Key Facts
- Next of kin are not automatically liable for a relative's care home fees — no law makes family members pay
- Fees fall to the resident (their assets/income), the local authority (if eligible), or the NHS (if CHC applies)
- You become liable only if you sign as a guarantor — and the CMA says forcing unlimited personal liability is "unlikely to be fair under consumer law" (CMA, 2021)
- An attorney or deputy is not personally liable — they use only the resident's money (CMA, 2021)
- The means test assesses the resident's capital: £23,250 upper / £14,250 lower, frozen since 2010 (DHSC, 2025)
- If there's a primary health need, NHS Continuing Healthcare pays 100% — not means-tested (DHSC)
When a parent moves into a care home, a fear surfaces fast: am I going to be made to pay for this? Care homes sometimes hand relatives a contract to sign, and the language can make it sound as though the family is now on the hook for tens of thousands of pounds a year.
Here's the reassurance, grounded in the law: next of kin are not automatically responsible for a relative's care home fees. There are two real traps to avoid — signing as a guarantor, and deprivation of assets — but neither is the default, and there's a third possibility most families never test: that the NHS should be paying the whole bill.
Reviewed by legal professionals and social care professionals.
TL;DR: No law makes next of kin liable for a relative's care home fees. The cost falls to the resident (their own assets/income), the local authority (if the resident qualifies after a means test on their capital — £23,250/£14,250), or the NHS if the person is eligible for Continuing Healthcare. You become personally liable only if you sign as a guarantor — which the CMA says is often an unfair term (CMA, 2021). If there's a primary health need, CHC pays 100% and the question disappears.
Are next of kin legally responsible for care home fees?
No. There is no statute that makes a spouse, child, or other relative automatically liable for a person's care home fees. Responsibility for the cost sits with the person receiving care, funded from their own assets and income, from the local authority if they qualify after a means test, or from the NHS if they are eligible for Continuing Healthcare.
"Next of kin" carries no financial meaning in English law — it identifies who to contact, not who pays. Being named as next of kin, arranging the placement, or handling day-to-day admin creates no personal debt. The means test that decides council funding looks only at the person needing care.
So where does the fear come from? Almost always from a contract. A care home is entitled to want its fees paid, and it may ask a relative to sign — but how you sign decides whether you take on any liability at all.
When does a family member actually become liable? The guarantor trap
You become liable in one situation: when you voluntarily sign as a guarantor — agreeing to pay the resident's fees yourself if they stop. The Competition and Markets Authority looked hard at this and found many such terms unfair.
Its guidance is direct: terms requiring "a third party to guarantee the resident's performance of all their obligations under the contract, without limitation or further explanation, are unlikely to be fair under consumer law" (CMA, 2021). The CMA even lists example clauses it considers likely unfair, including "you will assume full responsibility for the performance of the resident's obligations" and "you are fully liable with the resident for each and all of the obligations of the resident."
The practical rule is simple. Sign in a representative capacity — "as agent for [the resident]" — never as a personal guarantor, unless you genuinely intend to take on the debt. Watch for jargon like "indemnify" or "jointly and severally liable", which the CMA flags as unclear. And note the difference between a guarantor and a third-party top-up: agreeing a top-up makes you liable only for that top-up amount, not the whole fee.
Importantly, holding Power of Attorney or deputyship does not make you liable. The CMA states an attorney "uses only the resident's money... and does not become personally liable for contracts signed for a person lacking capacity" (CMA, 2021). You have duties to manage the money properly — see our Lasting Power of Attorney guide — but not a personal debt.
Whose money is means-tested — yours or theirs?
The resident's, and only the resident's. In England the local authority assesses the person needing care against a capital upper limit of £23,250 and a lower limit of £14,250 — both frozen at their 2010 levels (DHSC, 2025). A family member's income, savings or home are not part of the calculation.
How the thresholds work: above £23,250 the resident pays their own fees; below £14,250 their capital is disregarded (they still contribute from income); between the two, a "tariff income" is calculated. Because the limits have been frozen for over 15 years, inflation means they now bite at far lower real wealth than when they were set — but they still apply to the resident, never the family.
This is why the framing matters so much. A care home may present a bill to whoever arranged the placement, but the legal question is what the resident can be charged — not what a relative can afford.
What about giving money away? The deprivation myth
Here is the one area where family decisions can cause a problem — but not the one people fear. If assets were given away and avoiding care fees was a "significant" motivation, the local authority can treat them as "notional capital": assessed as if the person still owned them (Care and Support Statutory Guidance, Annex E).
The persistent myth is a "7-year rule" — that gifts made more than seven years before needing care are safe. That rule does not exist in social care. The seven-year concept comes from inheritance tax, and importing it here is a costly mistake: there is no fixed time limit on a deprivation-of-assets decision. What matters is intention and whether care needs were reasonably foreseeable at the time.
None of this makes a relative personally liable. It affects how the resident's means test is calculated — it doesn't transfer the debt to the family.
The question behind the question: could CHC mean you owe nothing?
Before worrying about who pays, it's worth asking whether anyone in the family should be paying at all. If the person has a "primary health need", NHS Continuing Healthcare funds 100% of their care and is not means-tested (DHSC). Not the resident's savings, not a top-up, not a guarantee — the NHS pays the lot.
This is the piece the "who's liable" articles miss. Families routinely fund care for months — sometimes years — before anyone offers a CHC assessment, paying fees that the NHS should have covered. Eligibility turns on the nature, intensity, complexity and unpredictability of the person's health needs, assessed against the 12 DST domains — not on their diagnosis or their bank balance.
CareAdvocate is an evidence preparation service, not a law firm, and this is general information, not legal or financial advice. If a relative is paying care fees, the highest-value thing you can do is check whether CHC should apply. The free CHC eligibility screener takes a few minutes; if the case looks arguable, our Case Strength Report at £97 tells you whether the evidence supports a primary health need before you commit further.
Continue learning
- Who pays for a care home? — the full funding picture: self-funding, council, and NHS
- Continuing Healthcare funding: the family guide — when the NHS pays 100%
- Deferred payment agreements — using the home's value without selling it
- Lasting Power of Attorney: the complete guide — an attorney's duties, and why they aren't personally liable
Frequently asked questions
Are next of kin legally responsible for care home fees?
No. There is no law making family members automatically liable for a relative's care home fees. The cost falls to the resident (from their own income and assets), the local authority (if the resident qualifies after a means test), or the NHS (if the person is eligible for Continuing Healthcare). Family become liable only if they choose to sign as a guarantor.
Can a care home make me a guarantor?
A care home can ask, but it cannot force you. The Competition and Markets Authority says terms requiring a third party to guarantee all of a resident's obligations 'without limitation' are 'unlikely to be fair under consumer law' (CMA, 2021). Sign in a representative capacity — 'as agent for [resident]' — and never as a personal guarantor unless you genuinely intend to take on that debt.
Whose money is assessed in a care home means test?
The resident's — not the family's. In England the local authority assesses the resident's capital against an upper limit of £23,250 and a lower limit of £14,250, both frozen since 2010 (DHSC, 2025). A family member's income and savings are not part of the assessment. Only the person needing care is financially assessed.
Is there a 7-year rule for giving money away before care?
No — that is an inheritance-tax rule, not a social-care one. English social care uses 'deprivation of assets': if avoiding care fees was a significant reason for giving something away, the council can treat it as 'notional capital' — as if the person still owned it. There is no fixed time limit, so don't rely on a 7-year cut-off.
Could NHS Continuing Healthcare mean we owe nothing?
Yes. If the person has a 'primary health need', NHS Continuing Healthcare funds 100% of their care and is not means-tested (DHSC). The liability question disappears entirely — neither the resident nor the family pays. Many families fund care for months before anyone offers a CHC assessment, so it is worth checking eligibility early.