Carer's council tax disregard

CIS

ThatManFid said:

Thanks @Albermarle it seems it's my LA that's being stubborn. I've quoted what you posted and even sent a copy of the guidance.  It's frustrating knowing you are right only to be told you are wrong without anything to back it up.

If councils did everything right I'd not in a job disputing them ! I'm often arguing with them over points of law that they refuse to concede on - often it needs to go in to minute spelling out.

Where the carers disregard is claimed for a person over 18, who is not a spouse, there's no bar on a couple both claiming as carers providing they meet the criteria. The disregard can then lead to a discount.

In this case, however, there's an SMI disregard for your daughter and a carers disregard for one of you. As long as the council add a 25% discount for both so there's a 50% discount overall then the end result is the same, as the maximum permissible discount is 50% regardless. It's a lazy way for the council to do it though as it means their records aren't accurate if they ever need to check anything or do run any reports from their systems.

ThatManFid

CIS said:

ThatManFid said:

Thanks @Albermarle it seems it's my LA that's being stubborn. I've quoted what you posted and even sent a copy of the guidance.  It's frustrating knowing you are right only to be told you are wrong without anything to back it up.

If councils did everything right I'd not in a job disputing them ! I'm often arguing with them over points of law that they refuse to concede on - often it needs to go in to minute spelling out.

Where the carers disregard is claimed for a person over 18, who is not a spouse, there's no bar on a couple both claiming as carers providing they meet the criteria. The disregard can then lead to a discount.

In this case, however, there's an SMI disregard for your daughter and a carers disregard for one of you. As long as the council add a 25% discount for both so there's a 50% discount overall then the end result is the same, as the maximum permissible discount is 50% regardless. It's a lazy way for the council to do it though as it means their records aren't accurate if they ever need to check anything or do run any reports from their systems.

@CIS thanks for taking time to reply.

 

To clarify my situation the SMI has been accepted but this hasn't led to a discount, which is fine. They 'only accept' the parent claiming CA as a carer. The other parent "'hasn't proved they are a carer".

So at the moment they have applied a 25% discount.

My first point to get an agreement on will be that both parents can be carers and therefore apply the correct 50% discount allowed.

I'm awaiting a reply on what evidence of the second carer (me) being a carer they want - although this may be difficult to do and I do not believe is required.

CIS

ThatManFid said:

CIS said:

ThatManFid said:

Thanks @Albermarle it seems it's my LA that's being stubborn. I've quoted what you posted and even sent a copy of the guidance.  It's frustrating knowing you are right only to be told you are wrong without anything to back it up.

If councils did everything right I'd not in a job disputing them ! I'm often arguing with them over points of law that they refuse to concede on - often it needs to go in to minute spelling out.

Where the carers disregard is claimed for a person over 18, who is not a spouse, there's no bar on a couple both claiming as carers providing they meet the criteria. The disregard can then lead to a discount.

In this case, however, there's an SMI disregard for your daughter and a carers disregard for one of you. As long as the council add a 25% discount for both so there's a 50% discount overall then the end result is the same, as the maximum permissible discount is 50% regardless. It's a lazy way for the council to do it though as it means their records aren't accurate if they ever need to check anything or do run any reports from their systems.

@CIS thanks for taking time to reply.

 

To clarify my situation the SMI has been accepted but this hasn't led to a discount, which is fine. They 'only accept' the parent claiming CA as a carer. The other parent "'hasn't proved they are a carer".

So at the moment they have applied a 25% discount.

My first point to get an agreement on will be that both parents can be carers and therefore apply the correct 50% discount allowed.

I'm awaiting a reply on what evidence of the second carer (me) being a carer they want - although this may be difficult to do and I do not believe is required.

Discounts are a pain, such much so that I regularly end up taking cases to tribunal for them. I shouldn't have to but after you've hit a brick wall there's little other option.

Councils are exceedingly bad at understanding legislation as they don't train their staff in the most part other than at a very superficial level. This means that they often don't understand what how the actual legislation works.

ThatManFid

Just to update those who have taken the time to comment, I have received confirmation that I will now get the correct 50% discount and it will be backdated.

It took another phone call because the original assessor refused to engage with me, but I finally got someone wiling to take ownership and it was resolved in a day.

Albermarle

ThatManFid said:

Just to update those who have taken the time to comment, I have received confirmation that I will now get the correct 50% discount and it will be backdated.

It took another phone call because the original assessor refused to engage with me, but I finally got someone wiling to take ownership and it was resolved in a day.

Good News !

Claiming CA is not necessary for the council tax disregard.  They could be working full-time and still providing care when they're not at work.
This is correct . I was disregarded as a carer even though I had a full time job . In fact I do not think I was ever even asked if I was working or not.