A quarter of us

User avatar
User

Andrew Krajewski

Posts

69

Joined

Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:40 pm

A quarter of us

by Andrew Krajewski » Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:46 pm

We're all living longer healthier lives.

Nevertheless a quarter of us
are likely to have to end our days in a Care Home.

But did you know that private Care Home fees
can easily be £1,000 per week? :o

If you cannot afford or don't want to go into a private home,
your local council has a duty to provide you with a care home place
and importantly you have the right to decide which one .

But do remember that
they do expect you to contribute to the cost
even if it means selling your hard earned home.

Currently in England if you have
more that £23,250 in savings and assets
YOU will have to pay for your care. :o

So there goes your home and the kid's inheritance. :evil:

Compare this with somebody
who has been on benefits all their life and has no assets.
They won't have to contribute a penny. :shock:

Personally I don't think that's fair. :x

Fortunately there are things that you can do perfectly legally
to protect your home
and enable you to pass it on to your children.

However you need to plan ahead.

Unfortunately it's not always our choice
whether we end our days in a Care Home
but it is our choice whether we plan for the that possibility.

The chances are that if we don't plan
events will take over
and everything that we have worked for will be taken away from us.

Regulations are continually changing,
so it's important to consult organisations
such as Age UK for impartial advise.
and ensure that it's our choice where and how
we spend our later years.
User avatar
User

Andrew Krajewski

Posts

69

Joined

Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: A quarter of us

by Andrew Krajewski » Tue Feb 24, 2015 7:01 pm

It just got more complicated. :?

The Government is putting a cap of £72,000 on care home fees
which is good news. :D

However this cap is ONLY for CARE FEES :o
it does NOT include the cost of board and lodgings at the care home. :x

As the average stay in a care home is 2 years and 4 months
it is extremely unlikely that the £72,000 in care fees will have been reached.

The resident still has to find up to £12,000 per year for board and lodgings
So the family home could still have to be sold.

It's not straight forward :?
So please do get professional advice
Age UK would be a good place to start
no avatar
User

nickbarnes

Posts

1

Joined

Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:12 pm

Re: A quarter of us

by nickbarnes » Fri Feb 27, 2015 9:21 pm

Perhaps if the government would tax all inheritance at 100% then there would be enough money in the system to pay for everybody's end of life care?
User avatar
User

Zak

Posts

29

Joined

Wed Feb 11, 2015 1:54 pm

Re: A quarter of us

by Zak » Sun Mar 01, 2015 8:15 pm

A excellent idea Nick

The system could be further improved if Income Tax was also increased to 100%

That way there would be nothing to will and inherit and so Inheritance Tax would disappear

It would also mean the end of Probate
Thus eliminating two Government Departments

Those civil servants could them be more gainfully employed in helping people
and in particular all those illegal immigrants, claim all the benefits that they are entitled to.
no avatar
User

MarkReynolds

Posts

3

Joined

Mon Jan 19, 2015 8:55 am

Re: A quarter of us

by MarkReynolds » Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:02 am

It's clear to me that we have been indoctrinated into the concept of relying on the state to take care of us, not just in our old age, however that is the topic of this post, so let's keep the context.

It appears to me that what we have here is a clash of ideals, as a state-led benefit system relies upon taxation of the populace in order to provide services... even to those that do not wish to (or have to) participate.

If there was no state to provide this kind of support, you'd certainly expect people to approach their finances and forward-plan in a totally different manner.

Is there a middle ground, where everyone can be satisifed? Hmmm ... interesting concept...

I believe that if people had the choice to opt-in to the system voluntarily and pay their taxes according to legislation and obey the rules then 'fair play'...

This begs the question? How many people would voluntarily opt-out of the "nanny state" and take personal responsibility for their lives and also for their loved ones?
User avatar
User

Helen

Posts

19

Joined

Thu Nov 27, 2014 11:49 pm

Re: A quarter of us

by Helen » Tue Oct 13, 2015 5:25 pm

A recent survey by the Office for National Statistics
found that the most common age of death
for men is 86 and for woman 89.

We're all living longer but what is the quality of this extended lifespan?

I have a horrible feeling that it might mean that we just become less independent for longer.
In other words we'll have to remain in care homes for longer
and therefore the costs increase.

So we come back to planning carefully for Care home fees
particularly as a longer stay might be required.

Otherwise our 'estates' could be virtually wiped out
meaning that our families get cheated out of their inheritance.
User avatar
User

Pete26

Posts

1

Joined

Thu Dec 03, 2015 2:07 pm

Re: A quarter of us

by Pete26 » Thu Dec 03, 2015 3:11 pm

There are those who are divided on who should pay for our care in old age.Some believe the state has a duty and those who say we should pay out own way.

The NHS Act 1946 made provision for everyone to have free health care at the point of use, a principle which still stands to this day. The payment of that care would be paid for through taxation so in effect the NHS is funded by all who pay tax.

However, when a person can no longer look after themselves and have been assessed as needing care assistance, be it in a care home or a nursing home, if they own assets above £23,250, they are expected to fund their own care until they reach this upper level. They are then expected to contribute to the costs where they have assets between the upper limit and the lower limit of £14,250.

Here is the issue. Many who know how to get around the system can place themselves in such a fortuitous position that they don't actually own very much and so they avoid the means testing assessment. There are also those who have lived on benefits, if not all, most of their lives. They continue to draw on the benefit of the state right up their death's and even then the family claim money from the Social fund to bury them.

In contrast, and this is probably the vast majority of people, they work all their lives and make sacrifices. They go without so that their children can have a better future and standard of living. What can be wrong with that?

Through ignorance and lack of awareness, many families loose any inheritance parents may have intended for them. Not knowing how property is owned for example can result in a surviving spouse becoming the sole owner of the family home. If that spouse then needs care, the Local Authority will carry out a means test and the whole value of the home is used. Had Mr and Mrs owned specified shares when the deceased spouse was alive, at least half of the value could have been protected and not used within the means testing assessment.

This planning is perfectly legal and effective if done properly. No one is obliged to pay for another's care, but , as it has been proven many times, the NHS and Local Authority assessments are not always carried out properly. All to often families are asked to provide financial information before a persons needs have been properly assessed. The National Frame work for Continuing Health Care lays out a clear process that should be followed, but often it is ignored. The result is the unknowing public pay what is demanded of them without question.

So, is it fair? Of course not. Those who have paid the most into the system are those who are likely to get the least.
User avatar
User

Helen

Posts

19

Joined

Thu Nov 27, 2014 11:49 pm

Re: A quarter of us

by Helen » Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:57 pm

I couldn't agree with you more, Pete

To me it's ridiculous that somebody can be on benefits all their life and contribute nothing
and yet have their care home paid for buy the state

Whereas somebody that as worked all their life
has to sell their assets in order to fund their care home place
and hence leave nothing for his beneficiaries.

The only saving grace is that with some careful planning with a solicitor
something can be left for beneficiaries
but be warned
you do need to plan ahead

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Copyright 50 Plus Friendship
cron