Income Support and Carer's Allowance

fogartyblue.

anguk wrote: »

I thought you could only earn around £100 a week if you were getting Carer's Allowance? :huh:

The C.A. rules allow breaks in care of up to 12 weeks withinany six month period without you losing payment of C.A. Up to 4 weeks can befor any temporary breaks in care, such as holidays or respite care, during this4 week temporary break in care you are allowed to earn over the normal £100weekly limit on earnings and not lose your C.A. The remaining 8 weeks allow foreither the carer or the disabled person to undergo medical or other treatmentas an in- patient in hospital. Note that if the disabled person is in hospitalfor over four weeks, or for children 12 weeks, they will lose their qualifyingbenefit for you to be able to claim C.A., so your C.A. could be stopped soonerthan 12 weeks. If you go into hospital your C.A. will continue for 12 weeks aslong as you have not already had time off during the last six months.
Put this with the other matter I raised - travelling time and as the other poster said - arranging the house time and not forgetting time spent on the telephone to the disabled person, you have a recipe for widespread abuse!
You need not live anywhere near the disabled person and you need not provide the care for 12 out of a period of 26 weeks, not forgetting that for 4 of those weeks in every 26, you can earn what ever you like and you will be still entitled to CA for the whole period.

All we need now is a register
of disabled people that claim the correct disability benefit (DLA either MR/HR
Care or any rate AA) and that they themselves don't claim any means tested
benefits.




Then another register of
possible CA claimants that we can match them
with Obviously we take a % - say
20% of the benefit claimed as our fee for matching these people
up!!!!

The claimant and the disabled
person split the difference. On current levels

That would be a fee for
arranging it - £11.69 a week, and £23.38 to each of the
others.

multiply that by 183 claimants and you have a nice weekly income of over £2000 a week!

The above was an actual case that was 'cracked' a year or so ago that I was involved in.

No I am not condoning any type of fraud, just pointing out what does happen in the real world and what could happen. It is illegal, but since when has that stopped some benefit claimants?

There are a whole raft of loopholes in many benefits that I have in the past been involved in identifying for the DWP whilst on secondment

jetplane

^^^^^ maybe you could get yourself seconded to the IRS and get yourself involved in cracking the whole raft of loopholes for tax evaders. Apparently the chancellor states he was unaware of this practice :eek: though I doubt anyone believes him.

fogartyblue.

jetplane wrote: »

^^^^^ maybe you could get yourself seconded to the IRS and get yourself involved in cracking the whole raft of loopholes for tax evaders. Apparently the chancellor states he was unaware of this practice :eek: though I doubt anyone believes him.

I had part of my career with HMRC (known in my day as simply 'Inland Revenue - HM Inspector of Taxes).

In fact there is currently a massive push ongoing by that department for the reason that you exactly mention.

Over the past year or two they have been 'subcontracting' in, mainly from the accountancy profession, many experts in tax compliance as well as those on the tax investigation side. It is costing the government a whole shed load of money to pay these people. But they are hoping that the results will more than compensate for that. It's a slow and methodical job, trying to work out what the loopholes are that can be used as well as those that are currently being used.

Anubis_2

http://www.welfarerights.net/benefits-guides/Carers-Allowance

My husband has never had a break ever. He also does far more than 35 hours a week. There is the other side that carers like my husband and the poster Anguk save the Government loads in caring costs also.

There's also no doubt that the genuine carers save the state vast amounts of money, I dread to think how much it would cost to get professionals in to do the work I do with my OH. He would need district nurses and carers coming in every day if I wasn't here and they'd certainly be getting more than one pound odd per hour.

fogartyblue.

Anubis wrote: »

http://www.welfarerights.net/benefits-guides/Carers-Allowance

My husband has never had a break ever. He also does far more than 35 hours a week. There is the other side that carers like my husband and the poster Anguk save the Government loads in caring costs also.

I have no doubt that your husband cares for you in one way or another for more than 35 hours a week.

There is the obvious question that keeps cropping up. The distinction between what a wife is expected to do for her husband during matters of illness or disability and which are classed as the 'norm' and those duties that are required of someone that is independant of the disabled person.

Some would argue that marriage is a contract that both parties entered into voluntarily. They each gave an undertaking to each other;
As quoted from The Book of Common Prayer, Church of England - Will you.....to live together.... Will you obey him, serve him, love, honour and keep him in sickness and in health....?
Consequently care and attention could be said to be that part of the contract that was binding on poth parties.
Would his wife expect remuneration for carrying out those duties?

Then we have the caring duties as performed by someone other than a spouse. These are either given as love and affection for the person without recourse to any funding and there are those who 'professionally care for someone and in part do expect to be recompensed.

A very difficult subject to argue for or against.

As far as my wife and I are concerned, we see caring as a natural progression of living and each offers the other that care simply because we love each other. We certainly do not and would not, expect to receive money for carrying out those duties.

As for the cost to the State, that is subjective. Given the above and the circumstances, yes payment should be made to some extent, but then it does depend on the relationship between the parties.

Anubis_2

He has an underlying entitlement - as it is deducted.

He goes far and beyond what is expected, he cannot live a normal life because of it, he barely can go out the house etc and he is more than entitled to claim but he only receives the premium. His duties literally are 24/7 as far as I am concerned and go above and beyond and would cost a hell of a lot more than the £30 premium he receives.

He has served in the forces and now dedicated his life caring for me. IMHO carers like him (and there are many many like him) are the unsung heroes of this country. A lot of marraiges fall apart in similar situations, and, like I said, the government deduct his carers as its classed as income.

jetplane

fogartyblue. wrote: »

I had part of my career with HMRC (known in my day as simply 'Inland Revenue - HM Inspector of Taxes).

In fact there is currently a massive push ongoing by that department for the reason that you exactly mention.

Over the past year or two they have been 'subcontracting' in, mainly from the accountancy profession, many experts in tax compliance as well as those on the tax investigation side. It is costing the government a whole shed load of money to pay these people. But they are hoping that the results will more than compensate for that. It's a slow and methodical job, trying to work out what the loopholes are that can be used as well as those that are currently being used.

I wish I could have faith that this would have results, however some of the loopholes are legal just as they are with benefits, although I'm sure the IRS lose more money via the tax system than benefits. Although I think when it's benefits it's called criminal activity and when its tax its called creative accounting.

fogartyblue. wrote: »

I have no doubt that your husband cares for you in one way or another for more than 35 hours a week.

There is the obvious question that keeps cropping up. The distinction between what a wife is expected to do for her husband during matters of illness or disability and which are classed as the 'norm' and those duties that are required of someone that is independant of the disabled person.

Some would argue that marriage is a contract that both parties entered into voluntarily. They each gave an undertaking to each other;
As quoted from The Book of Common Prayer, Church of England - Will you.....to live together.... Will you obey him, serve him, love, honour and keep him in sickness and in health....?
Consequently care and attention could be said to be that part of the contract that was binding on poth parties.
Would his wife expect remuneration for carrying out those duties?

Then we have the caring duties as performed by someone other than a spouse. These are either given as love and affection for the person without recourse to any funding and there are those who 'professionally care for someone and in part do expect to be recompensed.

A very difficult subject to argue for or against.

As far as my wife and I are concerned, we see caring as a natural progression of living and each offers the other that care simply because we love each other. We certainly do not and would not, expect to receive money for carrying out those duties.

.

I find these comments rather patronising. I think the situation described by Anubis below is much more realistic than your idealistic and judgemental view.

Anubis wrote: »

He has an underlying entitlement - as it is deducted.

He goes far and beyond what is expected, he cannot live a normal life because of it, he barely can go out the house etc and he is more than entitled to claim but he only receives the premium. His duties literally are 24/7 as far as I am concerned and go above and beyond and would cost a hell of a lot more than the £30 premium he receives.

He has served in the forces and now dedicated his life caring for me. IMHO carers like him (and there are many many like him) are the unsung heroes of this country. A lot of marraiges fall apart in similar situations, and, like I said, the government deduct his carers as its classed as income.