MSE News: Revealed: Councils overcharging 10,000s who are severely mentally impaired

John-K_3

Greenforgo wrote: »

I did describe a general over view of bipolar (and I'm sorry if that upset your sensibilities) but I didn't feel that I needed to quote from my journal. I am responding to the comment "Bipolar isn't an SMI"

But that is not true. That post is still there, you can go back and read it again if you want. You should maybe apologise...

Patr100

See my previous post on claiming for my late mother.
Here's a fuller quote from the guidelines. Note the difference from the definition of SMI in the Mental Health Act, for example.

Other points are:
It's possible that one doctor will support an application while another may not. It's possible that some doctors may consider some conditions as non permanent - or treatment may potentially reduce or eliminate some symptoms, depends how you interpret the "permanent" aspect as a clinician. The pro forma for local authorities differs. Some have a form , others require a letter.
If you've got your GP /doctor on your side to support and apply then fine. But I still had ,as I said earlier, the LA writing directly to my then 91 year old mum, to ask if her "permanent SMI" due to vascular dementia had changed and if so , she would no longer be eligible and if "she" didnt reply, the concession could be removed.

DEFINITION OF SEVERE MENTAL IMPAIRMENT AND CONDITIONS FOR DISCOUNT
The definition of severe mental impairment under the Act is exactly the same as for community charge purposes (under the Local Government Finance Act 1988 as amended). For the purposes of the Act a person is severely mentally impaired if he has a severe impairment of intelligence and social functioning (however caused) which appears to be permanent This definition applies only for the purposes of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. The definition is not the same as the definition of ;severe mental impairment in the Mental Health Act 1983.
A severely mentally impaired person will still satisfy the conditions for a discount from the council tax (and may be absolved of liability of the council tax) where:
I. he is severely mentally impaired as defined above: and
II. he satisfies at least one of a number of benefit conditions and
III. he is stated to be severely mentally impaired in a certificate provided by a registered
medical practitioner
!!!61623; In making a judgment on whether someone is severely mentally impaired it may be helpful for doctors to
know the reason for discount from the council tax. The aim of the council tax is to give taxpayers a direct
stake in the spending decisions of local authorities. Clearly this kind of accountability is much less
successful in the case of someone who is severely mentally impaired to the extent that he or she does not
have an understanding of local issues.
Doctors may wish to be aware that being classified as severely mentally impaired for the purpose of the
Local Government Finance Act 1992 does not affect the right to vote or to be included in the electoral
register which is complied separately and with different qualifying criteria

And this bit repeated below struck me as well. How many other people might be considered (for health or other reasons) not to have an "understanding of local issues"?

n making a judgment on whether someone is severely mentally impaired it may be helpful for doctors to know the reason for discount from the council tax. The aim of the council tax is to give taxpayers a direct stake in the spending decisions of local authorities. Clearly this kind of accountability is much less successful in the case of someone who is severely mentally impaired to the extent that he or she does not have an understanding of local issues.

Patr100

There's also the question of "permanence".
I've no doubt (I have suffered from chronic clinical depression in the past, thankfully not in recent years, and never to the extent of hospitalisation) that many conditions can be terrible and at times life threatening, but either with time, or treatment , or both , they can be controlled/minimised , change or hopefully pass for many. Though I accept not in all cases.

I guess this is where the GP or doctors assessment and judgement is part of the equation. If there is little prospect of improvement in a condition, they may understandably err on the side of caution.

Ames

I have Type II Bipolar and I've never read the regs as applying to me.

I worry that if some doctors are signing the forms for things like bipolar the end result will be the benefit being withdrawn for everyone.

caz340

Hi i Filled in the forms and had them signed by doctor for severely mentally impaired but because myself and her grandson her carers lived with her as shed needed 24/7 care everything doing for her was blind couldn't walk Alzheimer's and dementia etc and would not give it still had to pay full amount and house was mothers in her name.
surely this shouldn't happen and she shouldn't of had to pay

any ideas anyone

CIS

caz340 wrote: »

Hi i Filled in the forms and had them signed by doctor for severely mentally impaired but because myself and her grandson her carers lived with her as shed needed 24/7 care everything doing for her was blind couldn't walk Alzheimer's and dementia etc and would not give it still had to pay full amount and house was mothers in her name.
surely this shouldn't happen and she shouldn't of had to pay

any ideas anyone

Where there are other occs in the property who are not students/SMI then a charge will apply, there can be no exemption. The best that can be granted would be a 50% discount if every occupier was disregarded - for there to have been no reduction at all applied then there must have been at least 2 resident adults who were not disregarded for council tax purposes.

If you believe that there should have been disregards applied to other residents then you need to go back to the council as they are the only people who can determine any reduction.

[Deleted User]

caz340 wrote: »

Hi i Filled in the forms and had them signed by doctor for severely mentally impaired but because myself and her grandson her carers lived with her as shed needed 24/7 care everything doing for her was blind couldn't walk Alzheimer's and dementia etc and would not give it still had to pay full amount and house was mothers in her name.
surely this shouldn't happen and she shouldn't of had to pay

any ideas anyone

No, because you both live there who don't have SMI the discount is 0. If she lived alone or with other adults with SMI she wouldn't have to pay.

marliepanda

caz340 wrote: »

Hi i Filled in the forms and had them signed by doctor for severely mentally impaired but because myself and her grandson her carers lived with her as shed needed 24/7 care everything doing for her was blind couldn't walk Alzheimer's and dementia etc and would not give it still had to pay full amount and house was mothers in her name.
surely this shouldn't happen and she shouldn't of had to pay

any ideas anyone

She didn’t have to, but you and her grandson, assuming both over 18, had to pay.

There are discounts available for being a carer but there was likely to still be a charge as I do think both of you could have claimed the carers.

Who the house belongs to is irrelevant in this case.

CIS

Who the house belongs to is irrelevant in this case.

It would be relevant as far as who is named on the demand notice as liable to pay, if the mother was SMI but the sole resident owner/tenant she would remain liable.

marliepanda

CIS wrote: »

It would be relevant as far as who is named on the demand notice as liable to pay, if the mother was SMI but the sole resident owner/tenant she would remain liable.

But in this case, she wasn’t the sole resident.