Senior living home files for bankruptcy wiping out residents' funds
Entrance fees can be refunded to family members on a resident's death or returned to the retiree if they choose to leave the facility. However, when a facility such as Harborside enters bankruptcy the process ensures that secured creditors are paid before residents. This can mean that once debtors are paid the money due to families has been decimated.
Arlene Kohen, an 89-year-old resident at Harborside paid the standard $945,000 entrance fee by selling her Great Neck home for $838,000, according to The Wall Street Journal. Following the bankruptcy her family now expects to receive less than a third of the $710,000 refund the facility promised her.
'That's money that I'll never see,' Beverly Kohen Fried, Kohen's daughter, told the Journal. 187 out of the 210 current and former Harborside residents have accepted the Chapter 11 offer that returns 32 percent of their entry fees to them. Harborside had declared bankruptcy twice before its most recent filing.
The complex first opened in 2010 shortly after the housing market crash. In such a climate prospective residents found it harder to sell their homes to cover the steep entrance fees. As a result Harborside filled less than 60 percent of its 229 independent-living units in two years, the Journal reported. The company filed its first bankruptcy in 2014.
Then the pandemic once again halted the flow of new move-ins and the business filed for bankruptcy for the second time in 2021. Residents were unaffected by these first two filings because bondholders supported the proposed restructuring. However, when the company defaulted its bonds again in 2022 the new owner that bought Harborside began scaling back the care offered.
Most of the residents who either needed that care immediately or planned to incrementally increase their care over time were forced to leave. Among those residents were Bob and Sandy Curtis. The rollback of available care meant Sandy had to be moved to a specialized memory care facility in February. Sandy died in April at 85 years old after a fall. Curtis, 88, remained in Harborside and is hoping to receive a refund of $50,000 of his initial $840,000 entrance fee this fall.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
How I salvaged my husband's pension in a few easy steps
When I asked to see my husband's pension, he looked a little sheepish, like you would if you had a monthly bill that had been draining your account for years — a gym membership that you had never used, for example. It was worse than that. 'I'm not sure I even have a pension,' he admitted. Clearly, he does not engage with anything that his wife writes about. Unless you have actively opted out or not had an employer for the past 12 years, then it is likely that you have a pension. It's probably all there, with your contract, languishing away at the bottom of a drawer somewhere. People rarely interact with their pensions, thinking that they are a 'set-it-and-forget-it' type of thing. Except they're not. When we finally tracked my husband's savings down, we found that he actually had three workplace pensions. One of them was a laggard. Over the past five years, it had returned just 3 per cent a year after charges. The average is closer to 6 per cent, and while this may not sound like a life-changing amount, it is. Unless you are one of the few who take an active role in their pension savings and have personally chosen the fund you are invested in (yes, pensions aren't just sitting in some dusty pot somewhere, they are invested), the likelihood is that your pension is still in your employer's default fund. Default funds are designed to be low-cost and suitable for the average employee. But average is rarely optimal. Our analysis of default funds found that almost 90 per cent were underperforming against a standard benchmark, and the difference between the best and worst funds was huge. • Pension panic: how to get your savings back on track• Don't be one of the 15m heading for pension poverty Millions of people fail to check where their money is held, costing themselves thousands of pounds in retirement. In my husband's case, the best medium-risk fund had returned 49 per cent over five years, while the worst had lost 30 per cent. On a £300,000 pot, the difference is staggering: £447,000 in the best fund versus £210,000 in the worst after just five years. Over ten years, the gap grows to more than half a million pounds. It's easy to see how people can fall into this trap. Pensions aren't known for their simplicity, and there is no obvious trigger for reviewing them. Millions are losing out on growth because they assume that a professional is making sure their pension fund is doing a good job. I don't just see this as an issue for retirement savers. Employers should also get a wake-up call when choosing pension funds for their employees. This needs to be more than just about ticking a compliance box. Many workers rely on their employer to make these decisions with their workplace pensions, and the results show that this isn't a decision that should be taken lightly. A well-performing pension costs no more than a poorly performing one, but it can deliver vastly better outcomes. The UK is on a slow march towards a pension crisis. Most savers are not on track for a comfortable retirement, even when you factor in the state pension. Auto-enrolment has brought millions more into saving, but minimum contribution rates of 8 per cent are simply not enough for most to secure the income they will need. Combine low contributions with underperforming workplace funds, and you have a dangerous mix. Unless individuals and employers take more responsibility for checking the performance of their funds and increase savings where possible, we risk a future where large swathes of the population face a sharp drop in living standards the moment that they stop working. In my husband's case, we consolidated all three of his pensions into one fund that had historically been an outstanding performer over a significant period. Of course, there are no guarantees that the fund we chose will continue to outperform, but at least we've given it the best shot. And even tiny percentage point differences in performance can compound into a significant amount over decades. Now all that's left is to hope that Rachel Reeves doesn't come for our pensions as she attempts to plug that big black hole in the nation's finances. Antonia Medlicott is the founder and managing director of the personal finance advice site Investing Insiders
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
As Aussies face financial ruin over retirement funds collapse, money experts tell STEPHEN JOHNSON the warning signs you can't afford to miss
Australians have lost their homes, their retirement, and their peace of mind as a wave of self-managed superannuation funds collapsed without warning. Canberra couple Simon and Annette Luck face selling their house after losing almost every cent of their $340,000 nest egg. Perth nurse Kathryn Shannon saw her entire $460,000 life savings disappear overnight.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Intel secures $2bn lifeline from Japan's SoftBank
SoftBank has agreed to invest $2bn (£1.5bn) in Intel, amid reports that Donald Trump's administration is also considering a stake in the struggling US chip maker. The Japanese technology investor announced the multibillion-dollar deal on Tuesday, in a move expected to give it a 2% stake in the business. Masayoshi Son, the chief executive and chair of SoftBank, described Intel as a 'trusted leader in innovation'. 'This strategic investment reflects our belief that advanced semiconductor manufacturing and supply will further expand in the US, with Intel playing a critical role,' he said. Shares in the chip maker, which is listed in New York, rose by more than 5% in after-hours trading, while shares in Tokyo-listed SoftBank dropped by about 4%. Intel is valued at more than $100bn. It comes amid reports the US government is also considering taking a stake in Intel. It could be as high as 10%, according to Bloomberg. Lip-Bu Tan, an industry veteran who took the top job at Intel just four months ago, has been tasked with a huge turnaround project at the business. The company has suffered from slow sales and continued losses as it has struggled to maintain its technological edge in recent years. On Tuesday, Tan said Intel was 'very pleased to deepen our relationship with SoftBank, a company that's at the forefront of so many areas of emerging technology and innovation and shares our commitment to advancing US technology and manufacturing leadership'. He has 'worked closely together [with Son] for decades', he added. Donald Trump initially called for Tan's resignation, accusing him of having ties to the Chinese Communist party. However, after meeting with Tan in Washington last week, the president praised the Intel boss, saying he had 'an amazing story'. If the US government takes a 10% stake in the business, it could surpass asset manager Vanguard as the chip makers's single biggest shareholder. It would mark the Trump's administration latest attempt to intervene in an area of the private sector that it considers nationally strategic. Trump has previously threatened to impose tariffs of up to 100% on imported semiconductors and chips, which could favour Intel as a US-based semiconductor business. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Earlier this month the US government announced a deal that would result in chip makers such as Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) paying 15% of their revenue from Chinese AI chip sales to the US government. In July, the defence department also announced that it would take a $400m preferred stake in the US rare-earth producer MP Materials. For SoftBank, the Intel investment expands its presence in the US, while the Japanese government pushes Trump to cut tariffs in exchange for investment in the American economy. The Japanese company committed to increasing its presence in the US last year, and Trump announced in December that SoftBank would pour $100bn in the US economy over the next four years.
