Holidays and Attendance Allowance

poppy12345

rockingbilly wrote: »

Teddysmum wrote the following as to how they are:

Well just 10 minutes drive up the road, to Tesco, has my joints needing a heat pad for the next hour or so and I'm not an AA candidate

To which I replied that if they aren't eligible for Attendance Allowance and my wife is it stands to reason that my wife must have more care needs than they do obviously.

but she may well claim PIP or DLA..

rockingbilly

Penitent wrote: »

The point is that one of the rules of receiving this benefit is that you have to do this. It doesn't matter if it makes sense to you or not.

I see. Well to me it's nonsensical. So what you are saying is that even if it makes no logical sense to us it makes sense to the DWP?

I do wonder, I really wonder.
Well I know what we will do that is unless someone can come up with a sensible and logical answer as to why not just have it at 13 weeks. The 4 weeks thing means nothing other than to create extra work.

rockingbilly

poppy12345 wrote: »

but she may well claim PIP or DLA..

Why not ask them?

rockingbilly

Anyhow thread closed I have the answer - don't agree with it, but I accept that there is some reason for the two periods being mentioned if only to create more work.

People are left to make up their minds of what they do, but seeing that it will be paid in any event for up to 13 weeks well.................

Muttleythefrog

rockingbilly wrote: »

I see. Well to me it's nonsensical. So what you are saying is that even if it makes no logical sense to us it makes sense to the DWP?

I do wonder, I really wonder.
Well I know what we will do that is unless someone can come up with a sensible and logical answer as to why not just have it at 13 weeks. The 4 weeks thing means nothing other than to create extra work.

To be honest billy... you knew the answer to your own question before starting the thread didn't you! I don't know the technical reason....and quite frankly I don't see any real importance (even to you and your wife!) to pursuing finding out... but is it not likely to be surrounding the concept of facts worth investigating. i.e... if someone is out of the country for significant time check they are not leaving for time that affects the benefit entitlement. (I recall being asked to prove savings were under £6k when I declared them as being a little under that.. had I declared them to be £100 I doubt they'd have bothered). Unless you get any more technical answer consider it a bit like pubs asking anyone who looks 21 or under to show ID that they're 18 or over... if they only looked at those who seemed to look under 18 they may miss many of those who actually are but look a bit older.

rockingbilly

Penitent wrote: »

*shrugs* It will make literally no difference to my life if you don't follow the rules of the benefit you're on.

I can guess at reasons why they might want to know--potential changes in care needs indicated by taking multiple long holidays, activity potentially not lining up with what's being claimed for, needing to know when you're available for reassessments, residency issues--but if you want to know for sure the answer is to contact the DWP and ask them.

Err no thanks. Every time I speak with that bunch I tend to wind them up into doing something that they hadn't previously considered doing - like, as you say, having my wife re-assessed again. They have done that to me many times with my DLA in the years gone by. Always had an indefinite award yet after I contacted them over something, normally a complaint about their inefficiency in not replying to my letters, I just happened to be re-assessed shortly afterwards. The DWP and myself have many years of bad blood and history between us.