Oh no, not another DLA Appeal thread...

harveybobbles

So my OH's "award" (although why they call it an award when you're disabled is beond me - its not like you put the certificate on the bedroom wall next to the 100m swimming one you got as a child)

Anyway, the current award for DLA expired on June 26th this year. The renewal was sent in and a decision was only made on the 27th at the same rates.

However, it has been awarded for 5 years at LRM and MRC, but we feel that this is unfair as my OH's condition has worsened over time and I have had to reduce my hours at work to care for them more. We have a family member who spends a lot of time with them, and as such they claim Carers Allowance.

Do you think it'd be worth slapping in an appeal?

munchings-n-crunchings

With an award of LRM and MRc, you have more to loose when putting in an appeal.
An appeal will look at the whole decision again, not just the bits you are unhappy with, so awards can go down as well as up.

As you have the MRC, a person can put in a claim for CA, subject to certain criteria, ie they must be caring for over 35 hours per week, not in full time education, and the is an earnings limit.

A 5 year award does give the continuity that a 1 year or 2 year award does not.
If during that time, your OH's condition still worsens, that you can at any time ask for the award to be looked at again. Current medical reports, dated within the last 6 months will play an important part in this process, as they will help your case.

Regards
Munchie

ramsas

Taking into consideration the fact that DLA is coming to an end commencing 2013 and everyone going to be re evaluated for the new Personal Independence Payment irrespective of any award that may be in effect at that time i would suggest that you may be wasting your time and just putting existing claim at risk.Obviously the decision is entirely yours but given the above mentioned PIP issue i personally would just leave matters has they are for the time being.

kingfisherblue

MRC means that a person has substantial care needs either day or night, HRC means that a person has substantial care needs both day and night.

Which category do you think your OH fits into?

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

kingfisherblue wrote: »

MRC means that a person has substantial care needs either day or night, HRC means that a person has substantial care needs both day and night.

Which category do you think your OH fits into?

MRC is paid if you need help with personal care frequently or supervision continually throughout the day only, or help with personal care or someone to watch over you during the night only, or someone with you while you are on dialysis.

HRC is paid if you need help or supervision frequently throughout the day and during the night.

The keyword here is "frequently" and has been defined in DLA caselaw.

For the purposes of HRC night time is defined as between the hours of 11pm and 7am. This is defined in DLA caselaw but I am unsure of the reference off the top of my head.

About 3 years ago I helped someone with mental health problems in my early role as benefits adviser and they were awarded HRC due to poor sleep patterns (up during the night asleep mainly during the day).

Their care/supervision needs occur mainly at night. Part of their difficulties was agoraphobia and they frequently want to go out at night as there are few crowds around.

Supervison also take definition as "natural supervision" as defined in DLA caselaw CDLA/393/2006 which states: that "Natural protection" provided by bus drivers, shopkeepers, friends and neighbours were all thought to be relevant to the test.

I would be interested to hear your definition of "substantial"?

Richie-from-the-Boro

3.3.5 Meaning of frequent, prolonged and repeated (note: these definitions should be considered in the light of Moyna)

basic definition - starting point

R v NI Commissioner ex parte the Secretary of State for Social Services (1981) – (The Packer Case, published as an appendix to R(A)2/80) defines these as:
Frequent - Several times. Not just once or twice.
Prolonged - Some little time (not defined but taken to mean 20 minutes – used by the old attendance allowance boards). See also CDLA/4024/2003.
Repeated - More than once.

Stewart v Advocate General for Scotland (1999) – (reported in R(DLA)2/00) rejects the idea that more than two incidents of help throughout the day necessarily was a rigid definition of the frequency test. See also R(DLA)5/05. For the night condition C/34/98(DLA) (Northern Ireland decision).

Suggests that watching over at frequent intervals implies a substantial disturbance of the carer’s sleep. Therefore the frequent intervals must be more than twice at least.

frequency - fluctuating conditions

CDLA/12315/1996 looks at good and bad days and suggests ways of calculating frequent attention. Basically the approach is to assess an average over a given period of weeks.

frequency over the whole day

CA/140/1985 that you must look at the whole of the day. Discusses cases where there are gaps in attention during the day. CA/281/1989* (8/91) states that this frequency should be "at intervals spread over the day. See also CDLA/12315/1996.

frequency - total time spent

In CDLA/12150/1996 attention required briefly but frequently throughout the day could qualify for middle rate DLA even though the total time spent might be less than that for low rate DLA. CSDLA/590/2000* (82/01) states that the duration of attention may be brief but must be more than de minimis. See also CSDLA/24/1998.

moyna

R(DLA)5/05 states that Moyna should be used to determine attention needs. Definitions for prolonged and frequent attention should be considered in relation to this but also should not be followed slavishly.

"prolonged attention cannot be expressed in a given number of minutes (e.g. 20 minutes), beyond which attention is invariably prolonged and within which it is invariably not prolonged."

"..whether occurrences can properly be said to be "frequent" - therefore depends upon a number of factors, particularly the number and pattern of those occurrences over time. The nature of those occurrences is also relevant."

Following this approach, failure to need frequent attention in a given week will not prevent someone satisfying the frequent attention test if they have these needs most weeks over a period of time.

A_Flock_Of_Sheep

Well done Richie-from-The-Boro

Richie-from-the-Boro

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

Well done Richie-from-The-Boro

You know you are welcome

harveybobbles

kingfisherblue wrote: »

MRC means that a person has substantial care needs either day or night, HRC means that a person has substantial care needs both day and night.

Which category do you think your OH fits into?

they have substantional care needs day and night. During the day when I'm at work, we have a family freidn who sits in the house with them. and yes, they claim CA.