Retirement village operators

[Joh13]

While 1900 Retirement Village Residents’ Association members lodged submissions they were only 5 per cent of the 45,000 people living in retirement villages. Independent research showed 95 per cent were satisfied with living in a retirement village, Collyns said.

That’s from an article in stuff news...

Seems as though it’s a small proportion of people making noise.

How can you make sweeping changes based on only a small number of apparently disgruntled people?

[percy]

While 1900 Retirement Village Residents’ Association members lodged submissions they were only 5 per cent of the 45,000 people living in retirement villages. Independent research showed 95 per cent were satisfied with living in a retirement village, Collyns said.

That’s from an article in stuff news...

Seems as though it’s a small proportion of people making noise.

How can you make sweeping changes based on only a small number of apparently disgruntled people?

No one is questioning the actual living in or care in retirement villages.
It is "the right to occupy" agreement which is boarding on being an illegal agreement.
I do think the chair of the may villages ie RYM's Dr.David Kerr,OCA's Liz Coutts,and OCA's Rob Campbell will see the errors of their ways.They are good peopl and run great villages.

[Beagle]

No one is questioning the actual living in or care in retirement villages.
It is "the right to occupy" agreement which is boarding on being an illegal agreement.
I do think the chair of the may villages ie RYM's Dr.David Kerr,OCA's Liz Coutts,and OCA's Rob Campbell will see the errors of their ways.They are good peopl and run great villages.

If the agreements are so usurious and odious as you suggest why are the vast majority of residents so satisfied ? Food for thought - Could it be that their weekly fees which are often fixed for life and very reasonable for what you get are heavily subsidized by the terms of the occupation right agreement model ? or is it that the camaraderie and support of a caring community outweighs other considerations or maybe both these things ? I don't think there's any error of their ways to see. Nobody has a gun to anyone's head making them move in and yet they seem increasingly popular. You might understand why when / if you get to the typical entry age of 80 years old.

I'm also aware that there is an emerging number of small privately owned villages offering to share the capital gain but the thing is the money to run these villages has to come from somewhere. Something has to give, either the level of community facilities is materially less or the weekly fees are materially higher, I understand its usually some combination of factors. The old cliché comes to mind "If you want to hear the music you have to pay the band" One way or the other someone has to pay.

[percy]

First of all I agree with you except for "the right to occupy."
From the article, less than 5% of the residents understand it,and the problems only surface when the resident has died,and it is left for the family to sort out.
As you know sorting out a loved one's estate is not pleasant, and is usually done while grieving. Having an estate tied up, for as was the case for the Munns a year, while being charged ongoing fees for 6 months is totally un acceptable.
Yes I know your mother's unit was tidied up straight away.This should be the norm for all villages.
While it is more profitable for them to sell new units, rather than resales there will always be people like the Munns.

[Bjauck]

First of all I agree with you except for "the right to occupy."
From the article, less than 5% of the residents understand it,and the problems only surface when the resident has died,and it is left for the family to sort out.
As you know sorting out a loved one's estate is not pleasant, and is usually done while grieving. Having an estate tied up, for as was the case for the Munns a year, while being charged ongoing fees for 6 months is totally un acceptable.
Yes I know your mother's unit was tidied up straight away.This should be the norm for all villages.
While it is more profitable for them to sell new units, rather than resales there will always be people like the Munns.

Deceased estates in my family have taken at least six months to sort out - there has usually been something that it is not straight forward. The House involves ongoing expenses and the palaver of its sale. However I understand that some people who buy an ORA may wish to share in any capital gains (and share in any capital losses and the uncertainty and expense of finding a subsequent purchaser.)

[Beagle]

I think weekly fees should stop when the resident dies and the estate should be paid out within a certain timeframe (such as 6 months) irrespective of whether the unit has been occupied by a new incoming resident or not. If those are the changes you're after Percy then I completely agree mate, some reform is needed.

We still need to get probate sorted, (was at the lawyers this morning getting that process underway) but yes absolutely, I feel very fortunate that we're being paid out promptly....hasn't always been the case with the Peninsula Club retirement village, one of my clients found it took them, (from vague memory) nearly 2 years to get paid after his mother died.

[percy]

I think weekly fees should stop when the resident dies and the estate should be paid out within a certain timeframe (such as 6 months) irrespective of whether the unit has been occupied by a new incoming resident or not. If those are the changes you're after Percy then I completely agree mate, some reform is needed.

Yes we are in agreement.

[Waltzing]

Interesting posts from MR B and DIC SNOOP. Many thanks.

RV's are complex models and i wonder if anyone has had the time to read the review . Certainly one for a very very rainy day.

[Bjauck]

I think weekly fees should stop when the resident dies and the estate should be paid out within a certain timeframe (such as 6 months) irrespective of whether the unit has been occupied by a new incoming resident or not. If those are the changes you're after Percy then I completely agree mate, some reform is needed...

After a couple of decades the RVA 2003 probably needs a tidy up. I think it may be unrealistic to expect weekly fees to stop on death. With rental housing, rent is still payable by the Estate for a time after death. With home ownership expenses are payable until the house sale settlement. It would seem reasonable to me that under an ORA occupation the requirement to continue paying village fees would fall somewhere between the obligations with home ownership and those under a Rental agreement.

There should definitely be a time limit for the repayment of the ORA balance, to ensure the re-sale of the unit remains a priority.

[peat]

Interesting posts from MR B and DIC SNOOP. Many thanks.

RV's are complex models and i wonder if anyone has had the time to read the review . Certainly one for a very very rainy day.

Jenny Ruth a journalist from Business Desk ridiculed it. She described it as shoddy facile and asinine, so thats not mincing words.

CFFC paper on retirement villages was shoddy work | BusinessDesk (paywall)