Tuesday, 17 December 2013

Paying for Care - Letter in the Daily Telegraph, 17.12.13

Dear Editor,

If the chaotic inflation in house prices over the last thirty years is to have any good effect, it is in providing capital for care in frail old age for those lucky enough to have been able to buy their own homes. That the elderly rich should [sponge off] take from the state in their declining years without being required to sell up and fork out to pay their way, is surely anathema to every Conservative principle.

Yours faithfully,

Daily Telegraph, 17.12.13 (my original words in [])

1 comment:

  1. Well said.
    In 1966,when I started working in a council department that dealt with this, the definition of 'substantial private means' from the sale of a home was £2,000.0s.0d - two thousand pounds. Anyone with that amount of capital was considered well enough off to pay the standard charge.
    All our residents, rich or poor, remembered Queen Victoria and had lived through Liberal, Labour, Conservative and coalition governments.
    The minimum charge for those who had only the State Retirement Pension of £4.0s0d (four pounds) a week was £3.4s0d and they were grateful to receive 16/- (sixteen shillings/80p) pocket money every Friday. They had all grown up and grown old believing it was right to pay their way.
    Some slightly wealthier residents felt thrift and hard work was being penalised but only one rich elderly person in two years seriously objected to paying his full whack. He was in his late nineties and tried to pull me under a moving bus.