Attendance allowance /carers allowance

kittykat17

jlawrence wrote: »

That is not entirely correct. Credits which are awarded due to claiming a relevant benefits, or having caring responsibilities or simply looking after children count towards the pension. These credits are not awarded because you have paid anything in, but more often because you have taken out of the system.

I wouldn't normally respond to one of your comments but this one has really annoyed me. I was my mother's carer for 10 years and yes as I had to care for 24 hours each and every day I wasn't able to work. For the first 4 years I did not claim any benefits and simply lived on my savings from having worked from 16 years old to 40 (when I had to stop). When I was finally told about Carer's allowance and put in a claim I had gone through every penny of my savings. Because of caring I lost the home that I had bought through working and ended up homeless and almost destitute, in addition my health suffered considerably. Admittedly I haven't paid anything in over the past few years but why should this mean I shouldn't get pension credits? I feel that I have paid in as I have saved the Gov thousands of pounds by caring - otherwise my mother would have had to go into a home which would cost considerably more each week than the pittance I receive in benefits.


Due to my health problems I am now waiting for a PIP decision but if successful I intend to return to work now that I am in a position to do so - my mother died a short while ago enabling me to return to work if I am able to. I still care for my father but this is not so time intensive as caring for my mother was.


There are many carer's in the same or similar positions to me - do they not deserve to receive pension credits so that when they retire they will receive the state pension? Most carers are not in a position to have a private pension so what would you expect them to do?

kingfisherblue

I agree kittykat. I paid into the system until I was 30, when I became my son's full time carer. He was born with major disabilities, having his first surgery at nine hours old. My son has both care and mobility needs, and needs care both day and night. Since he was six, I have been a single parent.

It ŵas suggested to me a while ago that I return to work part time. How I would love to! However, when my son is in school, I catch up on my sleep. I also do voluntary work that fits in with my caring responsibilities, so I do give something back, albeit not in tax payments. My voluntary work can be cancelled or rearranged according to my son's needs, so I can still attend appointments with him - and he has a number of consultants that he has to see, including surgeon, ENT, thoracic, audiologist, ophthalmologist, paediatrics, dental, and community paediatrician.

margaretclare

jlawrence wrote: »

I'm not, it is a figure of speech. Anyone for any reason that is in receipt of an income that exceeds the basic amount needed to live on should be treated as disregarded for all welfare benefits - they clearly don't actually need the extra.
I refer back to the Irishman who won millions on the Lottery yet still demanded that his DLA award for mobility continues to fund a new car every 3 years.
Please explain why Brown and Cameron needed the extra from DLA for their respective children? Were they so broke that it made a difference?

I am very glad that we do not yet live in a country where you are the sole arbiter and decision-maker about what is the 'basic amount needed to live on'.

As I indicated earlier, Messrs Brown and Cameron will be high rate taxpayers and therefore are helping to fund the very benefit they claimed for their disabled children.

pmlindyloo

Please note that Lawrence has admitted that he is a wind up merchant on another thread.