Adelaide Hills MPs unite to call for retirement village reform

South Australian retirement village residents have been unfairly subjected to unknown and excessive fees, according to Mayo MP Rebekha Sharkie.

National Seniors Australia Chief Advocate Ian Henschke said nationally-consistent retirement village legislation would create less confusion and reduce the costs of compliance benefitting both consumers and operators.

Adelaide Hills MPs have united to push for an increase in the levels of transparency in retirement village contracts and “stop the rort” with the politicians claiming South Australian retirees had been subjected to unknown and excessive fees.

Member for Mayo Rebekha Sharkie on Monday moved a motion in federal parliament calling on the government to consider the national harmonisation and regulation of retirement villages to improve consumer protections.

She said Australians living in retirement villages needed greater financial protection and called on the government to take the lead in ensuring consistency in state and territory legislations.

National Seniors Australia chief advocate Ian Henschke said nationally-consistent retirement village legislation would create less confusion and reduce the costs of compliance benefiting both consumers and operators.

Ms Sharkie said while many enjoyed retirement village living, many others were “appalled at the excessive fees” applied to retirement village living.

“One couple from the south coast in my electorate say that, after perceived changes to their retirement village rules, they have been told they will receive only $259,000 of an estimated selling refund of their property — the property they’re living in, the property they don’t own — of $417,000,” she said.

“This represents a loss of around $160,000, largely for the privilege of leaving.

“A couple from a retirement village in the Adelaide Hills are concerned that fellow former residents have paid exit fees of between $80,000 and $100,000 … they‘re calling for legislative reform so these fees are required to be fair and reasonable.

She said residents had “no insight or control into how some retirement villages calculate the exit costs”.

“Many residents don’t have any control over how the unit is marketed or when it is put to market, as this is often done ‘in-house’ by the retirement village owners, often at rates higher than a licensed real estate agent, leaving exiting residents feeling powerless and out-of-pocket.”

“And once fees are deducted, remaining funds leave some residents ill-equipped to pay for higher level care they may need when they age … this is an area which clearly warrants federal government intervention to help ensure fairness and transparency when you enter and leave a retirement village.”

Member for Boothby Louise Miller-Frost said she shared Ms Sharkie’s concerns and the practices of retirement villages would continue to affect an increasing percentage of the community.

“(The) government cares deeply about the aged-care sector, including retirement villages,” she said.

“This government is on a mission to clean up the mess left by the previous government and to deliver the foundations of a world-class system that delivers the care that older people in this country deserve.”

Ian Henschke, chief advocate National Seniors Australia

National Seniors Australia Chief Advocate Ian Henschke said nationally-consistent retirement village legislation would reduce the costs of compliance, benefiting both consumers and operators.

“Older people are confused and frustrated by the complexity of the contracts and lack of protections when they consider entering a retirement village and dismayed by the delays and egregious charges when they exit one,” he said.

State Member for Kavel Dan Cregan said there was an urgent need for transparency in these agreements, especially around exit entitlements.

“I will seek to work constructively with the state government on bringing this much-needed reform to ensure residents’ rights are protected,” he said.

Member for Kavel Dan Cregan said retirement village residents should not be required to engage an expensive lawyer to understand their contracts. Picture: Keryn Stevens