Few in Hampshire to benefit from Government's care home costs cap

Daily Echo: 'Few to benefit from care home cap' 'Few to benefit from care home cap'

FEW homeowners in Hampshire will be helped by a Government pledge to cap care home costs, it was claimed last night.

A long-awaited package to help meet social care bills – by limiting the lifetime amount anyone must pay to £75,000 from April 2017 – was widely criticised.

The £1 billion plans, revealed by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt yesterday, will also significantly raise the assets below which patients can receive state help in meeting bills from £23,000 to £123,000.

However, even that higher threshold would appear to rule out any homeowner in Hampshire from help – because of sky-high house prices.

The average semi-detached home in Southampton is worth £196,188 and the average flat is valued at £131,848 – with higher prices outside the city.

A flat costs £146,992 in Eastleigh, at £168,849 in Test Valley and at £175,806 in New Forest, according to Land Registry figures.

Mr Hunt said the measures, to be introduced through the Care and Support Bill, would benefit around 100,000 people annually who would not receive support under the current system.

Certainty about the maximum bill they may face will allow everyone to buy insurance to protect them against the possibility of care costs.

While hailing the announcement, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, acknowledged that most homeowners in the south would still have to pay for their care, up to the £75,000 cap.

He said: “Almost everyone who doesn’t own their own home would get subsidised care along with those – in particular in the north – with the smallest homes.”

Meanwhile, Labour leapt on the £75,000 payment limit – more than twice the £35,000 recommended by an independent review in 2011– to warn that only a minority would be helped.

Liz Kendall, the party’s health spokeswoman, said the cap would not kick in until at least four years of fees had been paid – yet the average person spent only two years in residential care.

She added: “The vast majority of people in residential care homes would have passed away before that happens, if the cap is set at £75,000.”

According to the thinktank Demos, only 16 per cent of pensioners will be helped by a £75,000 cap compared with 37 per cent if the £35,000 figure had been adopted.

Many Tories were also furious with the announcement, because it will be partly funded by dragging more people into paying inheritance tax.

That threshold will be frozen at £325,000 until at least 2019 – or £650,000 for couples – despite a 2009 Conservative pledge to hike it to £1m.

However, the package will mean that no one will be forced to sell their home to go into care, as 40,000 people currently do every year.

That is because, from 2015, local authorities will be required to lend the money for care bills and recover it after death, from the property sale.

Many currently do not.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

4:49pm Tue 12 Feb 13

ac1947 says...

The way I understand this is: If I have a house (assets) worth £123,000 + and £75,000 in the bank, then I would not get any assistance and would have to pay £75,000 for my care. Leaving me with nothing.....Wherby if I have a house worth £250,000 and £100,000 in the bank I would only pay the same (£75,000) and still have £25,000 in the bank. If i'm right then this sounds like a good deal for the better off. Poor me !!
The way I understand this is: If I have a house (assets) worth £123,000 + and £75,000 in the bank, then I would not get any assistance and would have to pay £75,000 for my care. Leaving me with nothing.....Wherby if I have a house worth £250,000 and £100,000 in the bank I would only pay the same (£75,000) and still have £25,000 in the bank. If i'm right then this sounds like a good deal for the better off. Poor me !! ac1947
  • Score: 0

7:40pm Tue 12 Feb 13

Lone Ranger. says...

ac1947 wrote:
The way I understand this is: If I have a house (assets) worth £123,000 + and £75,000 in the bank, then I would not get any assistance and would have to pay £75,000 for my care. Leaving me with nothing.....Wherby if I have a house worth £250,000 and £100,000 in the bank I would only pay the same (£75,000) and still have £25,000 in the bank. If i'm right then this sounds like a good deal for the better off. Poor me !!
You are correct ..... But dont forget this money does NOT cover your accomodation and food ....... Coalition partners are not publicising this at all
[quote][p][bold]ac1947[/bold] wrote: The way I understand this is: If I have a house (assets) worth £123,000 + and £75,000 in the bank, then I would not get any assistance and would have to pay £75,000 for my care. Leaving me with nothing.....Wherby if I have a house worth £250,000 and £100,000 in the bank I would only pay the same (£75,000) and still have £25,000 in the bank. If i'm right then this sounds like a good deal for the better off. Poor me !![/p][/quote]You are correct ..... But dont forget this money does NOT cover your accomodation and food ....... Coalition partners are not publicising this at all Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree