Community Care Grant, help needed, direction 7

lou_89

Hi,

Please, if anyone can advise on this..? I really need some expert help, or if anyone has been in this situation before?

It's a lengthy post, but everything is a complicated mess, and there's a lot of information.

I applied for a CCG on 12th July 2012 to help with costs for furnishing my flat, and with the help of Stockport Resettlement service and a floating support service. The CCG was refused outright, 14 items were declined for the following reason: 'we cannot consider an application for anything you have applied for within the last 26 weeks, if there has been no change in your circumstances.'

There were also 3 items that were declined for a different reason: 'After looking at your application and personal circumstances, we have decided that your need for what you have asked for does not have high enough priority.'

Previously, I had applied for a CCG that was declined on 18 November 2011, so in fact 26 weeks had passed, but when I called the DWP I was told this was a mistake on the letter and it should have read '52 weeks', as this was the new rule and the reason I was not eligible to apply.

This previous application in November was done by a different floating support service, NACRO, on my behalf, and was declined because: 'We can pay CCG to help people in certain circumstances... After looking at your application and personal circumstances, we have decided that the qualifying conditions for the payment of a CCG are not satisfied.'

I ought to have met the criterion 'to set up home in the community as part of a planned resettlement programme following a period when a person has had no permanent home.' So I thought there must have been a mistake with the application, but I had not seen what was written in it.

I have been advised to appeal this recent application, but I believe that simply reiterating my need for the grant would get me nowhere because of 'direction 7':

"Direction 7
A decision maker shall not determine any other crisis loan application, or a grant application, made within 12 months of a previous application by the same person for the same expenses for which a payment has already been awarded or refused unless there has been a relevant change of circumstances."

Also:

"Changes in circumstances.
If the application is for the same item, then direction 7 will not apply if there has been a relevant change in circumstances. Relevant changes may include:

- a change in the applicant’s personal circumstances, or those of his family.

Not all changes will be relevant, but any change that impacts either on the nature or urgency of the need, or on the reasons for an earlier application being refused, will be relevant. This will be the case however minor the impact and whether advantageous or disadvantageous. It is important to identify any changes in the applicant’s circumstances that are relevant to his need for an item for which he has made a previous application.

As far as I can see, my options include 2 possibilities:

1) Appeal the decision on the first application made in November, my reason for the lateness being my state of mind, mental health and lack of outside support over the past few months.
2) Claim a change in circumstances has occurred.

I have a couple of questions I can't find the answers to:

1) Can I appeal a decision for a previous application after already having submitted a second, fresh application?
2) In order to count, the change would have to be something substantial? Or could it be fairly minor? What kind of change in circumstances would they accept?

For a change in circumstances the only things I can think of are a decline in my state of mental health which I have evidence for, including a psychiatric referral, or a withdrawal of support that I have been relying on.

The latter involves a partner who has been able to provide both emotional and practical support during the past few months, but the relationship ended a few weeks ago. I have had to return some items that I borrowed to help me get by, such as plates, cutlery, a microwave, and folding camp bed. The bed I have not returned yet, I am delaying as I have nothing else to sleep on.

Would this count as a change in circumstances? Or not?

Please, any advice on how to proceed would be gratefully appreciated, I am at my wits end with this whole thing.

Many thanks,

Louisa

missapril75

Basically the change would need to relate to what prompts the need for the items now.

Putting aside the rights and wrongs of the original decision, it's the resettlement issues - most obviously moving into new accommodation - that should be triggering the need for the items claimed.

Having to return items borrowed and needing to obtain replacements, items wearing out, breaking, that sort of thing...that's not the same need. Tough as it is, that happens to others. It's not a resettlement need, but a normal need.

A change of address since last time might be relevant but for different needs. Like moving to accommodation where only bedding, personal things and a few utensils were needed and then - still as part of planned resettlement - moving to your own place where cooker, bed, more kitchen equipment etc was needed.

Or maybe the first go was unsuccessful and there was another period of some kind of care and a different plan, different type of accommodation maybe, to the first time.

If you are in the same flat now as for the last CCG application, your chances are not good unless it can be shown that a CCG would be essential for you to remain in the community. That would usually be where someone could stay in their own home with certain pieces of equipment to enable them to manage rather than go into some sort of residential accommodation.

You might have to go the budgeting loan route.

Whether one knows about the 26/52 week rules doesn't really come into it. The idea, for CCGs, is that individual circumstances trigger a need, not the length of time that went by since a previous application. It's more rigid for grants than loans.

There is just one thing that puzzles me. This latest refusal includes two reasons - the previous application and low priority items. I would have expected the refusal to have been not meeting the resettlement conditions now; as the relevant circumstances for that were last November when they didn't think you met the resettlement conditions.

It may be that insufficient info was given on the November one. Sometimes applicants and/or support workers believe it to be a formality to get a CCG when being rehoused and don't give enough information about the resettlement issues.

But you say that application had the support of NACRO and I wouldn't have thought they'd slip up that way.

lou_89

Hi,

thanks for your response.

I don't think I will be moving to any kind of supported accomodation, but, although far from ideal and not what I want to do, I was considering moving to a furnished private rent because I can't continue living this way.

missapril75 wrote: »

Having to return items borrowed and needing to obtain replacements, items wearing out, breaking, that sort of thing...that's not the same need. Tough as it is, that happens to others. It's not a resettlement need, but a normal need.

I’m not sure about this... Yes, having to return a borrowed microwave is normal, but that leaves me with just a toaster and kettle because my resettlement need for a cooker is ongoing due to not being met in November.

The length of time does matter, because that is this direction 7 barrier. With the circumstances I was in I ought to have been accepted for a grant back in November, and my living conditions now are hardly any different from then, only they won’t consider my application now because 52 weeks have not passed.

I don’t agree that I don’t meet the resettlement conditions now, the resettlement need is ongoing from last November because I still have not managed to obtain any of the items I need from any other source. I have no sofa, bed, cooker, fridge, carpets, wardrobe… I am still living on/out of boxes, and I am being supported by a resettlement worker, after having previously had an ‘unsettled way of life’.

A budgeting loan is not an option, I am struggling with the money I have and the repayments would be too difficult to manage.

NACRO was a huge mistake, I do think that they must have given insufficient information about my needs, and after the first grant was declined I found I was unable to get in touch with my NACRO worker, she stopped responding to my text messages or calls, and I never heard from her again, although I know she still works there. I was completely lost and out of my depth, I asked for an explanation and reasons why I had been refused a grant, but I got no explanation, and thus only managed by myself a feeble request for a review of the decision, which obviously failed.

Can anyone answer my question on whether I can appeal a first application after having sent another application?

Thanks.

BigAunty

I can't help with your specific entitlement question but I heartily recommend websites like Gumtree freebies, freecycle and freegle, for example, to help furnish your new place. Our local freeshare/freecycle sites allow people moving to new places to put up general ads to help furnish them.

Also, many charity shops offer very cheap household items and furniture. Emmaus, for example, sells their items cheaper to those on benefits.

In addition, there are many locally run furniture charities that donate goods to those who have been allocated property and have nothing or very little household goods.

eadieb

I was not aware of the change to 52 weeks but had been aware of the 26 weeks. when I submit CCG applications, we usually send in a supporting letter and copies of the support plan for the client. When your original claim was turned down, you should have been assisted to appeal as this might have been more successful.

It sounds like you have added a couple of new items onto the last application so I guess you might be able to appeal the decision to refuse those. However, unless they were high value items, it might not be worth the bother for a few pounds.

i would apply for a budgetting loan and I would ask your support worker to make some effort to contact charities. there is a database of all the charities in the uk that we use and you can shortlist the most appropriate ones to approach. It usually takes a lot longer than applying to benefits as some charities take months to decide or lengthy forms and evidence of income need to be provided. However I have had great success with this form of funding, especially for people who can show that they can not access any money from benefits. sometimes I have had 6 different charities make awards totalling several thousand pounds for one client, enough to furnish and carpet a family home. some charitys specialise in helping people who have worked in certain jobs. We had funding for an ex chamber maid from one who helped people who have worked in the hotel industry. another charity were for 'artists and gentlewomen' and they funded a single parents driving lessons. as a housing support worker, the applications take a lot of time and you get a lot of negatives back but eventually we have always got something from one of them.

Apart from the obvious charity shops, small ads and local recycling centres, there are often local charities who run furniture stores. Also get your worker to make contact with the local salvation army. best luck

missapril75

lou_89 wrote: »

The length of time does matter, because that is this direction 7 barrier. With the circumstances I was in I ought to have been accepted for a grant back in November, and my living conditions now are hardly any different from then, only they won’t consider my application now because 52 weeks have not passed.

That your living conditions are the same now don't have a bearing on a CCG application now. The key issue is as you said in your first post. "I ought to have met the criterion 'to set up home in the community."

Last November was when you set up home. Your living conditions may be the same now and you may still be receiving support, but you haven't just set up home.

NACRO was a huge mistake, I do think that they must have given insufficient information about my needs, and after the first grant was declined I found I was unable to get in touch with my NACRO worker, she stopped responding to my text messages or calls, and I never heard from her again, although I know she still works there. I was completely lost and out of my depth, I asked for an explanation and reasons why I had been refused a grant, but I got no explanation, and thus only managed by myself a feeble request for a review of the decision, which obviously failed.

Can anyone answer my question on whether I can appeal a first application after having sent another application?

A second review is, in theory, possible but you need to say why its late. Including those reasons.

From the social fund guide:

Further independent review

If you still think the decision is wrong, you can ask for a further review by a Social Fund Inspector. The Inspectors are independent from the Department for Work and Pensions. They can either agree with the Reviewing Officer’s decision, ask us to look at it again, or make their own decision. They will write to you explaining what their decision is, and why they reached it.
top of page
How to apply for a Social Fund Inspector’s review

To apply you can complete the tear-off application in leaflet IRS1 ”How to ask for an Independent Review on Social Fund grants and loans”. A copy of this leaflet should be enclosed with your review decision letter. Or you can write a letter saying why you want an independent review. Send your completed form or letter straight away to the:
Independent Review Service
FREEPOST,
4th Floor, Centre City Podium,
5 Hill Street,
Birmingham
B5 4UB.
If you write after 28 days, it will help if you give the reasons why. If someone writes the form or letter for you, add your consent in writing to the form or letter. But you do not have to do this if that person is your appointee.
For more information about the Independent Review Service go to www.irs-review.org.uk

I hope that's of use to you.

lou_89

Thanks for the Freecycle/charity information. I didn't have Internet access before but now I frequently check Freecycle, Greencycle, Gumtree etc., but as I don't drive collection is often a problem.

The CCG is my priority at the moment, if that fails then I will look into charities/loans as options.

eadieb wrote: »

...we usually send in a supporting letter and copies of the support plan for the client. When your original claim was turned down, you should have been assisted to appeal as this might have been more successful.

I don't think my NACRO worker had even set up a support plan for me, she filled out the CCG application for me and then disappeared. I wish I had help back then from the people I am working with now, I believe it would have been a different outcome as they are so much better.

The 3 items refused for priority were a washing machine, fridge freezer and kitchen utensils, and I was surprised because I'd have thought NACRO would have listed all major appliances on my first application. I don't think I have much chance of appealing those, as I would be considered not to have high enough needs for the items.

missapril75 wrote: »

That your living conditions are the same now don't have a bearing on a CCG application now... Last November was when you set up home. Your living conditions may be the same now and you may still be receiving support, but you haven't just set up home.

I can't see how this is right... I understand that a while has passed since I moved in, and it would probably be expected that I would have 'set up home' by now, but:

"Setting up home primarily involves finding somewhere to live, related tasks such as applying for housing benefit and arranging for connection of utilities, as well as furnishing the property and making it habitable."

...and I have not yet accomplished all the things listed above, so I would conclude that I could be considered as still setting up home, as this involves more than just moving in.

Thanks for the link and information on Inspector reviews.

I am wondering whether asking for a (late) review on my November application would be the better course of action over appealing the decision on this recent July application (doing so on the grounds of a change in circumstances)?

missapril75

lou_89 wrote: »

I am wondering whether asking for a (late) review on my November application would be the better course of action over appealing the decision on this recent July application (doing so on the grounds of a change in circumstances)?

My instinct says they'd not consider there's been a change. If a the late review request was accepted, I'd say that was your best chance. But it's a big if for it to be accepted.

Your current support workers may have some more up to date knowledge about the likely acceptance of late review requests.

There's still that issue I mentioned in my first post where they just turned you down for reasons relating to the November claim whereas I'd have expected them to not have accepted you're still setting up home.

But that might have been because it needed less "writing up" for their decision than going into the resettlement issues. Why examine the resettlement issue when they could turn it down for an "easier" and quicker reason if you see what I mean. I don't mean that in a careless way.

I suppose, given the period that's elapsed since last November, another couple of weeks delay won't do any harm. After all, you have been occupied further with the subject. Your reason for the extra delay could be that as this application was still pending, there'd be no point in asking for the November application to be renewed.

You sound like you can make your case quite well. So you could ask for a review of the latest application. Perhaps ask for a face to face interview - even if it takes a few days more to arrange.

If you get someone helpful and sympathetic (it is possible ) you might get some good advice from them as to whether a late review might get accepted. Or you might get them to come to a reasonable compromise and agree to do what should reasonably have happened last year. (There are such people in DWP)

If all that fails, then do the late review - detailing the things you have said here and anything else you feel may help, such as what you touched on in your first post.

Is stockportmind of any use? Maybe a second opinion?

Good luck.

enabledebra

http://www.irs-review.org.uk/infocent/commad/d7relcha/d7relad.pdf

There do seem to have been changes for you- my advice would be to take the action that gets you to the IRS fastest- different class of decison making to your local office.

lou_89

Thanks for the advice, and the link, it's an incredibly useful site.

As they actually list borrowed items as an example of a 'temporary change', now I know for sure that it counts.

I think I know the reason why my first application was declined, I thought I met all the conditions, except perhaps for one... If my NACRO worker did not have an adequate support plan set up for me (I am convinced she didn't) then I would have failed the eligibility for a grant as this is an absolute requirement.

So, from that, appealing the first application must now be out of the question, as I can't dispute the above.

Which leaves claiming a change of circumstances as my only option now.

missapril75 wrote: »

Why examine the resettlement issue when they could turn it down for an "easier" and quicker reason if you see what I mean.

I think it's a bit like jumping hurdles, they follow an order when checking eligibility of applications and checking if it's a repeat application comes before checking the applicant's circumstances, so since I failed at an early stage there was no point in them checking the rest.

Also, I have found confirmation that I should still meet the resettlement conditions:

4. The timing of the programme
The applicant must be setting up home as part of the planned resettlement programme. As setting up home involves more than simply moving into the property, an applicant can still be setting up home after he has been occupying the property for some time. If, for example, there was no (or very little) furniture in the flat, it would be difficult to say that he had completed the process of setting up home.

missapril75 wrote: »

Perhaps ask for a face to face interview

I didn't know I could do that, thanks I'll look into it.

missapril75 wrote: »

If you get someone helpful and sympathetic (it is possible )

...Lol.

enabledebra wrote: »

...my advice would be to take the action that gets you to the IRS fastest- different class of decison making to your local office.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, I have to follow the procedure? Which means my next step is to get the DWP to review their decision, and then go to the IRS after that, if I've got that right?

missapril75

When you've done with all this, you should be applying for a job as an advocate of some sort. You have a really good handle on this.

Originally Posted by enabledebra
...my advice would be to take the action that gets you to the IRS fastest- different class of decison making to your local office.

lou_89 wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by that, I have to follow the procedure? Which means my next step is to get the DWP to review their decision, and then go to the IRS after that, if I've got that right?

I think they meant that you could go the review route on the latest one and that would get you to the IRS quicker than the original one which would have involved a decision on its lateness and whether to accept it before considering the actual merits of the application.

A few years ago I thought people could skip the local review and go straight for IRS but the IRS site says the local review must be done first.