eating, working and DLA

Muttleythefrog

grummps wrote: »

I'm simply looking at the facts as outlined by the OP!

To say the least they are stretching the 'reminding and encouragement' bit too far.

Have you not read what they have quoted?

Has Autism and doesn't work, and can't manage his eating properly, and when he has worked, he goes underweight.. but when at home and not working, then thanks to the flexibility and hours available, he manages to eat and not go underweight.. And so he hasn't gone underweight in years as he hasn't worked in years, then can it be said that he needs help reminded to eat? He would need help if he worked..

Yes.. but what people are saying is this approach may by symptomatic of the condition (rather than any calculated effort to subvert the course of a claim)... and the follow up responses actually suggest this is likely to me... note the Op twice asks for clarification as to whom the relevant section applies to... who is it for. There's hardly any facts here at all... that's what is important. I don't have autism... although a psychiatrist did say that his view was based on no history of evidence for such rather than any actual current evaluation. But when faced with the DLA form I found myself very much in a frame of thinking like someone else has outlined in this thread.. when I got to sections that weren't particularly relevant I found myself compelled to give a full answer when actually none was required. I found it very difficult to leave sections with a simple tick to say I had no problem with the activity.

grummps

princessdon wrote: »

maybe the fact that they are now on benefits (not enough money to pay their own mortage off (still owing £100K at pension age) is because his wife never worked since the day her children were born. Interesting that they claim DLA

I never said that there wasn't money available to pay off the mortgage - what I did say was that the money will not be available for quite a while, but we would like to move now.

My wife has never worked as it was agreed between us that her place at home was more important than earning a second income.

I claim DLA quite correctly - having proved what my needs are.

grummps

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

hello Andy.

Hello?????? Do we know each other?

grummps

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

Yes.. but what people are saying is this approach may by symptomatic of the condition (rather than any calculated effort to subvert the course of a claim)... and the follow up responses actually suggest this is likely to me... note the Op twice asks for clarification as to whom the relevant section applies to... who is it for. There's hardly any facts here at all... that's what is important. I don't have autism... although a psychiatrist did say that his view was based on no history of evidence for such rather than any actual current evaluation. But when faced with the DLA form I found myself very much in a frame of thinking like someone else has outlined in this thread.. when I got to sections that weren't particularly relevant I found myself compelled to give a full answer when actually none was required. I found it very difficult to leave sections with a simple tick to say I had no problem with the activity.

That is how I filled in both the ESA50 and the DLA renewal forms. Maybe that is why I failed both and had to send evidence in afterwards.

Edinburghlass_2

grummps wrote: »

Hello?????? Do we know each other?

Yes ......:rotfl:

grummps

Edinburghlass wrote: »

Yes ......:rotfl:

I don't think so.

I haven't been on this site very long and I would have remembered your name.

Edinburghlass_2

grummps wrote: »

I don't think so.

I haven't been on this site very long and I would have remembered your name.

I remember all of yours

grummps

Edinburghlass wrote: »

I remember all of yours

What a wierd reply!

I shall ignore you in the future, you don't seem to be such a nice person to know.

One wierd cookie!