can we both claim carers allowence

daska

Claiming carers allowance for each other is perfectly legal and compatible with the requirements of Carer's Allowance. The system is not mad. The system allows for the possibility that people have different disabilities and need different types of care.

E.G. I need someone around to make sure I'm safe and call for help if I get stuck - just having to have someone in the house during the night works out at way over 35 hours per week. That doesn't mean that my carer has to be able bodied. My mum (83) can care for me - she couldn't lift me if I fall or get stuck but she can call for help and that's all that is necessary to claim carer's allowance. My older kids also care for me in this way for about 4 nights a month - they don't get paid. I can care for my toddler in the same way. I may not be able to lift him but that doesn't mean I can't alert someone when he climbs over the garden wall. I need encouragement to look after myself but if that encouragement takes the form of my DH calling weakly from the sofa that it's about time we had a cup of tea or a meal and I go and make it (with my tippy kettle and my trolley) then I'm caring for him when he can't care for himself without anyone thinking that I'm capable of cooking a roast meal.

DLA is not about what care you get, it's about what you need. If you rely on Tesco delivering ready meals that you heat up in the microwave you still qualify for DLA. If people lie about what they are capable of on their DLA application etc then that's fraud. And you can't claim Carer's Allowance for caring for someone who doesn't receive DLA.

[Deleted User]

gemmalouanna wrote: »

Maybe but I just cannot understand how people do not feel guility for claiming carers meaning they cook/clean etc for someone else whilst claiming DLA for themselves claiming not to be able to do the above. The system is mad for allowing this to happen.

Rules are rules,and DLA doesnt take into account the ability or not to do housework when making a claim,and as i pointed out there are many types of care,and many types of disability.

[Deleted User]

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

It's a huge problem, and should be looked at carefully. I'm very, very surprised that such a cross claim isn't thoroughly investigated and checked out - like the example a while ago on here, there are definitely cases where people are claiming that they're too ill/disabled to do something - but then claim that they can care for another person.

Even where it's a neuro/physical crossclaim - if the person is claiming that they provide care for the person when the person with neurological problems cannot care for themselves, while claiming that they can't make a meal - something is seriously wrong with the checks.

I`m sorry but thats a load of utter nonsense,for starters you dont even have to be getting the care/mobility help you claim for with dla,just have the need for it(otherwise single people would be excluded unfairly from claiming dla),my neuro problems mean i need watching constantly during the day,my oh problems mean she needs physical help during the day ergo we could and did claim carers for each other,we dont now as we claim sdp which pays double.However there are basic checks and e.g. if someone was terminally ill and they tried to claim carers for someone who needed physical help then it would in reallity trigger a closer look at their own dla claim.

gemmalouanna

woodbine wrote: »

Rules are rules,and DLA doesnt take into account the ability or not to do housework when making a claim,and as i pointed out there are many types of care,and many types of disability.

Rules maybe rules but in SOME cases they need to be looked at when there is a clear contradiction.

I was meaning cleaning as in body.

daska

I think the main response was to PBS who, as usual, has calculated how to offend as many people as possible, being able to heat up a ready meal does not disqualify you from claiming DLA. I am sure that there are those who make fraudulant claims but to suggest that every couple who legally and legitimately should be investigated is insulting.

[Deleted User]

daska wrote: »

I think the main response was to PBS who, as usual, has calculated how to offend as many people as possible, being able to heat up a ready meal does not disqualify you from claiming DLA. I am sure that there are those who make fraudulant claims but to suggest that every couple who legally and legitimately should be investigated is insulting.

Well said.....

PolishBigSpender

daska wrote: »

I am sure that there are those who make fraudulant claims but to suggest that every couple who legally and legitimately should be investigated is insulting.

Why is it insulting to suggest that the State should conduct comprehensive checks into an area that can be potentially abused? If they're claiming benefits - then the State should be making sure that they're not doing so fraudulently. Having a disabled couple claim that they're caring for each other while not being able to care for themselves - well, shouldn't every such claim be scrutinised closely?

daska

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

It's a huge problem, and should be looked at carefully. I'm very, very surprised that such a cross claim isn't thoroughly investigated and checked out - like the example a while ago on here, there are definitely cases where people are claiming that they're too ill/disabled to do something - but then claim that they can care for another person.

Even where it's a neuro/physical crossclaim - if the person is claiming that they provide care for the person when the person with neurological problems cannot care for themselves, while claiming that they can't make a meal - something is seriously wrong with the checks.

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Why is it insulting to suggest that the State should conduct comprehensive checks into an area that can be potentially abused? If they're claiming benefits - then the State should be making sure that they're not doing so fraudulently. Having a disabled couple claim that they're caring for each other while not being able to care for themselves - well, shouldn't every such claim be scrutinised closely?

You're claiming it's a "huge problem" but as usual you fail to provide evidence to back up your claims.

gemmalouanna

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Why is it insulting to suggest that the State should conduct comprehensive checks into an area that can be potentially abused? If they're claiming benefits - then the State should be making sure that they're not doing so fraudulently. Having a disabled couple claim that they're caring for each other while not being able to care for themselves - well, shouldn't every such claim be scrutinised closely?

Quite agree that the checks should be more thorough for this possible loop-hole in the system.

holistic_witch

so as usual what polish is saying is a load of you know what.
just because someone cant bend to put their own sock and shoes on doesnt mean that their cared for cant sit next to them and put their's at a height that can be done.
Care is for over 35 hours over the seven days which is only 5 hours a day. It doesnt dictate what hours they are and how they are allocated only to certain tasks. It is over a 24 hour period.