Ignorance is no excuse

Well it’s true, my Mother who worked all her life and paid tax was in a nursing home paying £1000’s a week, I had to sell her home to pay for care.

In the same home were residents who paid nothing.

So it does often seem unfair.

I know from personal experience that inheritance tax and paying for care take a huge whack out of any money your parents want to pass on. The more you earn and save for the future the more "They" take. Being careful with your money is not rewarded when it comes to inheritance.

Of course it is up to us all to take personal responsibility to keep ourselves informed. When we/I don't do that then basically we/I just have to get on with it.

Yes it is unfair the lady’s right, I remember years and years ago I used to visit an old friend in a care home and he said, that lady next to me came in with no savings, no money, I ve saved all my life, two good pensions she pays nothing, and they take all my money and I get a couple of quid ‘pocket’ money a week
The lady’s right it is very unfair

I love asking that question - “Who is ‘they’”?

Sadly it’s true. Mum’s care bill was horrific and we did have to sell her house.

As for the title, ignorance is no excuse,

not knowing or not having been told was used as an excuse by KS recently. Maybe he should read GN.

Magenta8

I know from personal experience that inheritance tax and paying for care take a huge whack out of any money your parents want to pass on. The more you earn and save for the future the more "They" take. Being careful with your money is not rewarded when it comes to inheritance.

Yes.I agree that it's true.

My mother died within the seven year period of gifting me a substantial amount, and as the recipient, I had to pay the excess tax. I do understand that that's the rule, but because I was just out of education at the time, and had never had a father in the picture, I thought "they" were unfair to take what I saw as rightfully mine!

It was complicated because, although a single parent, my mother had worked all her life, paid all her taxes and never claimed benefits. As my absent father worked overseas he had never paid her stamps so she did not receive her full pension when she retired.

It seemed to me "they" take from you all the time, and it has made me very wily at legally avoiding tax throughout my own life!

Yes. This is so true. Where I live I gave up my job to look after both my parents for many years doing everything for them. They were ambulant but very frail and my mother had dementia and cancer and could be quite difficult. As my father became a care home case, we found a lovely one near by at the going rate but by that time I was exhausted so I was actually ready to sign away his savings and house to cover the fees. He died very shortly afterwards but it was a legal and medical nightmare navigating all the paperwork and left me short on my pension as I could not pay the full amount in to get the full amount out. The money I did inherit has been put into an account to pay for my old age so my offspring don't need to go through what I went through.

Woman in sheltered housing was sent there by the council and paid nothing.Drank a bottle of gin every day and stole things from the lounge 😨

I am mindful that I am fortunate at this stage of my life, to not have any financial worries and to be able to help children and grandchildren.

I am also mindful of not leaving them with an IHT burden, which is administered in such a Catch 22 manner.

Sorry, but I don't understand the 'it isn't fair' point of view; what's the alternative, that those who can't afford care don't receive any?

If no one who can afford to pay does so, there wouldn't be care for the vast majority of those who need it.

My m.i.l.'s bungalow was sold to pay for her care. It bothered her but not Mr. S. and his siblings who were thankful she could go to the home of her choice and stay there until she died.

It is true. My parents had to sell their house to pay for their care in old age. My father was proud that he did not have to rely on 'charity' as he regarded it but was able to pay his way by his own efforts.
Both my parents had supported their parents through the Depression, my father supported his mother entirely through her very long widowhood until she was 94.
That attitude seems to have vanished , but the welfare state gives priority to those who make no attempt to help themselves.

And I would add, penalises those who save.

Smileless2012

Sorry, but I don't understand the 'it isn't fair' point of view; what's the alternative, that those who can't afford care don't receive any?

If no one who can afford to pay does so, there wouldn't be care for the vast majority of those who need it.

My m.i.l.'s bungalow was sold to pay for her care. It bothered her but not Mr. S. and his siblings who were thankful she could go to the home of her choice and stay there until she died.

Thank you Smileless for your post. There are still some of us on here with some compassion and less bitterness

We talk a lot about trying to manage our older years and think for us is a move to a bungalow and make it easy for things like wheelchairs etc. we talk about a suicide pact as well.

I am currently reading Lionel Shriver's book 'Should we stay or Should We go?' which fictionalises the life of a couple who decide on a pact in their after witnessing the problems their parents were facing including dementia and care issues. She then goes on to describe the various scenarios that could be the consequence of either not going through with the pact or not. It's fascinating and helpful to us who both witnessed and 'managed' our own parents decline with various degrees of horror and expense. A good read.

Compassion is all very well but some of the 'poor' are undeserving. I can understand the bitterness of those who have striven all their lives, done without in order to save, etc., only to be penalised in old age. It's obvious the State should spend far more on social care but politicians are cowardly and use the long grass of yet another 'study' to avoid the issue.

The same could be said for any service.
Smokers vs non smokers in need of cancer care.
Mountain climbers vs couch potatoes, and so on.

Thank you Ilovecheese.

I don't think that being able to pay for care in old age is being penalised Grantanow. Are the ones who wont have any inheritance or less than they hoped for the ones being penalised?

Should tax payers pay more in tax to fund the care of the elderly so their children can have an inheritance?

What's the alternative? If the State were to spend far more on social care which I agree should happen, it will never be able to finance it totally.

If I felt that more than an infinitesimal amount of the large chunk of money taken by "Them" in IHT was going to be spent on providing welfare for those in need I would not feel any resentment.

Not everyone is entitled to PC.
What I’ve found working in care is that it doesn’t do to have loads of savings as you are penalised for having those savings.
My dad was one of two residents that were paying the full amount, all the rest were funded by other means.
Those who had nothing were given all their toiletries free.
It doesn’t exactly make you want to save up hard, or even own a property.
That’s the mentality of some the younger generation today, rent, don’t earn much & you’re entitled to loads of different benefits.

People always provided their own toiletries in homes I've worked in.
There is money left in their kittys to pay for hairdressing, chiropody and other costs

There is no way of making it fair. If free care was to be provided to all who need it, working age people would have to pay more tax, which would put more burden on them, also unfair, given most people don’t ever need to go into care.

Life is a lottery, or in other words, life’s a bitch, and then you die.

“You'll own nothing and be happy" is a phrase originating from a 2016 World Economic Forum (WEF) essay by Danish politician Ida Auken, forecasting a future sharing economy where goods are rented or accessed as services.

While intended to describe a potential future with reduced consumption, it is often criticized as dystopian or a symbol of technocratic overreach.

You’re right Casdon I just looked it up.

“Approximately 2.5% of people aged 65 and over in the UK live in care homes.

This proportion has decreased from 3.2% in 2011, reflecting a shift toward community-based care.

While usage is low for those aged 65–74, it increases significantly among the "oldest old" (85+), though a minority of that age group reside in care homes.”