Claiming AA/DLA - risking by claiming Carers Allowance.

satarical

I have just had a very enlightening and fruitful home visit and conversation with a Welfare Rights Officer from the County Council.

It would appear that when couples are both in receipt of a qualifying benefit (AA or DLA MRC/HC) AND they attempt to claim Carers Allowance for each other, the DWP/Tribunal Service are now actively viewing those claims as matters of concern as to whether the AA or DLA has been correctly awarded. A case that he is involved with currently went against a claimant when the FT Tribunal heard that the DLA applicant was already in receipt of CA for his wife. One of the reasons to refuse the claim was the fact that the Tribunal thought (as do the DWP now) that having a CA award AND attempting to claim DLA for himself were incompatible.

This has long been thought to be the case but many have argued that it is compatible.

The writing could well be on the wall with these 'double claims' for the future.

Maybe thoughts should be directed to that it may be better to lose the CA to gain the DLA or indeed PIP in time to come.

Being greedy and trying to get both may now be the wrong thing to do.

rogerblack

First tier tribunals do not set the law, they interpret it.

Their decisions should implement the law as it stands.
Having DLA, and claiming CA for someone else may raise legitimate concerns about your DLA claim - depending on what care you provide.

I am not aware of any recent decisions by the upper tribunal that would change the interpretation of the law in any way.

Clealry, some claims of CA, when the claimant is in reciept of DLA are justified.
For example - someone who is blind, and due to memory problems can do very little for themselves may be able to care for someone who is disabled physically, with prompting from that person.
And the other person may be able to care for the blind person by prompting them using their sight.

If you get DLA on the basis of being unable to safely prepare food, and prepare food for someone else daily - that would of course raise legitimate questions.

To quote the sticky on 'benefits and tax credits' - 'It's about entitlement - not policy'.

satarical

rogerblack wrote: »

First tier tribunals do not set the law, they interpret it.

Their decisions should implement the law as it stands.
Having DLA, and claiming CA for someone else may raise legitimate concerns about your DLA claim - depending on what care you provide.

I am not aware of any recent decisions by the upper tribunal that would change the interpretation of the law in any way.

Clealry, some claims of CA, when the claimant is in reciept of DLA are justified.
For example - someone who is blind, and due to memory problems can do very little for themselves may be able to care for someone who is disabled physically, with prompting from that person.
And the other person may be able to care for the blind person by prompting them using their sight.

If you get DLA on the basis of being unable to safely prepare food, and prepare food for someone else daily - that would of course raise legitimate questions.

To quote the sticky on 'benefits and tax credits' - 'It's about entitlement - not policy'.

I agree with you there will be genuine cases. But the vast majority just see more money is available without really thinking about all of the consequences of making that claim for CA.

I have severe mobility problems as well as needing care during the day. My wife requires care 24/7.
In the cold light of day, there is no way that I could genuinely say that I care for her and her for me - not 5 hours every day.

There are many things that neither of us can do for each other.

I am pleased that this abuse of the CA system is being looked at - we all know what goes on in reality - many claim to care for each other that an ordinary guy would consider impossible given the circumstances.

It was just a point of making people aware that the DWP have moved on from using the ESA assessment to review any DLA/AA award to reviewing the DLA/AA award in the light of a claim being made for CA by each other.