralled to a need for a CH. What does 'annoy' me with Mcarthy Stone is they are constantly re-decorating, recarpeting, refitting, redoing the car park etc and they shell out thousands in the process from the fund collected from the service fees and very questionable as to why it is needed - as the place is immaculate in the first place!

moneyistooshorttomention · 20 April 2018 at 6:54PM

margaretclare wrote: »

The other point is - do you really want to live in an old people's ghetto?

Having come late to this thread - but my answer to that one is a resounding "No".

Though I'm only in my 60s - I do find that a high proportion of people even in that age group (ie not elderly yet) have got such a "fixed/set in stone" way of looking at things that it's quite shocking to me.

There may be an element in that - not sure how big? - of having moved from a modern city to a small town that is about 20 years behind the times in many ways:(. But I've certainly been surprised at the way I see little evidence in some of them of "keeping up" with things and I swear the next person that expects me to subscribe to a more rigid/old-fashioned mindset, as I'm apparently "wrong" for not doing so:rotfl: will find the comment they get back will be very "short, sharp and very much to the point:cool:".

I am promising myself that the next person that tells me/implies I'm "wrong" about something just because I have a different viewpoint to them is likely to get me "taking a swing at them". Whereas younger people are much less likely to (as their minds are rather less likely to have "set in stone").

seven-day-weekend · 20 April 2018 at 8:31PM

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

But clearly this is a solution which SOME parents choose for themselves - certainly you wouldn't have been able to 'put' my late mother anywhere she didn't choose to be. Our preferences were completely irrelevant! And the frequency of our visits and emails (she couldn't use the phone) would not have changed had she chosen to move into something like this.

She did not WANT us to have to worry about her. She did not WANT to move in with any of us. She did not WANT any of us to have to care for her.

Neither did my mum and when the time came, moved into a residential home quite happily, and made new friends

humptydumptybits · 21 April 2018 at 9:17AM

If people lack capacity you can put them somewhere they don't want to be. With my family we all agreed on a home and we were told we either got her there, by deception or whatever it took, or they would be sending a ambulance and she would be detained by force if necessary. If people aren't safe then someone has to take responsibility.

humptydumptybits · 21 April 2018 at 9:34AM

lessonlearned wrote: »

Interesting about your visit Kittie.

A couple of these high end developments have sprung up near me. Very expensive. They include gyms, swimming pools, restaurants etc. I get the feeling that they could end up being very cliquey and there could be a lot of oneupmanship at play. They just don’t appeal.

I would rather save myself the £150K or so EXTRA that they are charging for a one bedroom flat and buy myself a nice house that I can future proof.

These properties cost serious money and as far as I can see the extra costs just cannot be justified. And that’s without taking into account management fees.

At the end of my life when and if I really do need sheltered accommodation then obviously I might have to rethink my priorities. I’m currently 66 so hopefully not for a while yet.;)

There is a development close to me and for someone without much support I think they can be a good idea. At the local one you can buy a bungalow or flat and live independently while enjoying the facilities, carers on hand for any care package you might want to buy into as you need it and a care home that you can move into if the time comes. The big advantage is that you know the staff in the care home and the management, friends you have made can just walk across the gardens to visit.

Personally if I decided to do it I would rent a flat, plenty on offer at local places, presumably they can't sell them so rent them out. Capital not tied up but still get the benefits. I hope I never need it but none of us know what we might need.

DairyQueen · 29 April 2018 at 8:46PM

humptydumptybits wrote: »

If people lack capacity you can put them somewhere they don't want to be. With my family we all agreed on a home and we were told we either got her there, by deception or whatever it took, or they would be sending a ambulance and she would be detained by force if necessary. If people aren't safe then someone has to take responsibility.

Sounds like something I read about admissions to 19th/20th-century 'insane asylums'. Did they also offer a straight-jacket?:eek:

margaretclare · 30 April 2018 at 11:49AM

lisyloo wrote: »

My in-laws moved into a less luxurious version in Keynsham (opposite the Esso garage if you know the area.
The service charges are about £3K per year and the ground rent about £540.
It was the right move for them at age 74 as they couldn't do the stairs or gardening or much DIY and even cleaning and walking around the flat would eventually become difficult.
They had organised activities, a manager and a care line they could pull if in difficulty.
This was the correct move for them but be aware there are cheaper places than the chocolate quarter and mccarthy and stone which are the "shiny" versions.

If you're an active 62 year old then why would you want to be stuck in one of these?

That was quite early for your in-laws to become so incapacitated - stairs, gardening etc.

Fortunately my first husband and I decided in 1990 to move from a 3-storey Pennine cottage to a 2-bed bungalow in Essex. Although he didn't live very long to enjoy it, from my point of view it has been one of the best decisions we ever made. DH (my second husband) and I are now 80+, the garden is a wildlife haven but we pay for a local gardener to prevent the grass becoming a total hayfield.

Over the past 20 years we've spent quite a lot modernising and making the place easy-care. No bath - walk-in disability-friendly shower.

60 + property - why?

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free