truman Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Sorry, what I meant was that most people haven't got £75k spare unless they sell their home to raise it. So most people are no better provided for under this scheme than they were before. Underwhelming. There was no limit before.....you could have been charged 150k .. 200k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 If Governments / institutions are allowed to pluck figures out of the air without accountable justification or a proper breakdown of the figure, then we become just another cash cow and leave them free to charge whatever they like. The figure is £75,000 (much too high in the first place) at the moment but it will undoubtedly rise in the future (like University fees,) and there seems to be nothing we can do about it. Standards are often not good, but we are lining the pockets of the care home owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 If Governments / institutions are allowed to pluck figures out of the air without accountable justification or a proper breakdown of the figure, then we become just another cash cow and leave them free to charge whatever they like. The figure is £75,000 (much too high in the first place) at the moment but it will undoubtedly rise in the future (like University fees,) and there seems to be nothing we can do about it. Standards are often not good, but we are lining the pockets of the care home owners. At the moment there's no limit...is that what you prefer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 At the moment there's no limit...is that what you prefer? For the majority of people it makes no difference. A 75,000 bill + £10.000 per year B&B,) costing £150,000+ £20,000 p.a. for 2, means most will still have to sell their house. So it discriminates again against the less well off. No limit would be better. Then when Cameron or his equally well off chums have to sell everything to pay for their own care we might get a change in the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 For the majority of people it makes no difference. A 75,000 bill + £10.000 per year B&B,) costing £150,000+ £20,000 p.a. for 2, means most will still have to sell their house. So it discriminates again against the less well off. No limit would be better. Then when Cameron or his equally well off chums have to sell everything to pay for their own care we might get a change in the law. Genuine question..how many people have to sell their home now to pay for care? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloom Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 It's a disgrace. Condems looking after big business on the make again, at the expense of the genuine working person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Genuine question..how many people have to sell their home now to pay for care? Difficult to say, but more than you think. You had the sorry tale a few years back of the last titanic survivor auctioning her mementos to pay for care home fees. There have been threads on here with folk having to sell their parents house for care home fees. That said you only have to sell if nobody (ie a surviving spouse) is living in it, ergo it's an empty house so I don't see much of a problem myself. Anna does raise a valid point that it a house sale should give the children a leg up, but considering the "children" could be pushing 60 by the time the parent goes into care, its a moot point. Home helps and care workers going to into someone's home is still provided by the state without means testing as far as I am aware. Day centres may cost though, I'm not sure on that. It will probably vary from council to council. ---------- Post added 13-02-2013 at 17:09 ---------- It's a disgrace. Condems looking after big business on the make again, at the expense of the genuine working person. How ? Seems to me they are lowering a threshold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloom Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Difficult to say, but more than you think. You had the sorry tale a few years back of the last titanic survivor auctioning her mementos to pay for care home fees. There have been threads on here with folk having to sell their parents house for care home fees. That said you only have to sell if nobody (ie a surviving spouse) is living in it, ergo it's an empty house so I don't see much of a problem myself. Anna does raise a valid point that it a house sale should give the children a leg up, but considering the "children" could be pushing 60 by the time the parent goes into care, its a moot point. Home helps and care workers going to into someone's home is still provided by the state without means testing as far as I am aware. Day centres may cost though, I'm not sure on that. It will probably vary from council to council. ---------- Post added 13-02-2013 at 17:09 ---------- How ? Seems to me they are lowering a threshold. By setting an inappropriately high one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Difficult to say, but more than you think. You had the sorry tale a few years back of the last titanic survivor auctioning her mementos to pay for care home fees. There have been threads on here with folk having to sell their parents house for care home fees. That said you only have to sell if nobody (ie a surviving spouse) is living in it, ergo it's an empty house so I don't see much of a problem myself. Anna does raise a valid point that it a house sale should give the children a leg up, but considering the "children" could be pushing 60 by the time the parent goes into care, its a moot point. Home helps and care workers going to into someone's home is still provided by the state without means testing as far as I am aware. Day centres may cost though, I'm not sure on that. It will probably vary from council to council.---------- Post added 13-02-2013 at 17:09 ---------- How ? Seems to me they are lowering a threshold. No, old people have to pay for home helps and care workers these days, not sure how much but definately all have to pay something. This in itself is quite a scandal. A relative of mine (90 years old, not well off, council house,unable to walk and housebound) has carers coming in 3 times a day. She pays for 1 and a half hours a day (3 x 30 minutes,) but rarely gets more than 10 minutes. They come in and make her a cup of tea and a sandwich and maybe wash a few pots and that's about it. She rarely gets dressed or has a wash. They are always in a rush to get on to the next client. God forbid they have time to sit down for a chat... I don't blame the carers particularly, but because the job has now been tendered out to private companies by Sheffield Council, the carers are not paid for travel times between customers and they have to 'pinch' the travel time off the clients, otherwise they'd never get done. There's also a million and one jobs they are 'not allowed' to do. It's far from satisfactory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 No, old people have to pay for home helps and care workers these days, not sure how much but definately all have to pay something. This in itself is quite a scandal. A relative of mine (90 years old, not well off, council house,unable to walk and housebound) has carers coming in 3 times a day. She pays for 1 and a half hours a day (3 x 30 minutes,) but rarely gets more than 10 minutes. They come in and make her a cup of tea and a sandwich and maybe wash a few pots and that's about it. She rarely gets dressed or has a wash. They are always in a rush to get on to the next client. God forbid they have time to sit down for a chat... I don't blame the carers particularly, but because the job has now been tendered out to private companies by Sheffield Council, the carers are not paid for travel times between customers and they have to 'pinch' the travel time off the clients, otherwise they'd never get done. There's also a million and one jobs they are 'not allowed' to do. It's far from satisfactory. Could be a council thing then, I'm sure you get a budget to spend on carers "over the border" without dipping into your own cash. The carers are at fault though, they'll get by doing the bare minimum. Get your friend to switch agencies and complain, or do it for her if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.