Saturday, Jul 11, 2009
A fairer system for people who need to enter nursing homes?
Times: Hope for pensioners forced to sell homes
A Green Paper discusssion document is to suggest a range of measures that would let pensioners hang on to their properties when they need care in a nursing home. Options mooted include a one-off payment at retirement or death, or compulsory insurance paid throughout a career.
Posted by alan @ 10:22 AM (874 views) Add Comment
12 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. matt_the_hat said...
Can someone please tell me why it is unfair for someone to have to pay for their expensive old age care when they have made no contributions towards this all their life??
The only thing I think is unfair is that the baby boomers have racked up massive national debts by not paying in advance now the next generation has to pick up the bill
2. Alan_540 said...
"Options mooted include a one-off payment at retirement or death, or compulsory insurance paid throughout a career."
Yes... It's called "National Insurance"
The debate would be funny if it wasn't so tragic!
3. mark wadsworth said...
This is mental.
If we agree that a certain minimum level of care for all should be paid for by the taxpayer, then fine, and if we are to have such benefits then they should not be means-tested, as means-testing is a stealth tax.
But why the special favours for homeowners? If an old person who is renting goes into care, would be expect the taxpayer to pay for all the rent on a vacant property while they are in care?
4. paul said...
I smell a baby-boomer bailout coming.
Pity the cash-poor property-rich pensioner that has ridden the system and younger generations for all the money they have. Let her stay in her lovely six bedroom house - young families would never need that many rooms but each one has special memories for the old biddy so let her stay there at taxpayers' expense!
Absurd and dangerous precedent. Watch this one.
5. Mikelivingstone said...
I've just posted similar comments on the times website. This scheme is basically another baby boomer swindle against the young. Think about it, granny goes into care aged 82 and no longer needs to sell the house. Baby boomer aged 60 inherits said house 3 years later when granny dies aged 85. Boomer pockets sale of proceeds, Meanwhile the cost of carrying for granny for the 3 years prior has been paid for by priced out 25 year old who is now paying 45% tax and can't afford a home.
This stinks and I would urge you to post on the Times and any other site accordingly.
6. stillthinking said...
For the current generation of pensioners, they did, to be fair, pay all their lives into NI which from the outset was meant to cover these costs. That the current government has emptied the till isn't down to them.
7. Hiopl said...
normal comments from the i want it now brigade
8. letthemfall said...
Agree with stillthinking. The elderly will have worked throughout their lives. It must be traumatic to have to go into care, knowing your home will be gone should you ever be able to look after yourself again. The argument wouldn't arise were it not for the credit explosion from the 70s on, which has primarily benefited younger people. Anyway, few will live in a 6-bed house and the majority will pre-date the boomer generation - for the time being. And inheritance tax will be due on the expensive houses. In the end this is about equality, and all ages are entitled to fair treatment.
9. techieman said...
I believe we should pay for our old age costs, and that we effectively don't (because if we did the NHS would be able to be funded). Since we don't payment care home costs need to be borne by someone. I advocate a % basis - some from the taxpayer - on the basis of ST and LTF and some coming from a loan which is interest free and offset against your say a maximum % of your estate or leaving a minimum value of your estate, whichever the greater. Now what share? I think that depends on a few things which require some clever people to work out. It could be based on how much you have already used state resources because of say lifestyle choices - although this argument wouold be fraught with dilemmas.
Bring on the actuaries!
10. deeplyblue said...
IT'S A GREEN PAPER. This means that it no longer has any real chance of getting through Parliament before the next election. So it's not about what is actually going to happen in the real world.
This is all about trying to hang on to a few votes amongst those fearing that their houses will be taken away from them to pay for care in the future, or who think that they ought to inherit their parents' house when those parents die. It might hold another seat or two in the general election. That's it.
You might observe, however, that if it did get through then - as others have pointed out - when Granny finally dies, her house will be inherited by someone. That someone is not necessarily the children - the inheritance could, as happened in my family, be shared with the grandchildren. And as for Mum and Dad inheriting - well, since "the bank of Mum and Dad" is the place for the needed deposit, that too could benefit the next generation.
Mum and Dad may need a bigger house for longer, as well. Look at the figures for over-20s staying with their parents, and then check the new scheme to make more students stay at home rather than go away to Uni.
However, all of this is speculation, since nobody knows what the Conservatives will actually do when they get the power next year. It may bear little resemblance to anything they are saying now, and virtually nothing to the pious proclamations of a lame-duck Labour administration.
11. a saver said...
Kind of agree with Alan at #2. It's not like the gov isn't already taking too much off us. It's not just NI contributions, but income tax at 20-40% or more, plus 8% stealth tax (class 3 contributions), tax on savings income, VAT on most things we buy, humungous petrol duty plus road tax, council tax, then inheritance tax when we die. No one need worry that I haven't paid my way if I eventually need longterm care. So what is income tax supposed to pay for anyway? As a taxpayer I would much prefer to pay for an old person who need longterm care than for the hordes of foreigners that come to this country for the handouts.
12. mr g said...
I bet that the majority of people who have commented here will be pi*ssed off if their parents' house has to be sold and they lose their inheritance.