DWP discrimination against elderly and Disabled

Spoonie_Turtle

M25 said:

And what happened to the £24K? That is a form of compensation too.

" … which will go towards a wet room, a stairlift, a mobility vehicle, and garden landscaping."  (Crowdfunded, not compensation.)

whizzywoo

Is the pensioner and his wife in receipt of Pension Credit?  

If yes then this may be increased as a result of now receiving Attendance Allowance.

If no then the income threshold will be increased as a result of now receiving Attendance Allowance and therefore they may now qualify.

The best idea would be to have a meeting with a suitable Benefits Advisor like Age Concern.

elsien

According to a different newspaper article, the gentleman has a pension which makes him ineligible for the means tested disabled facilities grant for property adaptations.  So unlikely to be on means tested benefits.
He could probably look at a compensation case against the dog owners however I suppose they have to have enough money to be able to pay if he wins 

elsien

Moving away from the original question, and just because I’m interested, I looked up why there was no compensation from the criminal injuries board.
And that is because it’s about assaults committed by people, and animal attacks are specifically excluded in the legislation unless the animal was deliberately used as a weapon. 

Muttleythefrog

Emmia said:

I hadn't seen the story, but in any case should the OP be on here asking about someone who is now identifiable?

We're all identifiable...and essentially by default those we know who we discuss... anonymity is a mindset not a reality.... I imagine it would take less than 5 minutes for someone to work out who I am if they truly wanted to.

Hopefully there is some legal avenue to seeking compensation directly from the offenders in this case... it's a shocking one. Otherwise they need to make sure they're getting all they are entitled to

EnPointe

kapplin said:

Helping a 80 year old man who was attacked by two Rottweilers 18 months  ago and lost an arm and leg as a result. He can’t travel safely in a car so needs a mobility car with wheelchair access. Naturally following such an awful event you would assume that he qualifies for the mobility scheme but no! 

He can’t get PIP as too old, did not have DLA before his attack and only has attendance allowance. 

Attendance allowance is not a qualifying benefit so he does not meet the criteria.

He has no savings and only a small personal pension on top of state pension. His wife is unwell and is in the same situation. 

How can this be right?? 

PIP  is a working age benefit  

/thread

teddysmum

EnPointe said:

kapplin said:

Helping a 80 year old man who was attacked by two Rottweilers 18 months  ago and lost an arm and leg as a result. He can’t travel safely in a car so needs a mobility car with wheelchair access. Naturally following such an awful event you would assume that he qualifies for the mobility scheme but no! 

He can’t get PIP as too old, did not have DLA before his attack and only has attendance allowance. 

Attendance allowance is not a qualifying benefit so he does not meet the criteria.

He has no savings and only a small personal pension on top of state pension. His wife is unwell and is in the same situation. 

How can this be right?? 

PIP  is a working age benefit  

/thread

Kapplin appears quite aware of this, but they are explaining that he was not in receipt of DLA, which is retained after State  Pension age, if awarded before this age and that he couldn't have PIP as older people were not required to change from DLA.

Murphybear

kapplin said:

Helping a 80 year old man who was attacked by two Rottweilers 18 months  ago and lost an arm and leg as a result. He can’t travel safely in a car so needs a mobility car with wheelchair access. Naturally following such an awful event you would assume that he qualifies for the mobility scheme but no! 

He can’t get PIP as too old, did not have DLA before his attack and only has attendance allowance. 

Attendance allowance is not a qualifying benefit so he does not meet the criteria.

He has no savings and only a small personal pension on top of state pension. His wife is unwell and is in the same situation. 

How can this be right?? 

It’s morally wrong.  The DWP were taken to court over this as it’s blatant discrimination.  However the judge ruled it wasn’t discrimination.  🙀🙀🙀. The government of the time decided that they couldn’t afford to let the pensioners have a Motability car as it would cost the country too much money.  That hasn’t changed 😿. I believe it was deliberate that pensioners don’t get a mobility component in Attendance Allowance.

I’m afraid this is a battle we are unlikely to win.  However the government has made it clear that AA can be spent on whatever improves the quality of life.  I know many pensioners use it to take a taxi to visit their GP surgery or the hospital.