Will they stop my DLA if I get a job?

princessdon

shrugs

I *interpreted* nanny's words as

DLA isn't affected now - but be warned that in the future if your work contradicts your care needs statement to DLA this could be looked at.

Don't see that as encouraging fraud - especially when no-one knows how exactly it will be covered under PIP - More a warning

No harm as at the moment it is irrelevant - gives them fair warning though and advanced knowledge is always a good thing IMO but here and now as you can work with DLA and they don't assoicaiate the two I can't see a "defruading" incentive.

lighting_up_the_chalice

princessdon wrote: »

shrugs

I *interpreted* nanny's words as

DLA isn't affected now - but be warned that in the future if your work contradicts your care needs statement to DLA this could be looked at.

Don't see that as encouraging fraud - especially when no-one knows how exactly it will be covered under PIP - More a warning

No harm as at the moment it is irrelevant - gives them fair warning though and advanced knowledge is always a good thing IMO but here and now as you can work with DLA and they don't assoicaiate the two I can't see a "defruading" incentive.

So, receiving DLA for mobility issues while working as a professional footballer would be just fine?

princessdon

Nope - I have my own feelings on DLA - especially the passport to CA and therefore IS and other benefits

But .....

for some reason people are granted it - and the ability to work and receive it isn't decided between departments.

Wrong - hell yes - but I am not in charge or can change that.

lighting_up_the_chalice

princessdon wrote: »

Nope - I have my own feelings on DLA - especially the passport to CA and therefore IS and other benefits

But .....

for some reason people are granted it - and the ability to work and receive it isn't decided between departments.

Wrong - hell yes - but I am not in charge or can change that.

But if a review is immanent and that footballer was advised to get a desk job specifically to ensure that his employment doesn't contradict what he has stated are his mobility limitations???

princessdon

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

But if a review is immanent and that footballer was advised to get a desk job specifically to ensure that his employment doesn't contradict what he has stated are his mobility limitations???

it would be valid advice - based on what the legislaion is NOW, but that wasn't what she said.

Each to their own and you are welcome and entitled to your opinion, but personally I didn't interpret anything other than advice that DLA and work (that are not linked at the moment) may be linked in the future.

lighting_up_the_chalice

princessdon wrote: »

it would be valid advice - based on what the legislaion is NOW, but that wasn't what she said.

Each to their own and you are welcome and entitled to your opinion, but personally I didn't interpret anything other than advice that DLA and work (that are not linked at the moment) may be linked in the future.

So, you're fine with someone who is able to do a particular job being advised against it because his capability to do so would indicate that his eligibility for DLA may no longer apply?

I'm not. Because that is pretty much the definition of fraud.

princessdon

Nope - I don't see it being fraud

It is permitted. You can work and claim DLA - there is no fraud

Once the govt gets their behinds in gear and sorts it out - then yes I'd have exception.

Take another post currently ^^^ someone is so ill they can't work but can look after someone for 35 hours a week. Totally wrong IMO. DLA is either ridiculously easy to get or irregulated

But until the govt change this - I can't take exception to anyone who gives current and relevant advice.

clemmatis

lighting_up_the_chalice wrote: »

So, receiving DLA for mobility issues while working as a professional footballer would be just fine?

No. That would be a clear case of initial fraud or later breach of DLA rules. DLA recipients are required to report any change in their care/mobility needs. We are not required to report employment.

And Nannytone does not support benefit fraud.

lighting_up_the_chalice

princessdon wrote: »

Nope - I don't see it being fraud

It is permitted. You can work and claim DLA - there is no fraud

Once the govt gets their behinds in gear and sorts it out - then yes I'd have exception.

Take another post currently ^^^ someone is so ill they can't work but can look after someone for 35 hours a week. Totally wrong IMO. DLA is either ridiculously easy to get or irregulated

But until the govt change this - I can't take exception to anyone who gives current and relevant advice.

Well, I can, when that advice is to deceive.

lighting_up_the_chalice

clemmatis wrote: »

No. That would be a clear case of initial fraud or later breach of DLA rules. DLA recipients are required to report any change in their care/mobility needs. We are not required to report employment.

And Nannytone does not support benefit fraud.

And yet the advice that Nanny gave was, essentially, don't get a job as a professional footballer if you've stated mobility issues to claim DLA.