Off to sit in on another care assessment today.

A house owned by the offspring can assumed to have been paid for by the parent? Get real, Gerry. My sons long ago told me they could stand on their own feet which was just as well because they certainly couldn't stand on mine.

He's having a laugh methinks.

Don't feed 'em!

mollie

It is difficult on where to draw the line for NHS funding.
If the prime need for care is medical then the NHS has to fund all of the care at present as it does in hospital.
I would agree with this as a person in the past would have been kept in a long term NHS ward at the expense of the NHS and nursing homes have come in to existence to do the same job cheaper.
Also in most of the cases I have dealt with the parent has assaulted people including NHS staff. The dementia has caused it.
If it was a younger person they would be detained at the tax payers expense so why not an older person?.

Frank

Aka

If a person is in his own home and the needs are medical then the NHS should fund the care as at present.
Social Care has to be funded by the patient or by the council and the value of the home can not be taken in to account.
I know there have been arguments that if a person owns a house and needs social care they should be obliged to take some form of mortgage annuity on it or the money should be taken when the house is sold.
Again unfairness could happen here.
If there is a spouse in the house then no charge can be put on the house and if it is jointly owned with the offspring and he or she occupies the house no charge can be put on the house.
If my father had needed care he had little money in cash terms at the end of his life and I was in occupation of our jointly owned house.
Clearly the council would have had to funded a lot of his care in a care home or in the house as his part of the house would have no value on the open market as nobody would buy half a house with somebody in it.
Also a mortgage could not have been taken over the house as it states on the land certificate ''No sale, transfer, or charge to be taken over the house without the consent of both owners''.
Obviously I would have not given the council consent to take a charge over the property so the council would have to pay.
On the face of it if I had not been in occupation of the property it looks as if the council could not take a charge over the house because of the above mentioned clause on the land certificate or my father may not have been able to will his half of the house to anybody other than me as I would not have given my consent for the transfer.

Frank

annodomini

If a parent has bought a house for a son or daughter it is likely they would have a property of their own.
I don't think there are many people living in a council house who have purchased a house for their son / daughter.
That said I did hear of a case where a person died and they had purchased their council house years before probably under the right to buy scheme and relatives were surprised how much money the person had when he died.
The logical thing would have been for him to sell up and buy somewhere better.
That said the house was well maintained and furnished and he always ran newish cars so he was probably happy there and did not want to move.

Frank

Frank: point taken. I agree, if the need is medical then the NHS would seem the logical place to seek funding and support. But there is a fine line between genuine medical need and social support. It's the same with some treatments that I might consider non-essential and yet someone else could make a genuine medical case for funded treatment.

I'm wary of this debate because my mum owns her own house but my brother has always lived with her. We know that if she needs care the house will be looked at as an asset so its down to the two of them to make suitable arrangements. Personally, I'd see the house sold for that purpose but I couldn't see him without a home - it's a dilemma. On the other hand, I think that we (families) ought to take responsibility for our old folks and not farm them out - that's a generalisation - but I know modern life doesn't make that easy. And I say that despite knowing I'd be awful at looking after my mum if the need arose...

Mollie

It is a pity your father did not leave his half of the house to his offspring.
If that had been the case the council could not take any of the house towards care fees ( see age concern factsheet 38 ).
You say about families taking responsibility for old folk. Unfortunately in cases I have seen the relatives were violent and doing things like turning the gas on without lighting it so they could not be kept in an ordinary house.
Another case I know of was a daughter who was 72 and widowed and coping with her mother on her own and the mother started to become violent and had to be taken in to care.
Obviously the sanity of the daughter had to be considered as she was not exactly a spring chicken.
In your case your brother may be able to argue he was your mothers carer so the council may not take any of the house.
Also is your brother over 60?. Again in this situation the council could not take any of the house.

Frank

The house was never my father's, Frank, so that wasn't a consideration.

Of course, in the case of dementia and similar the care of both parties must be considered. Most domestic homes couldn't safely contain someone in those circumstances but there are other reasons why older folk go into care. Hopefully that won't be the case for us but who knows...

mollie

If it ever happens do not take the word of the Social Worker.
They are really acting just in the interest of the council.
I have known several cases where the offspring have been joint owner occupiers and they have been told to downsize the house to pay the fees.
In another case a daughter owned a 6 bedroom house and her father merely lived there. The Social Worker said 1 person does not need 6 bedrooms and he told her to downsize.
In another case a house has been left to the offspring on condition the step mother could live in the house until her death or when she enters a nursing home.
Again the Social Worker wanted the house sold even though it did not belong to the step mother.
1case where a social worker got it seriously wrong was where a father owned a house jointly with his daughter and the father had to go in to care.
The father had been in hospital 4 times over an 18 month period . The daughter was 58 when he first went in but she was 60 when a decision was taken for the father to go in to care.
The social worker wanted the house sold and for the daughter to have half the proceeds and when the daughter mentioned she was 60 the social worker said she was only 58 when the father was admitted to hospital.
The daughter refused to sell on the grounds she was an owner occupier and she was 60 and the father passed away a year later and she is still living in the house as a full owner.

Frank

Thanks Frank. We'll bear all that in mind...thy cant downsize much more, it's a tiny little house and they trip over each other as it is! Brother is early 50s with his own health problems (they are betting on who pegs out first!) so they need to plan for the worst scenario but are both doing good ostrich impressions.