Retirement Village Reforms Petition Reaches First 100 Signatures

A consumer driven retirement village reforms petition reaches first 100 signatures.

Retirement village resident Les Scobie started an on-line petition to all governments pushing for meaningful reforms to retirement village laws throughout Australia.

The on-line petition can be reached at this link - https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/retirement-village-reforms

His petition places particular emphasis on the following areas -

Implement retirement village reforms inclusive of the following:-
1. Create greater fairness in the financial outcomes for residents for the provision of residential accommodation to older Australians.
2. Total revision of all Retirement Villages Legislation.
3. Easier access to the law for residents through the appointment of an industry Ombudsman.
4. Simpler contracts.
5. Greater clarity as to who is responsible for ongoing costs.
6. Amendment to the legislated definition of a retirement village to enable occupancy by way of a Residential Tenancies Agreement.
7. Outlaw the Deferred Management Fee model where the in-going fee does not reflect a relevant discount to the asking price of a commensurate property within the general community.

Having reached the first 100 signatures Mr. Scobie now wants to move to 200, 300 and beyond so as to send a firm message to both state and federal governments.

In a recent article in his home town newspaper entitled 'Retirees Beware' Mr. Scobie spoke of the pressing need for such reforms based on his own lived experience and his background in finance. - https://wangarattachronicle.com.au/2018/04/11/retirees-beware/

Mr. Scobie has produced tables showing the potential devastating impact on the capital value of a retiree from living in a retirement village.

Retirement Village Reforms Petition Reaches First 100 Signatures

The on-line petition can be reached at this link - https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/retirement-village-reforms



 

Aged Care Reform Campaign

Aged Care Reform Campaign - Aged Care Weekly reports on a new grass roots campaign for Aged Care Reform called Aged Care Reform – A Community Campaign.

You can support the campaign by signing a petition here :- https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/urgent-aged-care-reform

"I did not start out seeking Aged Care Reform. In fact, when I told people that I wanted to pursue a career in aged care, I usually got quite similar responses across the board.

“My Mum/Dad is in a nursing home. The staff are always so busy!”

“Mum won’t let me complain but…”

“I’d rather die than ever go into a nursing home.” 

When I began to study for my Diploma of Nursing, on our very first day at TAFE, our lecturer asked us all where we saw ourselves as future nurses.

I said aged care, of course.

I told all my friends that one day I would own a nursing home. I was already planning my post-diploma study path in geriatric nursing – aged care was where I wanted to be.

Fast Forward

Fast forward three years, and I don’t work in aged care. After a decade of working as a community personal care and disability support worker, I am now an Enrolled Nurse working in acute care.

I was rapt when I secured a job as a personal care worker while I was a nursing student on my work placement in a residential facility. You couldn’t wipe the smile off of my face! I hoped it would lead to future opportunities to work as an aged care nurse.

MY DETERMINATION TO FIGHT FOR CHANGE HAS BEEN IGNITED BY WHAT FEELS LIKE CONSTANT NEGATIVE PRESS

However, I lasted just eleven short months before I was sitting in my car outside work, crying and not wanting to go inside before my shift. I didn’t sleep. In fact, I was anxious and jumpy. I was short-tempered and stressed at home because I couldn’t be at work – at least not in front of my residents. My colleagues and I vented and leaned on one another constantly, but it was still like working in a pressure cooker full of stress, about to explode. There was no one particular reason that it was like that – there was a pile of problems, and there was no one to fix them."

Read the full story here:- https://agedcareweekly.com.au/2018/01/aged-care-reform-a-community-campaign/

You can support the campaign by signing a petition here :- https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/urgent-aged-care-reform

Aged Care Reform Campaign - Website -  https://urgentagedcarereformnow.com/



[blog_subscription_form]

Retiree Warning

Retiree Warning - Seniors locked in battle with Geelong lifestyle village.

Channel 9 Network A Current Affair reports:-

Full story available here:-   Seniors locked in battle with Geelong lifestyle village

"There are new calls for an overhaul of Australia's retirement and lifestyle villages, after a contract technicality caught out seniors at a gated community in Geelong.

Charlie Sciberras has had a holiday unit at Pelican Shores for more than 40 years, but the 62-year-old recently decided to sell the property to help fund his retirement.

The company claimed a clause in the contract meant they had control over the unit, and Mr Sciberras couldn't sell it on his terms, even though it had been in the family for decades.

Town planner Bill Kusznirczuk says property contracts are far too difficult and confusing, particularly for retirement and lifestyle villages.

He wants the Government to review the entire industry.

"I think it'd be prudent for the Federal government to initiate a review of retirement villages and lifestyle villages and how they can better improve the offer that's being given at the moment," he said."

Read the full story here:-   Seniors locked in battle with Geelong lifestyle village

Retiree Warning

[blog_subscription_form]

Benchmark Retirement Village Legislation

Benchmark Retirement Village Legislation - The Hon Michael McCormack MP the federal minister responsible for Consumer Affairs sites has proposed South Australian retirement village laws as  the new benchmark  for other states to consider.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/lifestyle/federal-government-tells-states-to-create-uniform-retirement-village-laws-to-protect-seniors/news-story/43a69d3620f342eb215da484d0e54b32

An initial examination however on just one point shows that outgoing residents will have to wait 18 months to get their money back after leaving the village.  Even when a new village resident has paid their in-going amount a village operator has no obligation to repay the outgoing amount until the expiration of the 18 month period.

This does not seem much of a benchmark for other states to follow. This area of retirement village life has long been a source of angst for outgoing residents as they try to move on with their life.

Is this new emphasis on fresh retirement village laws and protections for consumers truly the object of the exercise or is it just a process to ensure operators can generate the profits that they (the operators ) demand.




[blog_subscription_form]

Legislate or Educate

Legislate or Educate - Will Retirement Village legislators stop the industry problems with tighter legislative controls and greater consumer protections or will they simply continue on the current path of so called educate retirees in the hope retirees can identify the problem for themselves.

This policy given the current public outcry seems to have failed many Australian retirees.

In the past the retirement industry has managed to persuade governments that greater consumer protections would come at the cost of industry growth and innovation. Governments have held the view that it was better to educate than to legislate.

Report after report identified the issues, the issues in 2007 were the very same issues today. Some argue that it is the very basis of retirement villages, the Deferred Management Fee model which has sent the industry on this path, a system designed for charity organisation decades ago, and that to just buy or rent is the best simplest reform to make.

The property purchase market and the property rental market are mature markets, well legislated, and very well understood by retirees. It is now 2017, let us hope we will not be back here in 2027 discussing these same issues.



 




[blog_subscription_form]

Influenza Deaths Board Accountability

Ten flu deaths at nursing home amid serious management failure

Influenza Deaths Board Accountability - The Board of Governors of St. Johns Village Wangaratta is showing no signs of accepting any responsibility for this influenza deaths tragedy.

 

•  In early 2016 the Director of Care position was made redundant.


• The Board introduced a flatter management structure


• The Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation Victorian branch alleged that St John’s had breached its enterprise bargaining agreement by not employing a director of care – and consequently jeopardised its community reputation.


• Following a letter from the Board's lawyers claiming that they believed the statement was defamatory the ANMFV apologised for any inference that the Board may have failed in its governance obligations.


• Mr. Morris was appointed as acting Care Services Manager.


• On July 10 2017 Dr Brett Sutton, Deputy Chief Health Officer (Communicable Disease), Victoria issued a warning to all Victorian Health professionals and consumers that seasonal influenza rates are up, with the overall number of confirmed influenza cases in Victoria up 81 per cent compared to the same time in the calendar year 2016.


• The Board of Governors ultimately responsible for the operation of the facility includes a medical practitioner and also a member that claims a specialty in infection prevention and control.


• August 7 first signs of illness amongst residents.


• August 16 first death.


• Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt instructs the quality agency to conduct a review audit of the St John’s Wangaratta aged care facility to assess their performance against the 44 accreditation standards, which includes infection control systems and processes.


• Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt announced that the Wangaratta St. John’s Nursing Home failed multiple outcomes after an audit by the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency.


• One such area listed as a fail was 1.2 Regulatory Compliance.
  “The organisation’s management does not have an effective system to identify and promote compliance with all relevant legislation, regulatory requirements, professional standards and guidelines.”

Although the Board of Governors cannot be held responsible for influenza entering the nursing home they do carry a responsibility and an accountability for what happened once it did.  Is it a strength or a weakness of an organisation that simply sheets home the blame to individuals who were placed in positions but may subsequently be shown to be without the necessary experience to fulfil the role.

Whatever any shortcomings of the now resigned Mr. Morris may be, he was appointed to the position in an acting capacity by senior management.  Whatever any shortcomings of the now resigned CEO Mr. Phelps may be, he was appointed to the position by the Board.

The responsibility and accountability for this tragedy does not rest just with the sacrificial lambs Mr. Morris and Mr. Phelps alone.  If the buck doesn't stop with the Board then who does it stop with?


[blog_subscription_form]

St Johns Nursing Home Fails AACQA Audit

St Johns Nursing Home Fails AACQA Audit - Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt announced that the Wangaratta  St. John's Nursing Home failed multiple outcomes after an audit by the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency.

The report was ordered  by the Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt after 10 residents died during an outbreak of influenza at the facility.

The Quality Agency audit found that the Nursing Home failed to meet 12 of the 44 expected outcomes from the Accreditation Standards.

The full report can be downloaded here :- http://www.aacqa.gov.au/publications/reports/stjohnsretirementvillagenursinghome4481-5.docx/@@download/file/stjohnsretirementvillagenursinghome4481-5.docx

Below is a summary of the audit findings for the Nursing Home section of the complex.

The information obtained through the audit indicates the Nursing Home did not meet expected outcomes.

Standard 1 – Management systems, staffing and organisational development

1.1 Continuous improvement

“The organisation does not have an effective system that demonstrates a proactive approach to continuous improvement across the Accreditation Standards.”

1.2 Regulatory compliance

“Management did not ensure staff reported allegations of elder abuse in a timely manner. Management did not ensure the respiratory outbreak case list was complete and reflected all deaths and hospitalisations. Management did not ensure all deaths and hospitalisations related to the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017 were consistently notified to the Department of Health and Human Services in a timely manner within 24 hours. ”

1.3 Education and staff development

“Management and staff cannot demonstrate they had the appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, contain and manage the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. These skill and knowledge deficits impacted negatively on care recipients.”

1.4 Comments and complaints

“During the review audit, stakeholders raised concerns about staffing levels, skin care, pain management, continence and clinical care during the influenza and respiratory outbreak in August 2017 and September 2017. In addition, they raised concerns about infection control, cleaning and the level of communication during that time.”

1.6 Human resource management

“The organisation did not maintain a sufficient number of appropriately skilled and qualified staff during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. There was not always a registered nurse on duty and the on call nurse did not always come in when requested after hours. ”

1.8 Information systems

“The organisation cannot demonstrate their information systems during the recent respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017 were effective. The policies, procedures and flowchart do not reflect current Australian Government and Victorian Government infection control guidelines.”

Standard 2 – Health and personal care

2.1 Continuous improvement

“Clinical monitoring and reporting mechanisms are ineffective and management cannot show key performance data that exceeded specified risk thresholds has been actioned, for example, falls, hydration status and number of medications prescribed.”

2.2 Regulatory compliance

“Management did not ensure qualified staff were always available and responsible for assessing and monitoring care recipients’ clinical care needs during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. Staff did not always work according to legislative requirements or within their scope of practice in relation to verification of death, management of syringe drivers and controlled medication.”

2.4 Clinical care

“During the influenza and respiratory outbreak in August 2017 and September 2017 a number of care recipients did not receive appropriate clinical care. Three of ten care recipients who died with influenza or respiratory illness were not referred to a medical officer at the onset of their illness.”

2.8 Pain management

“Care recipients' pain was not effectively managed during the respiratory and influenza outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. Staff said care recipients who were unwell during the outbreak died in pain because they could not provide timely repositioning and pain management resources were not always available. Pain relief medication was not always available for care recipients and pain charting was not always completed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of pain relief measures.”

2.11 Skin care

“During the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017 a number of care recipients did not receive appropriate skin care. Seven of ten care recipients who died with respiratory illness had outdated information in assessments and care plans impacting on the delivery of care recipients’ skin care needs. Four of ten care recipients developed pressure areas during the outbreak with no action taken to initiate wound management plans or ensure treatments were ongoing. ”

Standard 3 – Care recipient lifestyle

3.2 Regulatory compliance

“Staff who received allegations of elder abuse did not always report the allegations in accordance with regulatory compliance obligations. Management said until September 2017 they were not aware they had to maintain a consolidated record of incidents where discretion not to report is used. The new consolidated record does not capture all incidents of care recipient to care recipient aggression.”

Standard 4 – Physical environment and safe systems

4.1 Continuous improvement

“Monitoring and reporting mechanisms to gather infection data, analyse data for trends and improvement opportunities are not effective. Infection data provided to the home’s benchmarking service has been inaccurate, resulting in performance monitoring and reporting that is incorrect. Systemic failures were identified in relation to the monitoring and actioning of the processes within the quality system in relation to Standard 4 Physical environment and safe systems.”

4.2 Regulatory compliance

“Management did not have systems to ensure management and staff followed all relevant guidelines in identifying, actioning and monitoring the influenza and respiratory outbreak in a timely manner from the onset of symptoms. Management was not aware of their responsibilities in relation to the reporting of the hospitalisation or deaths of care recipients with influenza or respiratory illness within 24 hours and did not comply with these requirements. ”

4.3 Education and staff development

“The home did not have an effective system to ensure management and staff had the required knowledge and skills to identify and contain infection during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. Processes to ensure staff had appropriate knowledge and skills to perform their roles effectively during the outbreak did not occur until infection control education commenced on 22 August 2017.”

4.7 Infection control

“St John's Retirement Village Nursing Home did not implement a coordinated and timely infection control program that was effective in identifying and containing infection during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. Management did not implement timely and effective infection control measures and did not provide co-ordination, direction and management during the outbreak to control the spread of infection.”

4.8 Catering, cleaning and laundry

“Infection control cleaning procedures were not consistently implemented during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. Five cleaning staff and the environmental services manager were on unplanned leave at times during the outbreak and the leisure and lifestyle coordinator with no recent infection control training supervised environmental services staff. Cleaning shifts were not consistently replaced and when filled, the shifts were not always replaced with staff who had been trained in outbreak infection control.”


[blog_subscription_form]

Aged Care Influenza Reviews

Aged Care Influenza Reviews - The Hon Ken Wyatt AM, MP, Minister for Aged Care released the results of the AACQA  Influenza reviews for the St. John's aged care facility in Wangaratta Victoria and the Uniting AgeWell Strathdevon facility in Latrobe Tasmania.

The St. John's Wangaratta facility failed 13 of 44 outcomes with 12 deaths and the Uniting AgeWell Latrobe facility failed 5 of 44 outcomes with 6 deaths.

"The Australian Government today released detailed reviews of aged care homes in Victoria and Tasmania that suffered deadly influenza outbreaks this winter, which revealed poor facility management and low staff vaccination rates.
Federal Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt ordered the review by the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency of the St Johns facilities in Wangaratta and the Strathdevon facility in Latrobe during the influenza outbreak in August and September.
“These review audits reveal management errors, especially in infection control at the two sites,” Minister Wyatt said.
“The flu season affected aged care residents and staff and the homes’ infection control and contingency plans were overwhelmed but it was unacceptable.
“Staff vaccination rates in both homes were low, with only around one-third vaccinated ahead of the outbreaks, and dozens of staff were subsequently struck down with the flu.”
In response, Health Minister Greg Hunt has moved to make it mandatory for aged care facilities to implement flu vaccination programs for staff, with Chief Medical Officer Dr Brendan Murphy currently examining all options to increase vaccination rates.
These reviews have found that at both sites, the homes’ management did not provide enough additional support and the professional guidance that was required to cope with the outbreak.
Minister Wyatt said the Quality Agency had now greatly increased its focus on the issue of infection control at all aged care facilities.
“The Agency is reviewing infection control practices, including a mandatory survey of all facilities’ outbreak management and staff vaccination rates, which is due for completion next week,” said Minister Wyatt.
“Results will be collated, then the Agency will focus on and engage with all homes which have registered low vaccination rates or difficulties managing the 2017 flu season.”
The Quality Agency is also running staff seminars in every aged care jurisdiction at present, to strengthen quality monitoring around infection control and increase staff and resident vaccinations.
Targeted aged care communication and education materials will be developed for the 2018 influenza season to further promote staff influenza vaccination.
All aged care providers have also been asked to review their infection control practices, to ensure that they are well equipped to manage and respond to an outbreak.
“Providing safe, quality aged care for our senior Australians is non-negotiable,” Minister Wyatt said.
“I am closely monitoring developments, and ensuring all Government-funded aged care facilities are prepared for infectious outbreaks, especially influenza, is a top priority.”
The reports are available at:
St John’s Retirement Village Hostel
http://www.aacqa.gov.au/publications/reports#b_start=0&c8=3293
St John’s Retirement Village Nursing Home
http://www.aacqa.gov.au/publications/reports#b_start=0&c8=4481
Uniting AgeWell Strathdevon
http://www.aacqa.gov.au/publications/reports#b_start=0&c5=strathdevon&c8=8405

Aged Care Influenza Reviews

[blog_subscription_form]

St Johns Hostel Fails AACQA Audit

St Johns Hostel Fails AACQA Audit - Wangaratta Aged Care facility St. John's Village has failed multiple outcomes following an audit by the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency.

The report was ordered  by the Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt after 10 residents died from influenza.

Following a review audit the Quality Agency decided that the Hostel section of the complex failed to meet 12 of the 44 expected outcomes of the Accreditation Standards.

The full report is available for download here :- http://www.aacqa.gov.au/publications/reports/stjohnsretirementvillagehostel3293-5.docx/@@download/file/stjohnsretirementvillagehostel3293-5.docx

The following is a summary of the audit findings for the Hostel section of the complex.

The information obtained through the audit indicates the Hostel does not meet the following expected outcomes:

Standard 1 – Management systems, staffing and organisational development

1.1 Continuous improvement

“The organisation does not have an effective system that demonstrates a proactive approach to continuous improvement across the Accreditation Standards. ”

1.2Regulatory compliance

“Management did not have systems to ensure management and staff followed all relevant guidelines in identifying, actioning and monitoring the influenza and respiratory outbreak in a timely manner from the onset of symptoms. ”

1.3 Education and staff development

“Management and staff cannot demonstrate they had the appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, contain and manage the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. These skill and knowledge deficits impacted negatively on care recipients.”

1.4 Comments and complaints

“During the review audit, stakeholders raised concerns about staffing levels and clinical care during the influenza and respiratory outbreak in August 2017 and September 2017. In addition, they raised concerns about infection control, cleaning and the level of communication during that time. ”

1.6 Human resource management

“The organisation did not maintain a sufficient number of appropriately skilled and qualified staff during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017. ”

1.8 Information systems

“The respiratory outbreak case list used to provide accurate information to the Department of Health and Human Services was incomplete and did not reflect all care recipients’ hospitalisations and deaths.”

Standard 2 – Health and personal care

2.1 Continuous improvement

“Clinical monitoring and reporting mechanisms are ineffective and management cannot show key performance data that exceeded specified risk thresholds has been actioned, for example, falls, hydration status and number of medications prescribed.”

2.4 Clinical care

“During the influenza and respiratory outbreak in August 2017 and September 2017 a number of care recipients did not receive appropriate clinical care. Not all care recipients who received treatment for respiratory illness were referred to a medical officer at the onset of their illness.”

Standard 3 – Care recipient lifestyle

3.2 Regulatory compliance

“Management said until September 2017 they were not aware they had to maintain a consolidated record of incidents where discretion not to report is used.”

Standard 4 – Physical environment and safe systems

4.1 Continuous improvement

“Systemic failures were identified in relation to the monitoring and actioning of the processes within the quality system in relation to Standard 4 Physical environment and safe systems. ”

4.2 Regulatory compliance

“Management were not aware of their responsibilities in relation to the reporting of the hospitalisation of care recipients with influenza or respiratory illness within 24 hours and did not comply with these requirements. ”

4.3 Education and staff development

“The home did not have an effective system to ensure management and staff had the required knowledge and skills to identify and contain infection during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017.”

4.7 Infection control

“Organisational policies and procedures to direct staff response during a respiratory outbreak are not in line with current Australian Government and Victorian Government infection control guidelines that define an outbreak as three or more people (care recipients or staff) showing symptoms within the same three day period. ”

4.8 Catering, cleaning and laundry

“Management cannot demonstrate that hospitality services are provided in a way that enhances care recipients’ quality of life and the staff working environment. Infection control cleaning procedures were not consistently implemented during the influenza and respiratory outbreak of August 2017 and September 2017.”

St Johns Hostel Fails AACQA Audit.




[blog_subscription_form]

ACQA Reports St. John's Aged Care Failures

ACQA Reports St. John's Aged Care Failures - Melbourne Age in an article by Michael Bachelard and Ebony Bowden reports -

Ten flu deaths at nursing home amid serious management failure

"A fatal flu outbreak at a Wangaratta nursing home, where 10 residents died of influenza and two others from respiratory illness, was worsened by serious management failures, a scathing government audit has found.

In response, the St John's Village nursing home accepted the resignation of its own former acting care services manager and referred him to his professional body for potential sanction.

A federal government audit of the St John's Village home, which was ordered after the catastrophic outbreak, has found it took days after infections began in August for management to report the outbreak."

Read the detailed article here:- http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/ten-flu-deaths-at-nursing-home-amid-serious-management-failure-20171113-gzk29h.html

[blog_subscription_form]

Uniform Retirement Village Laws

Uniform Retirement Village Laws -

Herald Sun reports :-

Federal Government tells states to create uniform retirement village laws to protect seniors

"STATES have been put on notice to change their laws to better protect their retirement village residents and their families or face federal intervention.

Federal Consumer Affairs Minister Michael McCormack has given state counterparts until the first half of next year to create plans to overhaul legislation covering villages, with evidence lax and un-enforced laws were being manipulated by unscrupulous owners and operators."

Take this link to see the full comprehensive story:- Federal Government tells states to create uniform laws to protect seniors


[blog_subscription_form]

Capital Value Lost Percentage

Capital Value Lost Percentage - The table below show the loss of capital value suffered by a retirement village resident expressed as a percentage of the in-going amount paid.

Also shown is a comparison calculated at an identical growth rate in property value for those who may remain in the family home.

Governments through incentives and legislation encourage older Australians to make the move from the traditional family home into retirement accommodation such as a retirement village. Although there are aspects of life in a retirement village that are beneficial to the retiree, the reduction in capital value is clearly excessive and does not represent fair and reasonable value for those intangible benefits as claimed by the industry.





[blog_subscription_form]

Abandoned residents spark village warning

Brisbane Times in an artcle by Adele Ferguson reports -

'Steer clear' - abandoned residents spark village warning

" "Stay well clear of retirement villages," say the families of residents and former residents at Berkeley Living, a retirement village that saw state authorities forced to intervene on Friday evening after unpaid staff walked out.

What is equally shocking is that the retirement village has been dogged with issues for years, yet the regulators have been missing in action.

Earlier this month Fairfax Media revealed that Berkeley, run by convicted criminal Stephen Snowden, stands accused of not paying more than 30 families when the units sold. In some cases they were on-sold to new residents, who didn't get paid when the units were re-sold. Snowden denies the allegations and has called the families "scumbags". He denies not paying staff.

A recent media investigation into one of the biggest operators Aveo laid bare concerning business practices including punitive fees, churning of residents, complex contracts, misleading marketing promises and questionable safety and emergency services. In the case of its Aveo Way contract, the exit fees are 35 per cent after three years, and its Freedom Aged Care contracts exit fees are 40 per cent after two years. This means if a resident pays $600,000 for a Freedom unit, then leaves or dies after two years the exit fees are $240,000.

It is why the federal government needs to stop procrastinating and launch an inquiry into the sector or adopt recommendations made back in a 2007 parliamentary inquiry and regulate the sector federally.

If there was any doubt, it should take a look at the Victorian government, which recently held a parliamentary inquiry then outlined a set of industry reforms that are a damp squib.

The Andrews government's idea of what reform looks like prompted various housing residents and advocates to issue the following scathing statement: "The pleas of residents have fallen on deaf ears, with many of the proposed reforms pushed off into the long grass of more reviews."

What was particularly flabbergasting was the decision not to create an ombudsman to help residents resolve disputes, despite the overwhelming evidence. The report said "significant further analysis and evidence are required before a position on this recommendation can be determined". "

Full story available here:-  'Steer clear' - residents spark village warning

Real Retirement Village Reform

Real Retirement Village reform outlined by Paul Latimer - Swinburne University of Technology - Swinburne Law School

It's Time for Federal Regulation of Retirement Villages

"As Australia’s population ages, increasing numbers of seniors move to a growing number of retirement villages. Unlike time shares, which are ‘managed investment schemes’ and therefore regulated as ‘financial products’ under corporate law administered nationally by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the Commonwealth withdrew from the regulation of retirement villages in the 1980s on the basis that at that time they were local, usually run by religious bodies and charities and were not of national concern. The regulation of retirement villages was taken over by the States and Territories under their non-uniform Retirement Villages Acts and the common law. Until then retirement villages, often indistinguishable from Commonwealth regulated timeshares, were regulated in the original State and Territory Uniform Companies Acts in 1961 as ‘interests’, and then in later Commonwealth legislation as ‘prescribed interests’ by the forebear of ASIC, the then National Companies and Securities Commission (NCSC) with the State and Territory Corporate Affairs Commissions as its ‘delegates’.

Today retirement villages, which are largely owned and managed by the corporate sector, raise many issues of national concern such as accountability, fees and the rights of residents. Some aspects of retirement villages such as directors’ duties, fundraising, prospectuses and unregistered schemes are regulated as corporations by ASIC under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), but retirement villages are not regulated as ‘financial products’ under corporate law.

This article challenges the effectiveness of State and Territory regulation of retirement villages and calls for federal regulation of retirement villages by bringing retirement villages into the definition of ‘financial product’ in the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and in the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth). As financial products, retirement villages would then be regulated by Commonwealth legislation which deals with financial services and financial markets, as regulated by ASIC. These laws include consumer protection provisions such as the prohibition of misleading or deceptive conduct, unfair contract terms, unconscionable conduct, licensing and high standards for those in the retirement village industry. This would result in a return to Commonwealth leadership of the regulation of retirement villages to harmonise and to consolidate the current mix of State and Territory regulation with federal legislation including an enforceable Retirement Villages Code of Conduct."

Full paper here:   It's Time for Federal Regulation of Retirement Villages



 

Governments Push Financial Doom

Governments Push Financial Doom - Federal & State Governments are actively directing many retirees toward financial doom despite being advised of the negative financial impact on retirees of their statutory & regulatory actions in the retirement village sector.

The poor response of the Victorian Government to their own retirement living enquiry has received criticism including an observation that "Sadly the Victorian government has been seduced by the industry notion that better consumer protections are at the cost of retirement village innovation and growth."


The above was part of a summary statement on Page 28 of the LSIC report from the committee in March 2007 despite hundreds upon hundreds of retirement village residents together with consumer advocate organisations, providing evidence to the contrary in their submissions to the enquiry.

In June 2007 the ABC 4 Corners program 'Bleed Them Dry Until They Die' aired showing statements such as above to be a representation of the failure of legislators and regulators to fully understand what was and still is happening to older Australians in the retirement village sector.

Problems with the retirement village industry can be summarised into some key areas:-

1. Low operational standards of some operators.


2. Outdated legislative frameworks.


3. A failure of regulatory bodies to police and enforce breaches of law.


4. A failure to provide easy access to the law and justice for retirement village residents.


5. The continued use of the retirement village 'Deferred Management Fee' business model designed for charity organisations of decades past.

Federal & State Governments through statutory and regulatory frameworks are encouraging retirees to step into the financial mire of retirement villages. Legislators don't understand or won't acknowledge the negative financial implications for retirees of the deferred management fee model used in this industry sector. A business model designed for charity organisations of decades past not the modern, slick, profit driven, private enterprise organisations of today.

The following example shows the potential financial impact on a home owner should the home owner decide to sell the family home and downsize into a retirement village. The example uses common contractural parameters found within the industry although there can be variations.

The example shows a difference in outcomes over just 7 years of nearly $750,000.00.

The positive social outcomes of living in a retirement village are acknowledged but at what financial cost to retirees. The outcomes are financially debilitating for many retirees and yet an outcome as described above is actively encouraged and even promoted by Federal & State Governments.

It is important to note that the financial damage done in the example above is not done by bad contracts, by bad operators, by poor legislation, by slow acting regulators. The financial damage done is from just one primary thing the deferred management fee business model.

Legislators and regulators can tinker with contracts, fact sheets, dislosure statements, access to the law and while all these areas are important nothing will stop the financial damage done to retirees unless the deferred management fee business model itself is outlawed or heavily reformed.

In this new century is there really room for a consumer product that even lawyers and financial advisors cannot fully explain to their clients.Should not the retirement village industry be based simply on you either buy it or you rent it, they are two concepts everybody understands even legislators and regulators.

Governments Push Financial Doom

[blog_subscription_form]

Infection Control Procedures

Australian Ageing Agenda reports -

"The Minister for Aged Care has ordered an “urgent review” into the infectious disease management practices of all aged care facilities following an increase in flu-related deaths in residential aged care this winter.

Minister for Aged Care Ken Wyatt told AAA the Australian Aged Care Quality Agency would “examine the management of infectious diseases outbreak procedures, including vaccinations of staff and residents, across the aged care sector.”

Questions posed by AAA to Minister Wyatt regarding the scope and nature of the agency’s review were referred to the quality agency.

The details of how the examination will be conducted and what it will involve are currently being finalised, a spokesperson for the quality agency told AAA on Wednesday morning.

The review announcement came on Sunday when Minister for Health Greg Hunt and Minister for Aged Care Key Wyatt also announced that Australia’s chief medical officer Professor Brendan Murphy would look at ways to boost vaccination rates among residential aged care workers including making the flu vaccination compulsory.

Both investigations have been prompted by the deaths of now eight residents at St John’s Retirement Village in Wangaratta in Victoria and reports of fatalities from the flu at Strathdevon Aged Care in Tasmania.

“Older people are always vulnerable to the flu, but the many deaths this year are unacceptable,” Mr Wyatt said.

Minister Wyatt said he has also instructed the quality agency to conduct a review audit of the St John’s Wangaratta and the Strathdevon aged care facilities to assess their performance against the 44 accreditation standards, which includes infection control systems and processes.

“The quality agency has been advised that the Strathdevon home is being reopened, meaning this review audit will begin on Monday, 11 September,” Mr Wyatt said.

“The review audit of St John’s Wangaratta is also expected to start next week but this will depend on when the home is reopened,” he said.

The completed review audit reports will be provided to the secretary of the Department of Health and will be published on the quality agency’s website."

 



 

Act In Good Faith

" In the end the prospective resident signs the documents in good faith and hopes that the village owner/developer has acted in good faith also. "

Many residents in retirement villages around Australia in 2017 would relate to the statement made by Mr. Robert Boyne to the House of Representatives Standing Committee enquiry into Older People and the Law way back in 2007.

Mr. Boyne advised the committee, " In the end the prospective resident signs the documents in good faith and hopes that the village owner/developer has acted in good faith also. "

Given the recent revelations highlighted on the ABC 4 Corners program and in the Sydney Morning Herald and Age newspapers, village residents could be forgiven for feeling that this 'act in good faith' by the residents through the years 2007 to 2017 has not been matched by village owners/developers in a multitude of cases.

7 Deaths @ St. Johns Wangaratta

ABC News Reports:-

Seven elderly residents from a nursing home in Victoria's north-east have died during a flu outbreak, the state's health authorities say. The deaths occurred at St John's Retirement Village in Wangaratta, which is run by the Anglican Church.

The Department of Health and Human Services said the retirement village had 146 residents and 200 staff, with 123 people affected by flu during an outbreak over the past few weeks.

The seven residents who died were aged between 70 and 94, and had other conditions that made them particularly susceptible.

The department said it had worked with the facility to manage the outbreak and ensure strict infection control measures.

It said the outbreak was now subsiding.

Wangaratta Bishop John Parkes said the outbreak has been an "extraordinary and unusual event" unlike any they had ever experienced before.

"It has been a very difficult time," he said.

"Of course the tragedy is we've lost seven residents who are part of the St John's family and that is dreadful for them, for their families and for the staff and the organisation."

"But we mourn the loss of any resident and seven [dead] in one influenza epidemic is a tragedy for their families and for us."

Thirteen people are still sick at the home, which will be in lock-down for at least another week as long as no-one else develops flu.

Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt said as soon as the outbreak is over, the facility will be audited.

"My thoughts are with the families of those affected," he said.

"The Australian Aged Care Quality Agency will conduct an urgent review audit of the Wangaratta retirement and nursing home facility."

Victoria's acting chief health officer Dr Brett Sutton said the flu is particularly dangerous for frail people in aged care facilities.

"The deaths have occurred mostly in the last week, they were all in elderly people in their 70s [and] into their 90s, all with pre-existing conditions so they were vulnerable to significant illness," he said.

"It's a reminder that flu is really deadly."

There have been twice as many outbreaks of the flu this year than there were in 2016, with 208 respiratory outbreaks in aged care homes this year compared with 104 for the same period last year.

The health department said there had been more than 11,300 confirmed cases in Victoria in 2017, with many more notifications still expected.

"We've had aged care facilities hit particularly hard this year with a record number of outbreaks in those settings and we've had elderly people in general affected more than most years," Dr Sutton said.

"They [the elderly] are vaccinated in aged care facilities largely, including this one, but the vaccine doesn't work as well in the very elderly so it's incumbent upon those who are visiting and the staff in those facilities to try and be immunised and to exclude themselves from work if they're unwell."

 

Has Aveo Killed The Golden Goose?

Has Aveo killed the Goose that lays the Golden Egg?

Recent ABC 4 Corners presentation and Fairfax media articles drew attention to problems within the retirement village industry and highlighted issues within some Aveo villages. Since these presentations aired there has been public outcry for reforms with state governments, regulators, and even the commonwealth government making noises about immediate and long term reforms to the industry. Ongoing fees, complex contracts and the complexity of the Deferred Management Fee calculations have now come to the attention of legislators through television, newsprint, and the public response to them.

The focus on the industry has been so strong that welcome reform may now come to the Deferred Management Fee model used by most retirement village operators. The Deferred Management Fee model of retiree living was initially designed for charitable groups where residential accommodation for retirees was made available at an entry cost below general values, the deferred payment being part 2 of a two step payment plan. The concept works well so long as retirees obtain accommodation at an initial cost well below market values. Today the DMF model is still used but retirees now pay an entry amount more commensurate with a purchase price but without obtaining ownership of the property.

In 2007 a House of Representatives Committee report into Older people and the law recommended that the matter of exit fees be fully reviewed including consideration as to whether they should be abolished. In light of current industry revelations and how far the Deferred Management Fee model has moved from the original çharity organisation concept, it is clear an opportunity was missed by legislators and regulators to improve protections for retirement village residents from as far back as 2007.



 

The amount of attention drawn to the plight of Australian retirees in retirement villages by the Aveo exposure begs the very question, why the deferred management fee model is still permitted given the accelerated transfer of capital value from retirees to operators as a result of this model.

Australia generally uses the well understood property ownership or property rental models, both these models of residential accommodation deliver dramatically better financial outcomes for retirees.



The table below quantifies the capital value lost by the retiree and the capital value gained by the operator in just one 7 year occupancy period. Just one unit in one village plus the operator has the capacity to repeat this scenario over multiple occupancies of this one unit during the life of the village. The average occupancy of a retirement village unit is around 8 years.

The Deferred Management Fee model is truly the goose that lays the golden egg for the retirement village industry.

The following table quantifies the options for a retiree of staying in the family home or renting residential accommodation and compares them to entering a retirement village using the deferred management fee model. The numbers speak for themselves but of course each retiree has to consider issues outside of just dollars and cents when giving consideration to entering a retirement village. The tables show that there is a substantial cost to living in a retirement village beyond just the entry price. Many retirees who have entered retirement villages now consider this cost to be far too high and claim they and/or their professional advisers were unable to identify these punishing impacts before entering.



 

SUMMARY.

The question for legislators and regulators is:

• 
  

  Continue to make reforms to retirement village legislation, regulation, contractural, explanatory information, consumer protections. Reforms made in the hope that retirees will eventually identify the impacts of the deferred management fee model and the sizeable negative impact it will have on the value of their capital base.

  
  


• 
  

  OR

  
  


• 
  

  Create retirement villages that are the same as any other residential accommodation where you either buy it to own outright or you rent it. A residential accommodation model already fully understood by the great majority of retirees with existing legislative and regulatory frameworks and consumer protection mechanisms.

  
  


• 
  

  OR

  
  


• 
  

  Totally reform the current legislative framework that facilitates the deferred management fee model while at the same time prohibiting the rental of retirement accommodation within a legally defined retirement village.

  
  

 

Industry 8 Point Plan Fails Retirees

Industry 8 Point Plan Fails Retirees - The announced Retirement Village industry 8 point plan fails retirees as it masks the retention of the most powerful of all tools available to the industry, the deferred management fee business model. This deferred management fee business model is the goose that lays the golden egg for the industry. See table below:- Click Here

The retirement village industry 8-point improvement plan and why it fails retirees

• Support nationally consistent retirement village legislation and contracts.


• Retvill.net comment - A singular legislative framework under the auspices of the federal government together with a singular model contract is the only outcome that will truly protect consumers. State governments despite the best intentions of some have succumbed to the slick presentations of the industry and shown a lack of desire to protect retirees from the financial ravages of a deferred management fee business model.


• Ensure there are transparent and easy-to-understand descriptions in contracts of entry pricing, ongoing service fees, reinstatement costs and fees and payments relating to departure, so residents have certainty about the costs associated with living in a retirement village.


• 
  

  Retvill.net comment - Transparency and easy-to-understand descriptions although important are not the primary issue here, the primary issue is the very existence of an entry cost (lease/licence) rather than an outright purchase cost or rental. Service fees, maintenance costs on a property not owned by the village resident, reinstatement costs on a property not owned by the village resident, a 'deferred management' fee effectively paid on entry not on exit, the decimation by inflation over time of the refundable portion of the entry cost. All this permitted by government legislation through a deferred management fee model of residential occupancy for older Australians.

  
  


• Encourage all potential residents to seek independent legal advice before signing a contract, and work together with government and the legal profession to make this happen. We will also encourage potential residents to share this information with family members and trusted advisers.  


• Retvill.net comment - Many, many prospective retirement village residents do seek professional advice. Many lawyers, accountants, financial advisers simply do not have a sound knowledge of the longer term impacts of the deferred management fee business model. Encourage is  a word  chosen by the industry because the fear is the use of the word legislated. It is unlikely any lawyer, accountant, financial adviser anywhere in Australia who understands this industry and the deferred fee model would recommend to a client to proceed without a deep understanding and expectation of the financial consequences.


• Improve training and professional support for village managers, sales people and other staff who engage directly with current and potential residents.


• Retvill.net comment - This area is essential if consumers are to be truly protected, however  mandates are required  from legislators and regulators as self regulation, codes of conduct, in-house industry standards have a poor record.  It It is a relatively simple proposition, is the objective of governments and regulators to protect retirees from the worst aspect of the industry and indeed for some from themselves.. If the answer is yes then the actions should be to truly protect them at all levels. 


• Commit to improve industry village accreditation standards and coverage, and support government initiatives to make accreditation a mandatory requirement for operating a village.  


• Retvill.net comment - Accreditation is an essential element  required in the retirement village industry, the very nature of the deferred management fee business model demands it. The markets for outright purchase of residential accommodation or the rental of residential accommodation are competitive and well understood by all parties. The very weakness of the retirement village industry is the fact that deferred management fee model is so little understood by legislators, regulators, professional advisers and particularly retirees.


• Commit to working with the Australian Retirement Village Residents Association to implement an industry Code of Conduct to set and maintain high standards about the marketing and operation of villages, as well as dispute management procedures for all operators and residents.    


• Retvill.net comment - Sorry but a Code of Conduct simply does not work. You only have to look at the Consumer Affairs Victoria retirement village industry code of conduct and the submissions by retirees to the Victorian Government enquiry into the retirement living industry to see the failure of it. Mandated requirements are a necessity together with a framework for compliance enforcement readily available to village residents.


• Commit to the establishment of an efficient and cost-effective government-backed independent dispute resolution process, such as an Ombudsman or Advocate, for disputes that are unable to be solved at a village level.  


• Retvill.net comment - Together with the removal of the legislated blueprint for the deferred management fee business model this is an essential retirement village industry reform. If the cop on the beat can't or won't enforce the law then a new cop is required. A new cop with the capacity to make decisions in a timely manner and sweeping powers to enforce those decisions. Anything less will be a failure of governments to act in the best interests of their citizens.


• Maintain and strengthen the relationship between industry and the Australian Retirement Village Residents Association to make sure resident issues are clearly identified and addressed.    


• Retvill.net comment - Ideal in a perfect world but sadly we do not live in a perfect world however any stronger relationship between owners/operators and retirement village residents is welcome.  The relationship should be between the industry and the representative body from each state. There should be a mandated annual report from each state body representing retirement village residents to the respective state or a national retirement village ombudsman/advocate as a means of helping to ensure matters raised from grass roots level are confirmed as receiving attention at the industry level.

Nothing in the eight point plan as outlined by the industry will save retirement village residents from the substantial negative financial impacts of the deferred management fee business model.

Until there is a 9 point plan with point 9 outlining reforms to the deferred management fee model, retirees will still suffer the decimation of their capital base as outlined in the example below.


See table below:- 




Industry 8 Point Plan Fails Retirees.