SIGN UP

Tory Manifesto

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 11:12 Fri 19th May 2017 | News
12 Answers
Could anyone explain why the government are being criticised for increasing the amount the elderly can keep (so as to pass on to their families) from £23,500 to £100,000?

Answers

1 to 12 of 12rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You only have part of the story AOG !
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/may/17/theresa-may-conservative-tory-policy-older-people-pay-for-social-care
Many more people will have to pay the entire cost of their social care.
However it will not be payable immediately but will come out of their estate after they die. So there will in reality be less or even nothing at all to pass on!
The alternative proposal was to cap total amount paid for social care at about £72,000, I believe. The other difference was that the £23,500 cap before did *not* include the house. The £100,000 figure *does*. For many people that means that in fact they are worse off under the new proposals.

Your comparison of the two figures is misleading, therefore.
Question Author
They will still retain £100,000 to pass on.

/// It means wealthier people with more than £100,000 in assets will have to pay for their own elderly care out of the value of their homes, rather than relying on the council to cover the costs of visits by care workers. ///
//Many more people will have to pay the entire cost of their social care. //

NO

"with more than £100,000 in assets will have to pay for their own elderly care out of the value of their homes"

So once the value of your estate drops below 100K you no longer pay.

It is still not right as it rewards the feckless and those that arrived into the country late and with nowt.

But, the baby boomers are retiring and living longer and it is going to cost a ruddy fortune that we dont have.
Question Author
jim360

As far as I know Jim, one always had to pay for their care cost by selling their house.

Except of course if one lived in Scotland.
But the asset calculation is different this time. The previous plans excluded house value; this new plan does not. Since most of the country has median house price values (well) in excess of £100k, that means that many more people will be expected to pay.

Not quite true jim as I know from experience.

For home visits yes but care in a home, even temporary it is. This is what changes they are now both aligned.
Question Author
jim360
/// But the asset calculation is different this time. The previous plans excluded house value; this new plan does not. Since most of the country has median house price values (well) in excess of £100k, that means that many more people will be expected to pay. ///

Can't understand where you are coming from Jim, no matter what one's house is worth it is still a house and everyone who owns a house will be expected to pay as before, but the difference this time is that all will be able to hold on to at least £100,000 instead of the paltry £23,500 that they now can.
At the moment, AOG, if you have care in your own home (arranged by Social Services), when they assess how much you will have to contribute towards the cost of your care, the value of your property IS NOT taken into consideration, nor are any savings under £23,500.

If you are in a care home, then the value of your property IS taken into consideration.

What the Conservatives are proposing is that property values WILL be taken into consideration, minus 100K, regardless of whether you are in a care home when deciding how much to contribute.
So if your house is worth 250K, Social Services will be able to ‘earmark’ 150K of it to pay for your care at home, which they will take when the house is sold after death. Leaving 100K for you to leave as inheritance for your loved ones.

And let’s remember that it is Social Services who can decide if you need care. You won’t have a say, nor will your family. (Been through this with my Dad).
Just had a quick look through some paperwork, and I have a note saying Social Services “ignore” any savings under £14,250.
So not sure where the £23,500 figure has come from.
Question Author
Bigbad

Even so, surely the present proposal has got to be better?
Well personally, AOG, I’d rather my children got to inherit my house.
How will those who rent (and haven’t had to pay to maintain it) be funding their care?

1 to 12 of 12rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Tory Manifesto

Answer Question >>