Hearing Difficulties - Additional Tax Credits???

[legalpickle]

Hi All,

 

A close friend has serious hearing difficulties since birth. A few years ago he was diagnosed with "acute deafness". I have been dealing with stuff for him for a while, and can vouch for the fact that he is borderline deaf! When talking to him I need to look him in the face and shout!!! He can't hear the phone ring very often, and when he picks up from people he knows he just says "text" or if it's his job (he's a delivery driver for a restaurant) he just says "I'll be right there" and hangs up.

 

I was filling in a Tax Credit claim form for a friend and as I haven't filled in one for quite a while I read the booklet cover to cover. Pages 22-24 deal with the disability element, but before I go into that a few additional notes:

 

1) He does not qualify for DLA as he has no mobility issues.

2) He does not qualify for Incapacity Benefit as whilst it is difficult he can work.

3) He does not qualify for Income Support as he earns too much (though he still can't be classed as wealthy by any means).

4) He is married with 4 children. His wife does not work. They get Child Benefits & Child Tax Credits as well as Working Tax Credits for him.

5) He does not wear a hearing aid - and I accept some will have problems with this - because he feels extremely embarrassed (as well as the fact that it would have limited benefits). The local community is very tight-knit and being that he is 31 it would be extremely embarrassing to him and his family. In my opinion this can be classed as a "psychological problem".

 

My understanding is that even though he does not qualify for DLA or IB he is entitled to an added bonus to his WTC, because he has a condition which affects his ability to work, whilst he still can work; which is the point of the Disability Element of WTC.

 

He clearly satisfies Condition 1 - working for more than 16hrs weekly & Condition 2 - having a disability that puts him at a disadvantage in getting a job; but doesn't satisfy Condition 3.

 

He hasn't received and doesn't receive a qualifying (or any) sickness or disability benefit. However, my understanding is that this is not a clause to prevent the Disability Element as the primary conditions are satisfied.

 

My understanding is that with a letter from his GP he can get the Disability Element of WTC.

 

Please can anybody comment as to my conclusions and explain if they think I am wrong. I spoke to Tax Credits yesterday who claimed he could get the Disability Element - based on my statements, and without giving his details - and that to do so we should write a letter and send a letter from his GP to TCO in Preston; but it has not been unknown of HMRC to give misleading or incorrect advice in the past, so I would appreciate further clarification and/or confirmation from anybody with experience in this field.

 

Ta,

legalpickle

[honeybee13]

Hello Legal.

 

Have you looked at websites for charities like RNID? Often, organisations like that are pretty clued up. Hope you find some answers.

[ErikaPNP]

He won't qualify for the severe disability element of £1,075, as to receive this he must be in receipt of the Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance, or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance.

 

He would not qualify for the disability element of £2530.00 as all of the conditions have to be satisfied, not just the first two. There are no "primary" and "secondary" conditions - they must all be satisfied to qualify. Whilst is is true that a person does not have to currently be in receipt of a qualifying benefit for the disability element, they do have to either

a) be in receipt of a qualifying benefit

or

b) have recently received a qualifying benefit

in addition to conditions 1 and 2.

 

The TCO fact sheet on this is here

 

You may also want to look up the Tax Credits Act 2002, and The Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2005).

[legalpickle]

Hello Legal.

 

Have you looked at websites for charities like RNID? Often, organisations like that are pretty clued up. Hope you find some answers.

Thanks for the idea, I plan to call RNID in the morning. Any other ideas would be muchas gracias.

 

He won't qualify for the severe disability element of £1,075, as to receive this he must be in receipt of the Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance, or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance.

 

He would not qualify for the disability element of £2530.00 as all of the conditions have to be satisfied, not just the first two. There are no "primary" and "secondary" conditions - they must all be satisfied to qualify. Whilst is is true that a person does not have to currently be in receipt of a qualifying benefit for the disability element, they do have to either

a) be in receipt of a qualifying benefit

or

b) have recently received a qualifying benefit

in addition to conditions 1 and 2.

 

The TCO fact sheet on this is here

 

You may also want to look up the Tax Credits Act 2002, and The Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2005).

Thanks for your post.

 

This seems a bit unfair, doesn't it? The purpose of the additional benefit of £2,530 is for people who suffer from disabilities that affect their ability to work - including hearing disabilities - but those with hearing disabilities alone cannot claim any other qualifying benefit. This purpose was clearly the intent of Parliament when legislating on this matter.

 

I'm sure this issue must have been raised before and I'm sure somebody has managed to find a loophole. Any other ideas are very much welcomed.

[pompeyfaith]

i am in the same situation i get IB higher rate due to a stroke which has left me with right sided disabilities as well as various mental conditions but cannot get this element just how disabled do u have to be?

[pompeyfaith]

and yes as 4 work it too puts me at a disadvantage

[legalpickle]

i am in the same situation i get IB higher rate due to a stroke which has left me with right sided disabilities as well as various mental conditions but cannot get this element just how disabled do u have to be?

and yes as 4 work it too puts me at a disadvantage

 

pompeyfaith,

 

You're not in the same position as my friend. You are entitled to IB Higher Rate and as such if you could work you would the Disability Element of WTC.

 

You can't get WTC, hence wouldn't be able to get the Disability Element of WTC. WTC is for those who work more than 16 hours a week, and as you get IB, which is for those who can't work at all, you can't get WTC; hence you can't get the Disability Element of WTC.

 

To summarize;

1) IB is for those who cannot work due to disabilities.

2) If you find work [more than 16 hours weekly], and thus come off IB, you are entitled to WTC and as you would have just come off IB, would be entitled to the Disability Element of WTC.

3) The Higher Rate of the Disability Element of WTC is for those who are on Higher Rate Mobility DLA.

 

My friend can work, hence doesn't get IB and hasn't been on IB. He can't get DLA as he has no mobility issues whatsoever.

 

In my opinion, though whether this is Law or not is currently unclear; he should be entitled to the basic award of WTC Disability Element as hearing difficulties are clearly a disability that puts him at a disadvantage in getting a job.

 

As to whether you're entitled even to low rate DLA, I don't know. Yes, one can get this with IB. I suggest you start a new thread in this section if you want assistance with this matter; but I warn you it will be a nightmare to deal with and you will NEED CAB help!

 

legalpickle

[pompeyfaith]

i have a claim for dla ongoing but this is a grey area as the hmrc site says if eather you or your wife work 16 hrs

[legalpickle]

i have a claim for dla ongoing but this is a grey area as the hmrc site says if eather you or your wife work 16 hrs

I suggest you start a new thread in this section for more advice on your benefits issues.

[ErikaPNP]

The Higher Rate of the Disability Element of WTC is for those who are on Higher Rate Mobility DLA.

 

This is incorrect. To qualify for the higher rate of the disability element (severe disability) the person must be receiving Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance, or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance. Mobility doesn't come into it.

 

but those with hearing disabilities alone cannot claim any other qualifying benefit.

 

This is also incorrect. People with hearing disabilities can receive one of the qualifying benefits.

 

He can't get DLA as he has no mobility issues whatsoever.

 

DLA is not payable solely on the basis of limited mobility. There is also the care component of DLA, which plenty of people with hearing difficulties receive.

 

If he doesn't qualify for any of the "qualifying benefits", has never had to claim one of the qualifying benefits, and has always managed to secure employment, then I would suggest that his condition does not affect his ability to work, harsh as that may seem - which is the basis for the three conditions having to be satisfied. The legislation is perfectly clear in that the disabled person must have been receiving one of the "qualifying benefits" in order to be eligible.

[legalpickle]

This is incorrect. To qualify for the higher rate of the disability element (severe disability) the person must be receiving Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance, or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance. Mobility doesn't come into it.

Not according to Tax Credits helpline or JobCentre Plus - who stated that DLA High Rate Mobility automatically awards one the Higher Rate element of either Tax Credits, Incapacity Benefit and/or Income Support.

 

This is also incorrect. People with hearing disabilities can receive one of the qualifying benefits.

Not according to JobCentre Plus, or the assessing centre for DLA. People with hearing difficulties as one of several disabilities probably will, but hearing difficulties alone are unlikely to as one with serious hearing difficulties can still take care of themselves.

 

DLA is not payable solely on the basis of limited mobility. There is also the care component of DLA, which plenty of people with hearing difficulties receive.

People with hearing difficulties who receive the Care Component don't receive it solely because of the hearing difficulties - confirmed by JobCentre Plus today.

 

If he doesn't qualify for any of the "qualifying benefits", has never had to claim one of the qualifying benefits, and has always managed to secure employment, then I would suggest that his condition does not affect his ability to work, harsh as that may seem - which is the basis for the three conditions having to be satisfied. The legislation is perfectly clear in that the disabled person must have been receiving one of the "qualifying benefits" in order to be eligible.

I think this is OTT harsh. Till you know him I don't think you can comment on this. I was in touch with somebody else in the know today who agrees with me and will be doing further research.

 

The definitions for the Care and Mobility components of DLA are very tough, and claimants go through considerable hassle before getting them - with many claimants being refused in the process despite having substantial difficulties. How much more so, somebody with "only" serious hearing difficulties.

 

I am sure there are a susbtantial amount of claimants of such benefits with serious hearing difficulties but they will most likely have underlying problems or other problems caused by this.

 

Also, in the local Jewish community people take care of their own. Rather like many other close-knit communities. People with difficulties are probably more likely to be coached and trained into a job if they are a member of a community than they are if they are a member of the public; hence my friend has a job - in a case where many others probably wouldn't.

[ErikaPNP]

I will place my answers in red.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikaPNP

This is incorrect. To qualify for the higher rate of the disability element (severe disability) the person must be receiving Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance, or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance. Mobility doesn't come into it.

 

Not according to Tax Credits helpline or JobCentre Plus - who stated that DLA High Rate Mobility automatically awards one the Higher Rate element of either Tax Credits, Incapacity Benefit and/or Income Support.

Response: HM Revenue & Customs: You have a disability - can you get extra tax credits? Scroll down to "Severe Disability". It states:

If you have a severe disability If you - and/or your partner - get the Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance, you may qualify for a further amount of tax credits because of your severe disability.

 

 

Also The Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002 (REG 17)

 

 

Severe disability element

Severe disability element

17. - (1) The determination of the maximum rate must include the severe disability element if the claimant, or, in the case of a joint claim, one of the claimants satisfies paragraph (2).

 

(2) A person satisfies this paragraph if a disability living allowance, attributable to the care component payable at the highest rate prescribed under section 72(3) of the Contributions and Benefits Act or an attendance allowance at the higher rate prescribed under section 65(3) of that Act -

 

(a) is payable in respect of him; or

 

(b) would be so payable but for a suspension of benefit by virtue of regulations under section 113(2) of the Contributions and Benefits Act (suspension during hospitalisation), or an abatement as a consequence of hospitalisation.

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikaPNP

This is also incorrect. People with hearing disabilities can receive one of the qualifying benefits.

 

 

Not according to JobCentre Plus, or the assessing centre for DLA. People with hearing difficulties as one of several disabilities probably will, but hearing difficulties alone are unlikely to as one with serious hearing difficulties can still take care of themselves.

 

 

Tosh. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/vol10.pdf

 

Hearing

61130 If a person with severe hearing difficulties needs a third party to interpret in order to

communicate with another, the interpreter is providing attention with the bodily

functions of hearing (and normally speaking). In a two-way conversation however,

where the parties are signing or lip reading rather than speaking to communicate,

that will not amount to attention as communication is being maintained normally.

Someone who has to speak more loudly or slowly, or listen more carefully is not

providing attention. Only if there is an element of service involved is the other party

to a two-way conversation providing attention; for example, when teaching a deaf

person to learn sign language.

 

Assessment of the degree of deafness

61338 The DM should refer cases to Medical Services for advice on the degree of the

disabilities. When advising on the degree of deafness, Medical Services will arrange

for an audiogram test to assess the person's average hearing loss in each ear,

measured in decibels (dB)1. If the person does not satisfy the “blind” test (see DMG

61337 1.) there will be no need to carry out an audiogram to test their degree of

deafness.

1 reg 34(2)

61339 A person with severe or total hearing loss in one ear but normal hearing in the other

ear will have no or minimal hearing impairment. They can compensate for the deaf

ear by turning their head. Any test of hearing, including formal testing by

audiometry, needs to ascertain the loss in each ear separately. The overall degree

of hearing impairment is then determined by considering the effects of both deficits

in combination.

See also appendix 2.

 

and here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/ch42-23312.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikaPNP

DLA is not payable solely on the basis of limited mobility. There is also the care component of DLA, which plenty of people with hearing difficulties receive.

 

 

People with hearing difficulties who receive the Care Component don't receive it solely because of the hearing difficulties - confirmed by JobCentre Plus today.

 

 

Again, absolute rubbish. Of course they are going to say that - they are turning down DLA claims at a rate of noughts, over 50% of appeals for this are successful. If a person has hearing difficulties and requires help in communicating (even for short periods) during the day they may qualify for the Care component. The rate would depend upon the level of assistance required.

 

JCP are routinely told they should NEVER tell a person whether they will likely qualify. The reason for this is that an application has to be submitted and the relevant medical assessments performed and the results interperated BEFORE they can state a person does not qualify. It is not confirmation until a decision letter pops through the post stating he does not qualify, following an application.

[pompeyfaith]

Legalpickle,

 

Not sure if you have read this, but you may find it useful.

 

DPTC: Meaning of Disadvantage In Getting A Job (DIGAJ)

 

PF

[legalpickle]

I will place my answers in red.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikaPNP

This is incorrect. To qualify for the higher rate of the disability element (severe disability) the person must be receiving Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance, or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance. Mobility doesn't come into it.

 

Response: HM Revenue & Customs: You have a disability - can you get extra tax credits? Scroll down to "Severe Disability". It states:

If you have a severe disability If you - and/or your partner - get the Highest Rate Care Component of Disability Living Allowance or the Higher Rate of Attendance Allowance, you may qualify for a further amount of tax credits because of your severe disability.

Also The Working Tax Credit (Entitlement and Maximum Rate) Regulations 2002 (REG 17)

 

Severe disability element

Severe disability element

17. - (1) The determination of the maximum rate must include the severe disability element if the claimant, or, in the case of a joint claim, one of the claimants satisfies paragraph (2).

 

(2) A person satisfies this paragraph if a disability living allowance, attributable to the care component payable at the highest rate prescribed under section 72(3) of the Contributions and Benefits Act or an attendance allowance at the higher rate prescribed under section 65(3) of that Act -

 

(a) is payable in respect of him; or

 

(b) would be so payable but for a suspension of benefit by virtue of regulations under section 113(2) of the Contributions and Benefits Act (suspension during hospitalisation), or an abatement as a consequence of hospitalisation.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikaPNP

This is also incorrect. People with hearing disabilities can receive one of the qualifying benefits.

 

 

Tosh. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/vol10.pdf

 

Hearing

61130 If a person with severe hearing difficulties needs a third party to interpret in order to

communicate with another, the interpreter is providing attention with the bodily

functions of hearing (and normally speaking). In a two-way conversation however,

where the parties are signing or lip reading rather than speaking to communicate,

that will not amount to attention as communication is being maintained normally.

Someone who has to speak more loudly or slowly, or listen more carefully is not

providing attention. Only if there is an element of service involved is the other party

to a two-way conversation providing attention; for example, when teaching a deaf

person to learn sign language.

 

Assessment of the degree of deafness

61338 The DM should refer cases to Medical Services for advice on the degree of the

disabilities. When advising on the degree of deafness, Medical Services will arrange

for an audiogram test to assess the person's average hearing loss in each ear,

measured in decibels (dB)1. If the person does not satisfy the “blind” test (see DMG

61337 1.) there will be no need to carry out an audiogram to test their degree of

deafness.

1 reg 34(2)

61339 A person with severe or total hearing loss in one ear but normal hearing in the other

ear will have no or minimal hearing impairment. They can compensate for the deaf

ear by turning their head. Any test of hearing, including formal testing by

audiometry, needs to ascertain the loss in each ear separately. The overall degree

of hearing impairment is then determined by considering the effects of both deficits

in combination.

See also appendix 2.

 

and here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/ch42-23312.pdf

Quote:

Originally Posted by ErikaPNP

DLA is not payable solely on the basis of limited mobility. There is also the care component of DLA, which plenty of people with hearing difficulties receive.

 

 

Again, absolute rubbish. Of course they are going to say that - they are turning down DLA claims at a rate of noughts, over 50% of appeals for this are successful. If a person has hearing difficulties and requires help in communicating (even for short periods) during the day they may qualify for the rate Care component. The rate would depend upon the level of assistance required.

 

JCP are routinely told they should NEVER tell a person whether they will likely qualify. The reason for this is that an application has to be submitted and the relevant medical assessments performed and the results interperated BEFORE they can state a person does not qualify. It is not confirmation until a decision letter pops through the post stating he does not qualify, following an application.

Some of your quotes are interesting and I will look into them, however everything I quoted above was what I have been told over the phone by Jobcentre Plus, Tax Credits and others. I therefore cannot agree or disagree with most of what you say on the basis of experience or law.

 

Jobcentre Plus did state they can only advise what conditions will mean a person cannot qualify, not relevant to the personal circumstances of that person. What I wrote was what they told me on the phone.

 

Finally, I know for a fact that Higher Rate Mobility - without Higher Rate Care - allows one to claim the Severe Disability Element of Tax Credits and of Income Support or Incapacity Benefit - because I was on it! [i was not on High Rate Care though!]

 

Legalpickle,

 

Not sure if you have read this, but you may find it useful.

 

DPTC: Meaning of Disadvantage In Getting A Job (DIGAJ)

 

PF

Thanks PompeyFaith, I'll look into it.

[ErikaPNP]

Some of your quotes are interesting and I will look into them, however everything I quoted above was what I have been told over the phone by Jobcentre Plus, Tax Credits and others. I therefore cannot agree or disagree with most of what you say on the basis of experience or law.

 

Jobcentre Plus did state they can only advise what conditions will mean a person cannot qualify, not relevant to the personal circumstances of that person. What I wrote was what they told me on the phone.

 

Finally, I know for a fact that Higher Rate Mobility - without Higher Rate Care - allows one to claim the Severe Disability Element of Tax Credits and of Income Support or Incapacity Benefit - because I was on it! [i was not on High Rate Care though!]

 

 

.

 

I would encourage you to follow it up. I routinely help people with these claims thus I know what I am talking about and I know the law in regard to it. If I am wrong, I am happy to hold my hands up to it. But what I have told you is direct quotes from legislation, Tax credit fact sheets and DWP decision maker's guidance.

 

The higher rate mobility alone does NOT qualify for SD of Tax credits, as defined in the legislation. Receving it does not mean it is correct - errors occur all the time. The amount I deal with in a day due to official error and claimants being requested to pay it back does not bear thinking about. If you received this then I would be prepared to defend a request for repayment of an overpayment if they ever find out about it. Mistakes are made, they are not infallible (far from it!)

[MelissaTeddyBear]

Hello legalpickle

 

I can see that what you are doing is well intentioned but it is best not to rely on what you are told by someone on the telephone. It is more helpful if you can supply actual guidance that can be verified. I do not think that Higher Rate Mobility gets you Severe Disability Premium on Income Support. The reason I think this way is because of what it says in the Decision Makers Guide.

 

Lower rate

23202 Single claimants, lone parents and claimants who are deemed to have no partner

(see DMG 23205) are entitled to the lower rate SDP if

1. they are in receipt of

1.1 “AA” (see DMG 23071) or

1.2 the middle or highest rate of the care component of DLA and

2. there are no non-dependants aged 18 or over

2.1 normally residing (see DMG 23209) with the claimant or

2.2 who the claimant normally resides with and

3. CA is not in payment to anyone for caring for them (see DMG 23236)1.

1 JSA Regs, Sch 1, para 15(1); IS (Gen) Regs, Sch 2, para 13(2)(a)

23203 Members of a couple or polygamous marriage are entitled to the lower rate SDP if

1. each member of the couple or polygamous marriage is in receipt of

1.1 “AA” or

1.2 the middle or highest rate of the care component of DLA and

2. there are no non-dependants aged 18 or over

2.1 normally residing (see DMG 23209) with the claimant or

2.2 who the claimant normally resides with and

Severe disability premium 23204 23207

Vol 4 Amendment 10 May 2003

3. CA is in payment (see DMG 23236) to someone for caring for one

3.1 of a couple or

3.2 or more, but not all, of the members of a polygamous marriage1.

1 JSA Regs, Sch 1, para 15(2)(a)-© & (d)(ii) and 20I(1)(a)-© & (d)(ii);

IS (Gen) Regs, Sch 2, para 13(2)(b)

Higher rate

23204 Members of a couple or polygamous marriage are entitled to the higher rate SDP if

1. the conditions in DMG 23203 1. and 2. are satisfied and

2. CA is not in payment (see DMG 23236) to someone for caring for any

member of a

2.1 couple or

2.2 polygamous marriage1.

1 JSA Regs, Sch 1, para 15(2)(a)-© & (d)(i) and 20I(1)(a)-© & (d)(i);

IS (Gen) Regs, Sch 2, para 13(2)(b)

 

Look forward to further postings from you but would appreciate it if you provide references to support what you believe.

 

Best wishes MelissaTeddyBear

[legalpickle]

I would encourage you to follow it up. I routinely help people with these claims thus I know what I am talking about and I know the law in regard to it. If I am wrong, I am happy to hold my hands up to it. But what I have told you is direct quotes from legislation, Tax credit fact sheets and DWP decision maker's guidance.

Erika, Thanx for the information. I plan to go through it in more detail over the next few days, and will post questions for further guidance when I have the time - considering the hell I went through with my printer, TNT and a few other companies involved today, we're looking at next week (which I've told my friend).

 

The higher rate mobility alone does NOT qualify for SD of Tax credits, as defined in the legislation. Receving it does not mean it is correct - errors occur all the time. The amount I deal with in a day due to official error and claimants being requested to pay it back does not bear thinking about. If you received this then I would be prepared to defend a request for repayment of an overpayment if they ever find out about it. Mistakes are made, they are not infallible (far from it!)

Thanx! I hope I never have to take you up on it!

 

Hello legalpickle

 

I can see that what you are doing is well intentioned but it is best not to rely on what you are told by someone on the telephone. It is more helpful if you can supply actual guidance that can be verified. I do not think that Higher Rate Mobility gets you Severe Disability Premium on Income Support. The reason I think this way is because of what it says in the Decision Makers Guide.

 

Lower rate

23202 Single claimants, lone parents and claimants who are deemed to have no partner

(see DMG 23205) are entitled to the lower rate SDP if

1.

they are in receipt of

1.1

“AA” (see DMG 23071) or

1.2 the middle or highest rate of the care component of DLA and

2. there are no non-dependants aged 18 or over

2.1

normally residing (see DMG 23209) with the claimant or

2.2 who the claimant normally resides with and

3. CA is not in payment to anyone for caring for them (see DMG 23236)1.

1 JSA Regs, Sch 1, para 15(1); IS (Gen) Regs, Sch 2, para 13(2)(a)

23203 Members of a couple or polygamous marriage are entitled to the lower rate SDP if

1.

each member of the couple or polygamous marriage is in receipt of

1.1

“AA” or

1.2 the middle or highest rate of the care component of DLA and

2. there are no non-dependants aged 18 or over

2.1

normally residing (see DMG 23209) with the claimant or

2.2 who the claimant normally resides with and

Severe disability premium 23204 23207

Vol 4 Amendment 10 May 2003

3.

CA is in payment (see DMG 23236) to someone for caring for one

3.1

of a couple or

3.2 or more, but not all, of the members of a polygamous marriage1.

1 JSA Regs, Sch 1, para 15(2)(a)-© & (d)(ii) and 20I(1)(a)-© & (d)(ii);

IS (Gen) Regs, Sch 2, para 13(2)(b)

Higher rate

23204 Members of a couple or polygamous marriage are entitled to the higher rate SDP if

1.

the conditions in DMG 23203 1. and 2. are satisfied and

2. CA is not in payment (see DMG 23236) to someone for caring for any

member of a

2.1

couple or

2.2 polygamous marriage1.

1 JSA Regs, Sch 1, para 15(2)(a)-© & (d)(i) and 20I(1)(a)-© & (d)(i);

IS (Gen) Regs, Sch 2, para 13(2)(b)

 

Look forward to further postings from you but would appreciate it if you provide references to support what you believe.

 

Best wishes MelissaTeddyBear

Melissa,

 

I don't doubt what you are saying. The DLA/Tax Credits (and previously Income Support) experience was mine. It happened to me, so if it was a mistake that's life, at least I got paid!

 

Income Support doesn't relate to my friend as he does work and is entitled to - and gets - Tax Credits, so he definitely can't get Income Support.

 

The question - which Erika seems to think has the answer of Yes - is whether he can get DLA and consequentially the basic disability element of Working Tax Credits. As I've written above, I'll go through this over the next few days - as well as calling RNID (which I intended to do today, but I ended up spending about 4 hours on the phone to a printer retailer and TNT instead!!!) - and post queries when I've got things straight in my head.

 

 

In the meanwhile, thank you Erika, PF & Melissa for your time. I'd much appreciate your continued assistance when I can get all straight in my head!

 

Now onto preparing some court claims for filing tomorrow!

[ErikaPNP]

I don't know that he would get DLA as I don't know the fine details and he hasn't has a medical assessment - just pointing out that it is possible for people to get it solely on the basis of hearing difficulty. Whether he qualifies would depend upon the degree of hearing difficulty, and the level of assistance he requires with it.

 

As a side note - TNT's guaranteed courier service is suspended at the moment due to the weather. Other deliveries are not affected. I don't k ow if this is what you are dealing with but just throwing it out there.

[legalpickle]

I don't know that he would get DLA as I don't know the fine details and he hasn't has a medical assessment - just pointing out that it is possible for people to get it solely on the basis of hearing difficulty. Whether he qualifies would depend upon the degree of hearing difficulty, and the level of assistance he requires with it.

If people with hearing difficulties alone get DLA, that is akin to saying that my friend is entitled to DLA.

 

As a side note - TNT's guaranteed courier service is suspended at the moment due to the weather. Other deliveries are not affected. I don't k ow if this is what you are dealing with but just throwing it out there.

Yeah, I know. But it's a lot worse than that. The driver claimed to have attempted to reach my road and said it was too snowed to do it. Despite that Parcelforce made it to me, and a friend's crapmobile made it in and out - as well as several other people who drove in and out of my road. Eventually - after threatening to sue the retailer and making an application to have TNT added as a Part 20 Defendant - they convinced the driver to try and reach me again and call me when he's nearby. I trudged to meet him 5 minutes away and guided him to my flat in 5 minutes flat!!! It's a lot longer than that, but it wasted most of my day!

[Emma1973]

If people with hearing difficulties alone get DLA, that is akin to saying that my friend is entitled to DLA

Jobcentre Plus did state they can only advise what conditions will mean a person cannot qualify, not relevant to the personal circumstances of that person.

 

What I wrote was what they told me on the phone

 

Perhaps it is easier to say that it is not the condition that qualifies you for DLA, but how that condition affects your mobility and care needs, so its not possible for JCP to hold a list of conditions that will qualify you or qualify you.

For example you have 2 people who have epilepsy, one may qualify for DLA on the grounds that they have frequent seizures with no onset warning who therefore need more supervision to keep themselves safe. Then you have the person who very rarely has seizures, has warning so is able to get themselves to a place of safety, etc. The first may qualify, the second wont, so effects of the condition rather than the condition itself is what counts.

 

Deafness by its self cannot usually qualify someone for DLA Mobility, it is usually taken into account with a degree of loss of vision.It can be taken into account for DLA Care, basically you must require attention or supervision with bodily functions.

Communication is now seen as a bodily function, i.e hearing. But that it has to be looked at what attention is needed from another person to help with that function. An example given is 'if you are profoundly deaf you may need an interpreter because you cannot hear spoken language' But this has to be for a 'significant portion of the day'So if he can satisfy the above, he may well get it, but each case is individual. ( As Erika has already pointed out!)

 

When it comes to WTC there is a disability test 'Schedule 1 Regulation 9 (1) to the Working Tax Credit Entitlement and Maximim Rate) Regulations 2002' then there are other conditions to add, one of those is the receipt of DLA but it does not state which Element or Rate.

For the Severe Disability Element he has to be getting the highest rate of the care component, so if he only got mobility he wouldnt get it.A lot of this is reiterating what Erika and others have already said but just to back them up!

Edited January 7, 2010 by Emma1973
Stooopid pc!

[legalpickle]

Emma,

 

I appreciate your post but I can barely understand a word because it is not done in paragraphs!

 

legalpickle

[Emma1973]

Apologies, the pc at work was obviously having a funny five minutes! Not unusual I have to say!