Blunkett - Sell house to pay for your elderly care

[Dark Night]

Care for the elderly has been free for 70+ years, when the country was not as well off as it is now.

There are a whole raft of people who entered old age with this understanding who are now caught up in a tangle of new rules - how could they have 'planned better for later life care?' The goalposts have moved suddenly with no time to 'plan.'

Also, the government has acknowledged that very few companies have taken up the opportunity to offer home care insurance.

 

I'd also like to know why a care home costs each person £2000+ a month, when the carer's allowance for full time (often 24/7) care is a measley £60 per week, when they have often had to give up a full time job to do it. And even that comes out of the cared for person's pocket.

Get one thing straight the promise was CRADLE TO GRAVE when the welfare state was formed under Labour by Bevan.

Regarding care home costs this has only become an issue with the advent of private nursing homes charging outrageous fees.

 

Care for the elderly has only been free for those who have never contributed throughout their working lives like elderly immigrants. The rest of us who worked and contributed have been conned.

[tinfoilhat]

Get one thing straight the promise was CRADLE TO GRAVE when the welfare state was formed under Labour by Bevan.

Regarding care home costs this has only become an issue with the advent of private nursing homes charging outrageous fees.

 

Care for the elderly has only been free for those who have never contributed throughout their working lives like elderly immigrants. The rest of us who worked and contributed have been conned.

 

He didn't bring in the welfare state he brought in the NHS - which is not and has never been responsible for residential care for the elderly.

 

That's the fourth time. Ask your carer if you still can't get it.

[Dark Night]

Arguably it's because the state will stump up X amount. If the state didn't pay X amount and families were forced to look relatives you can bet your bottom dollar fees would drop. A bit like housing benefit I suppose. The old supply and demand.

 

The state stump up nothing! The money has already been paid in contributions, otherwise pay the money back with interest and then let those recipients in need of care pay out of that.

You cannot make families care for their elderly relatives.

 

---------- Post added 09-02-2015 at 03:32 ----------

 

Which is why it's handy having a house - the difference, as I'm sure you'll agree in the £900 ones is massive. There are some around with Michelin chefs (they're more than £900 though). There were a few that weren't awful at the bottom end (they past the smell test at least) but they were really dull - like spending your final years in a travelodge.

Never had this problem till it was privatised under Maggie and the gravy train started. The care home where my elderly Mother-in-law stayed even tried to charge her for the Chiropadist treatment. Prior to going into the home she received it free so we refused to pay and they backed down.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Dark Night

[Hockley]

We simply must take better care of our elderly.

[cuttsie]

Bring back the Home Helps, Those lasses who were paid a pittance by the council kept thousands of old people out of the so called care homes ,[some try their best but some stink].

[mjw47]

The latest twist in this less than impressive situation.

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEEQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2945079%2FOld-people-auctioned-care-homes-internet-Anger-cattle-markets-grannies-councils-accept-lowest-bids-save-cash.html&ei=QIfYVLmrG5flapjPgJgD&usg=AFQjCNEpVCQs5l5qLa_eLlUX2B6G2CysVw&bvm=bv.85464276,d.d2s&cad=rja

[Anna B]

The latest twist in this less than impressive situation.

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CEEQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailymail.co.uk%2Fnews%2Farticle-2945079%2FOld-people-auctioned-care-homes-internet-Anger-cattle-markets-grannies-councils-accept-lowest-bids-save-cash.html&ei=QIfYVLmrG5flapjPgJgD&usg=AFQjCNEpVCQs5l5qLa_eLlUX2B6G2CysVw&bvm=bv.85464276,d.d2s&cad=rja

 

Yes I saw this too.

For those who don't do links:

 

'Old people auctioned off to care homes on internet; Anger over 'cattle markets for grannies' as councils accept lowest bids to save cash.'

 

And in case you didn't know, old people can be forced into care homes whether they want to go or not. So they don't have a choice about being robbed of all their assetts. (I'd rather die.)

 

This whole situation needs sorting out.

[barleycorn]

Two lads start off working for the same company and remain with it for their entire working lives.

 

They reach the same level and receive the same wages.

 

Both marry and have children, one decides to save, make a few sacrifices and buy his own house.

 

When that house requires decorating or needs a new boiler or roof repair he pays for it.

 

The other decides he will be quite happy in a council house, have more holidays and go out on a more regular basis.

His rent includes external decorating and repairs etc.

 

When they reach old age and require looking after in a care home the one who has paid for his own house and looked after his own repairs etc is expected to hand over the value of what he has worked for to the care home.

 

Whilst the one who lived in a council house and spent his extra money on having a good time receives the same treatment without any contribution.

 

Does that seem fair and reasonable?

 

If the house in question is a modest semi valued at £150,000, instead of having the satisfaction of leaving his children a small legacy - which he and his wife worked for - he is supposed to hand over that amount in addition to anything paid in taxes throughout his working life?

 

In comparison to the treatment received by his work colleague how is that equitable?

The one who rented his council house has paid his £150K to the council over the course of his life in rent, the other guy has given nothing, why shouldn't the other guy have to fork out for his care? Care which will be a damn sight better than the basic level given to the renter. Furthermore, where's the renters house, he's paid his dues yet doesn't get a valuable asset out of it?

 

jb

Edited February 9, 2015 by barleycorn

[truman]

The one who rented his council house has paid his £150K to the council over the course of his life in rent, the other guy has given nothing, why shouldn't the other guy have to fork out for his care? Care which will be a damn sight better than the basic level given to the renter.

 

jb

 

He hasn't "given" the council anything..he's paid for somewhere to live...like everyone else does..

Edited February 9, 2015 by truman

[barleycorn]

But why should I expect to pay £500 a week (and have to sell my house to do it,) to live iin a Travelodge?

 

It's about value for money. Why are people not up in arms about this? Is it just me?

You don't have to. You can stay at home and die from neglect. As to whether £500/wk is value for money I have no idea, not having costed it. How many nurses on 24 hr cover will that buy you? How many carers on 24hr cover will that buy you? How many cleaners and cooks?

 

jb