Budget - tougher for DLA claimants

Prinzessilein

karatedragon wrote: »

I actually do wonder how many people spend their weekly DLA money on actual care and mobility needs.

I get Lower Rate Care and Lower Rate Mobility.

Every penny gets spent on helping my live as independent a life as possible.

Care: Adaptations for my flat (various things from rails to electronic gadgets) - includes replacing some, maintaining others - batteries et.c. ...Some days I have 'extra laundry needs'...someone to accompany me to appointments/do shopping....

Mobility: Taxis to get me to appointments...someone to drive me to the shops (and accompany me when shopping)....someone to walk with me to the post box (or to go there for me) or just for a short walk for pleasure.

Every week my actual needs will differ. The fact that I have needs - and a considerable number of them, does not.

My DLA is vital in order for me to retain a modicum of 'normality'. It is in no way seen as 'additional income'.

starchild1972

karatedragon wrote: »

I actually do wonder how many people spend their weekly DLA money on actual care and mobility needs.

............
I am pretty confident DLA is often treated as additional income to spend in the household.

Do you know what? I get fed up of hearing things like this.

DLA being separated into Care and Mobility are really misnomers.
Especially care. Define care?

It isn't even strictly limited to "care" it is to cover extra expenses that a disabled person may find themselves having to pay out for. Whether aids, a carer, household items, special food, special equipment, items recommended by Drs and not NHS covered etc. Sometimes the money is just spent on trying to be normal, like other people!

Care doesn't just mean physical stuff, it can mean things to help someone's mental well being because it isn't fun being housebound 80% of the time, not just on the disabled person but their family too.
Things like the disabled person's partner being able to take the children out for a couple of hours, a new computer or similar so the claimant doesn't lose contact with the outside world, speech recognition software, treatments not offered by the NHS, the odd special treat now and again like a week in an adapted caravan at the seaside, a dishwasher to do the washing up, an electric potato peeler, replacement equipment, things that many working able bodied folk take for granted! Yes even a games console (as recommended by DH specialist and yes it has improved his hand-eye co-ordination backed up by medical evidence).

There is no "you can't buy this" or "you can't buy that". When you restrict what people do with their income, whether it is a social security income or not, you get onto dangerous ground. What if every taxpayer wanted to know what every civil servant spent their wages on? I mean, I don't pay tax so some desk clerk at the local council can go drinking on a friday night or smoke or drive or go to Spain on holiday etc etc.

Besides, how do you prove the DLA was used to buy, say the 50" plasma TV that everyone seems to think us Crips own? It could have been bought with a loan, could have been a gift, could have been a prize, could have saved for years, could have done a put by at a local store, could have saved necter points? They could have been super-frugal and save every last penny they have. They could even be in reciept of DLA while working (LEGALLY) and bought it from their wages shock horror! I mean, some of us cripples can work as well. Some of us even work from home.
(For the record, we have a 19 inch LCD TV that has nearly had it and I can't actually see.)

If my youngest was recieving it for his aspergers (we got turned down, long story will re-apply when I have the energy) then the money would go on replacing the doors he has damaged and the housing association refuse to repair, the plates and cups he smashes, the beds he has damaged etc. Strictly speaking, that is not what it is for eiter, but all extra expenses caused by his disability.

Fuel for the mobility vehicle because HRM only pays for the car, not the fuel to run it. Parking money for trips to the hospital.
Just because someone has a physical disability it doesn't mean their mental health doesn't suffer and just because some has a mental health problem it doesn't mean their physical health doesn't suffer.

I think you will find 99% of people on DLA at ANY rate would rather be 100% fit and working than having to justify what they spend their DLA on.

Oldernotwiser

starchild1972 wrote: »

I think you will find 99% of people on DLA at ANY rate would rather be 100% fit and working than having to justify what they spend their DLA on.

I'm sure that's true but I don't see why most of the things you mention couldn't be paid for directly, as is the case with the Motability car.

My husband chooses not to claim AA although he would certainly be eligible for the lower rate and probably for the higher. In the last 18 months we have bought a mobility scooter, wheelchair and stroller out of our own money. If he had chosen to claim AA, neither of us would have minded if we had been supplied with these things rather than receiving a weekly amount; in many ways it would have been simpler for us.

Indie_Kid

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I'm sure that's true but I don't see why most of the things you mention couldn't be paid for directly, as is the case with the Motability car.

My husband chooses not to claim AA although he would certainly be eligible for the lower rate and probably for the higher. In the last 18 months we have bought a mobility scooter, wheelchair and stroller out of our own money. If he had chosen to claim AA, neither of us would have minded if we had been supplied with these things rather than receiving a weekly amount; in many ways it would have been simpler for us.

But then you're telling people what they should have.

Trialia

starchild1972 wrote: »

Do you know what? I get fed up of hearing things like this.

I think you will find 99% of people on DLA at ANY rate would rather be 100% fit and working than having to justify what they spend their DLA on.

Word to that! My sister and I used to have really bad arguments because I get DLA and she is on IB while being treated for chronic depression and agoraphobia and was denied DLA when she applied. I told her quite frankly that she could have the damn money if she could take my laundry list of health problems with it. I'd far rather be healthy and able to work - I've known what I want to do as a career since early childhood, and being unfit for it drives me up the wall.

LindsayO

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I'm sure that's true but I don't see why most of the things you mention couldn't be paid for directly, as is the case with the Motability car.

That's it, exactly, you don't understand, your situation does not apply to everyone else

daska

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

If I employ a cleaner who is useless then I sack him/her; why would this be different for a carer?

Is your cleaner on PAYE? Very few carers can legally be classed as self employed.

_shel wrote: »

It would actually take a lot of pressure off some disabled people and their families to have someone come in to do the caring. Not to say it would suit everyone but there are many who would benefit a huge amount from that.
Direct payments etc were meant to do this but the criteria for assesment is dire and many dont get this or not enough when they do.

And you cant really make a decision about such a thing based on one tv programme on C4. Just as there many bad employees out there, in every profession, there are many more who are not.

Speaking as someone who employs carers... Sacking a carer and finding a replacement isn't easy. You can use an agency but that can cost twice as much as employing privately.

I cited the program as an example for those who might never have actually experienced what it is like needing/having a carer come in. I'm not generalising about the low standards - I currently have one brilliant carer, one good one and one who, to be frank, if they weren't planning to move 90 miles away, I would probably have got rid of already.

A friend of mine with severe physical disabilities on Direct Payments (from a council which is supposedly doing ALL the hiring and firing for her) found herself having to chair disciplinary hearings for a hostile employee with the person who was supposed to do the job saying they didn't feel like it and they'd just take notes. N.B. They suggested this carer to her knowing that the carer had already caused problems in two other positions.

Another who pays privately had a running battle with her agency who sent a procession of 17 yr olds who had no idea how to clean and were always late.

Hiring carers isn't easy and when it goes wrong it's nasty because they're involved intimately in your life - even if they are just employees and not family/friends. Using an agency is expensive but easier.

You pays your money and you takes your choice, but don't assume that outside help is necessarily a better option than friends or family or vice versa. There are pros and cons on each side.

summerof0763

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I'm sure that's true but I don't see why most of the things you mention couldn't be paid for directly, as is the case with the Motability car.

My husband chooses not to claim AA although he would certainly be eligible for the lower rate and probably for the higher. In the last 18 months we have bought a mobility scooter, wheelchair and stroller out of our own money. If he had chosen to claim AA, neither of us would have minded if we had been supplied with these things rather than receiving a weekly amount; in many ways it would have been simpler for us.

in this case you obviously have plenty money.
not all of us do and struggle to have some semblance of a normal life.quite frankly its no-one else's business what people use the dla money for.

daska

starchild1972 wrote: »

If my youngest was recieving it for his aspergers (we got turned down, long story will re-apply when I have the energy) then the money would go on replacing the doors he has damaged and the housing association refuse to repair, the plates and cups he smashes, the beds he has damaged etc. Strictly speaking, that is not what it is for eiter, but all extra expenses caused by his disability.

Why do you say it's not what it's for? It's for the extra costs incurred by the disability - one of his problems is a tendency to destroy things (DS1 is dyspraxic I know about things getting broken, we've had plastic plates since he was weaned LOL) so IMO that is a valid expense.

Indie_Kid

I agree, daska. I sometimes have to use my DLA to pay for things I've broken.