Reclaiming Attendance Allowance

tinkledom

I'm normally able to deal with most things that the DWP throw at us either by reading up on the subject and looking on forums like this one.
Well today is one of those days when I am completely lost so I have joined in the hope that someone can offer some guidance.

Here goes. We downsized from the family home to a bungalow because stairs were getting impossible to use as well as the cleaning tasks of the house. We made money on the sale and purchase and spent the profit on various adaptions for my wife such as hoists, specially adapted toilets, kitchen worktops that can rise and fall and a whole host of other expensive changes.
Now she has always had Attendance Allowance, high rate, for the past 5 years basically because she needed help in all manner of things, getting in and out of bed, the bath, toilet and even the lounge chairs (now have electrically operated rising chairs). We had to have the ceiling strengthened to cope with the rail tracks for the hoist that go into each room.
With all of this equipment and adaptions, she can clearly cope on her own (which was the idea just in case I went first).


Does this mean that as we have spent in excess of £125,000 in getting the home just right for her and she now doesn't need help from anybody else that I have to cancel the Attendance Allowance claim?

seven-day-weekend

AFAIK, if she no longer needs the help, then yes, you have to cancel it.

tinkledom

I can certainly see where you are coming from. But to me it seems a bit unfair.


We spent a fortune in trying to make things easier for her and in doing so spent our way out of nearly £80 a week in income.
So the moral of the matter is that you shouldn't spend money on helping yourself to improve your life in order to continue to receive an income. What would happen if medication relieved some care needs, does everyone notify an improvement based entirely on better medication?


We are now asset rich, with very little left in the bank, £3500 and a reduction in income of £80 a week. Not bad for trying to do the right thing.

jacques_chirac

Surely your wife's independence is worth all that and more?

bloolagoon

She could easily still be entitled. An electric chair doesn't mean she can put her tights on. She will need help when not in the house too. She could still need help with ironing, getting items from wardrobe, towels from airing cupboard etc even if she can use a shower.

Best idea would be to inform them of the improvements then let them decide.

lld01

I agree with the above poster. Your wife still has the same care needs, even if many of those needs are being provided for.

And attendance allowance is not just for needs around the house.

Give them a call and see what they say.

margaretclare

It's an interesting question, isn't it?

I personally would attempt to answer this by asking 'what is normal?' Is it usual or normal for a woman to be only able to sit in a 'riser' type chair or to have hoists which required ceilings to be strengthened? The OP says that his wife can 'cope on her own', but only by means of using various mechanical adaptations to her home. Is that what most people do i.e. those not claiming AA?

I think she's still entitled.

parcival

I would think she is still entitled but I wonder if the lower rate is now more appropriate.

Mojisola

tinkledom wrote: »

With all of this equipment and adaptions, she can clearly cope on her own (which was the idea just in case I went first).

Can she really? If you went away for a couple of weeks, would she be able to look after herself, prepare meals, remember to take any medication she has, etc.

tinkledom

I see, a very mixed bag of suggestions and opinions. Some that she isn't entitled to anything, some maybe the reduced rate is paid and some that it should not make any difference.
I suppose the answer is to tell the DWP what has happened and the full extent of the adaptions provided and how they have removed the needs she used to have and take it from there.
I note one person talked about domestic chores, they aren't allowed. The person that asked if she could live on her own now. Yes she could, that was the whole reason for having the home adapted in the first place.


Everything in the kitchen is at waist level, the worktops and hob rise and fall at the press of a button. The oven, washing machine, fridge, freezer, dishwasher and all cupboards are at waist level Likewise the bathroom, everything is electronically controlled so that she is able to wash herself. Even the toilets wash and dry her before she gets up off them. She can get to both the front and back doors easily. Her medication is prepared for a month in advance. We wouldn't have spent all that money if she wasn't able to be independent.

PlymouthMaid

I agree that it would be harsh if you lost the AA. I also commend you for making your wife's (and yours by default) life more comfortable as it can be demeaning, embarrassing and dispiriting for both parties when a lot of care is required. I would think, however, that your wife is still not in a position where it would be fine to leave her unattended for too long so perhaps the lower rate will apply.

The only way to know is if you ask them but to be honest if this had been my Dad (who has Parkinson's disease) and we had adapted in the way you have, I would not have even thought that he would no longer qualify but of course every disability/illness is different in its symptoms.

Does your wife feel that she could truly cope alone for days/weeks on end if she had to?