Dla - april 2011 new rules

celbelle

Just a thought, I'm not sure of your wife's age. Does she fit within the age criteria (of getting HRM) upto 64 on 11th April 2011 (and down to 3yo)?

michaeln2

celbelle wrote: »

Just a thought, I'm not sure of your wife's age. Does she fit within the age criteria (of getting HRM) upto 64 on 11th April 2011 (and down to 3yo)?

Hi & thank you for taking the time to reply again.

My wife will be aged 58 tomorrow, her date of birth was 6-4-53.

Not sure about the age criteria thing though?

Thanks again

celbelle

Skirge wrote: »

Posted my forms off on Match 10th.. rang last week was told they have received my forms and my claim is now on the system but they are taking 12 to 14 weeks to make a decision.

My OH posted his the same day as you and he got his letter today to say he would be receiving HRM, so hopefully (if you haven't already) you'll recieve your notification soon too

Skirge

I got a letter today to say sorry but they cannot make a decision yet and have written to my Consultant for more information, even though they have my upto date CVI.
I am at counting fingers what more info would they need?

dve_20

I had letter stating i dont qualify a couple months ago.

The rules to qualify in my opinion are totally unfair. DLA mobility is supposed to be for mobility help and is based on how difficult it is to get out and about etc. So, why is it, that there not taking into account the field of vision loss people have??

I have Retinitis Pigmentosa and it affect night vision first and the field of vision and then over time general vision. I can still manage to read the top 2 / 3 lines hence why ive not got HRM. Ive heard a saying that sums up RP...'i may beable to see a pensil on other side of a room, but will fall over a elephant to pick it up'

Lets take that top letter from the chart in acurity test (lets say its 'T')
I stand 3 metres away from a large wall. Standing next to me is John who qualifies for HRM as he cannot quite read the top letter.
The letter 'T' is stuck in a random place on the wall. John and i open eyes at same time and John spots where it is straight away but carnt quite tell its a letter T. I on the other hand, a couple minutes later find what clearly is a letter T. If this was done in low light then id proabbly never find it.

So clearly from my example, i find life a lot harder to get around day to day than 'John' But becasue John cannot read the top letter 'T' he is classed worse????????????????????????????

So my point is that i feel i am more disabled as far as mobility issues than someone who qualifies under acuity test. How is this right?

My Brother, who is a little worse than me has been told he is unlikley to get HRM and he even has a Guide Dog!!!!!!! System is wrong!!!!

jetta_wales

They do take reduced visual field into account but only if your central vision is still limited to 6/60 which is not as low as the 3/60 that is required if you don't have a reduced visual field. I agree they are still pretty tight criteria though.

Skirge

After speaking to them it seems it was their mistake and they needed no further info, my acceptance letter should be here in a few days.

Wicked_witch

My husband has a BD8, it's really faint and says 6/2 for both eyes (?). Not sure what that means. It was done years ago and although his vision has deteriorated enormously he's never been back as he finds it so upsetting. Guess we will have to go back now and get a CV1, which I'd not even heard of before this thread. Yeah, denial...

nannytone_2

dve_20 wrote: »

I had letter stating i dont qualify a couple months ago.

The rules to qualify in my opinion are totally unfair. DLA mobility is supposed to be for mobility help and is based on how difficult it is to get out and about etc. So, why is it, that there not taking into account the field of vision loss people have??

I have Retinitis Pigmentosa and it affect night vision first and the field of vision and then over time general vision. I can still manage to read the top 2 / 3 lines hence why ive not got HRM. Ive heard a saying that sums up RP...'i may beable to see a pensil on other side of a room, but will fall over a elephant to pick it up'

Lets take that top letter from the chart in acurity test (lets say its 'T')
I stand 3 metres away from a large wall. Standing next to me is John who qualifies for HRM as he cannot quite read the top letter.
The letter 'T' is stuck in a random place on the wall. John and i open eyes at same time and John spots where it is straight away but carnt quite tell its a letter T. I on the other hand, a couple minutes later find what clearly is a letter T. If this was done in low light then id proabbly never find it.

So clearly from my example, i find life a lot harder to get around day to day than 'John' But becasue John cannot read the top letter 'T' he is classed worse????????????????????????????

So my point is that i feel i am more disabled as far as mobility issues than someone who qualifies under acuity test. How is this right?

My Brother, who is a little worse than me has been told he is unlikley to get HRM and he even has a Guide Dog!!!!!!! System is wrong!!!!

i have RP too....i feel your frustration!

Bootsalebargains

My husband's sight test was done in 2008, it says right eye 6/36 left eye 6/60, primary loss of central field. He has been registered as partially sighted but was I suppossed to tell the dla about this. He is already on HRC & HRM for other problems