ESA - does this sound right?

nannytone_2

TELLIT01 wrote: »

You, your partner, or both may be entitled to Carers Allowance if you can show you care for 35 hours per week or more. That would add roughly £45 per week. It's certainly worth investigating.

it wouldn't in these circumstances.
as was explained to the OP in his previous thread ...

as BOTH the OP and his wife are disabled, they receive 2 x SDP.
if they claim carers allowance instead they would LOSE around £50 a week

FBaby

But does good fortune health wise mean you should accept to be significantly worse off than if you're not? OP will get in total benefit what a working person on £45k raking into account tax and NI.

It is right that disabled people should not suffer financially as a result of their disabilities but it is understanding that some people would question the extent of the level of entitlement.

[Deleted User]

FBaby wrote: »

But does good fortune health wise mean you should accept to be significantly worse off than if you're not? OP will get in total benefit what a working person on £45k raking into account tax and NI.

It is right that disabled people should not suffer financially as a result of their disabilities but it is understanding that some people would question the extent of the level of entitlement.

I had to give up work 18 years ago due to disability and i still get nowhere near the amount in benefits that i earnt as a net wage back then and probably never will,but i totally agree that where possible people who are sick/disabled shouldn't suffer financially in europes 3rd richest and the worlds 6th richest country

Indie_Kid

FBaby wrote: »

But does good fortune health wise mean you should accept to be significantly worse off than if you're not? OP will get in total benefit what a working person on £45k raking into account tax and NI.

It is right that disabled people should not suffer financially as a result of their disabilities but it is understanding that some people would question the extent of the level of entitlement.

For some people, disability can be and is very expensive.

FBaby

I had to give up work 18 years ago due to disability and i still get nowhere near the amount in benefits that i earnt as a net wage back then and probably never will

I am sure that is the case for some, but not for many. The average earning is about £25K in this country I believe, so any benefits that takes you to an equivalent of £45K job is likely to mean that a majority of disabled people will be better off financially than if they would have been not disabled and working.

For some people, disability can be and is very expensive.

Indeed, and for many it isn't. You also have to factor in costs associated with working, in many cases, the main one being childcare which means that two working couple with children would end up much worse off.

The longer I am on this forum and read about individual instances of claiming benefits, the more I believe that biggest shake up required is to do with DLA/PIP and all the other benefits it leads access to. Many people and politicians think the same, but no-one dares tackling it as that would immediately lead to a label of being a horrible person who only wants the misery of disabled people.

I know that this is certainly not what I want. I want disabled people to have access to services/equipment/support that will help them live as a much a normal life as possible, however, we need to stop this throwing money with no requirement on how it should be spent.

On one hand you have very valuable services that have to be stopped because of lack of funding severely affecting the health of some people, on the other hand you have people who receive PIP and don't know what to do with it, so spend it on nice luxurious holidays. It isn't right.

I know I know, should be on the discussion board

merlin68

The man has a terminal illness, why shouldn't he be comfortable.

FBaby

Who said he shouldn't be comfortable? At the equivalent of a £40-45K job income, I would hope he can find a way to be so as he rightly should be. The question is why should he need even more to be so.

By the way, OP says he has a life limited illness, which is different to terminal. He could have been diagnosed with MS or type 1 diabetes which is life limiting, but doesn't mean he is terminal. Not undermining the impact at all, it must be very hard to adjust to such a diagnosis, but joint pointing out that it is not the same.

pmlindyloo

FBaby wrote: »

I am sure that is the case for some, but not for many. The average earning is about £25K in this country I believe, so any benefits that takes you to an equivalent of £45K job is likely to mean that a majority of disabled people will be better off financially than if they would have been not disabled and working.


Indeed, and for many it isn't. You also have to factor in costs associated with working, in many cases, the main one being childcare which means that two working couple with children would end up much worse off.

The longer I am on this forum and read about individual instances of claiming benefits, the more I believe that biggest shake up required is to do with DLA/PIP and all the other benefits it leads access to. Many people and politicians think the same, but no-one dares tackling it as that would immediately lead to a label of being a horrible person who only wants the misery of disabled people.

I know that this is certainly not what I want. I want disabled people to have access to services/equipment/support that will help them live as a much a normal life as possible, however, we need to stop this throwing money with no requirement on how it should be spent.

On one hand you have very valuable services that have to be stopped because of lack of funding severely affecting the health of some people, on the other hand you have people who receive PIP and don't know what to do with it, so spend it on nice luxurious holidays. It isn't right.

I know I know, should be on the discussion board

Yes, it should be on the discussion board

In fact SDP will be abolished when Universal Credit comes in for all although those currently on it will have transitional protection.

And yes, I misread the OP's thread and according to this one

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5248215

his illness has a prognosis of 1-5 years. (Sorry OP, I am not trying to minimise what must be a dreadful thing to have been told)

It seems that the OP would not have qualified for fast tracking.

Was just trying to explain that the ESA rate is the assessment rate at present and should go up once OP has been assessed and put into a group - WRAG or Support.

I also suspect some of the comments have been a reaction to posts about trying to exist on £70 or less a week. We have to remember that in most of these cases they are from able bodied people who can at least work - finding a job may seem more difficult in some areas of the country - but at least they have the ability to work.

It's a pity that some of the comments have 'scared off' the OP.

It is difficult not to comment sometimes but sadly it often does have the effect of some posters not returning.

nannytone_2

FBaby wrote: »

Who said he shouldn't be comfortable? At the equivalent of a £40-45K job income, I would hope he can find a way to be so as he rightly should be. The question is why should he need even more to be so.

By the way, OP says he has a life limited illness, which is different to terminal. He could have been diagnosed with MS or type 1 diabetes which is life limiting, but doesn't mean he is terminal. Not undermining the impact at all, it must be very hard to adjust to such a diagnosis, but joint pointing out that it is not the same.

he has been fast tracked onto PIP, and is being given benefit help via macmillan.

they don't just fast track you because you have a life limiting condition.... death has to be expected within a short time frame ( the opinion if doctors and not the claimant)

very few people receive such high benefit amounts, the majority receive far less)

FBaby

Only going by what OP said himself in his thread. If it is the case that OP is terminal, then my heart truly goes to him, but that's different to agreeing that they should be entitled to even more benefits than what they are already receiving.

I don't agree that very few people receive such high benefits. Why would it be any different for others in the same situation which is not that unusual?

My experience of people I know who claim disability benefits, especially those who are disabled themselves and have a disabled child(ren) is that they are entitlement to that amount and more when you add all the additional benefits that can be claimed, it is just that the larger public isn't yet aware of it.