To bring your attention to the Carers Benefit fraud scandal?

I wouldn't wait tbh. Believe it or not, it's not an easy benefit to sack off ime. I'd give them a ring telling them the date you'll be over the threshold. Make a note of the date and time you informed them.

This is not the same as the Post Office scandal. In that, people knew the system was faulty and carried on prosecuting anyway. Victims were entirely innocent because they had not taken the money they were accused of stealing. They couldn't have done the right thing and not been prosecuted.

In this benefits example, the onus is on the claimant to ensure they only claim what is allowed. It's up to them to only apply if they meet the conditions, it's up to them to inform the relevant agency if they earn more than they are allowed. YES it's stupid there isn't a system in place to prevent people claiming what they are not entitled to and YES it's a bit heartless to pursue someone who was caring for a relative for tens of thousands for an honest mistake. But it was the claimant's mistake.

For once I have a little sympathy for the government here. Don't go after fraudulent claims, get criticised, go after people who claimed what they shouldn't have... get criticised!

It’s a shame the conversation couldn’t be around how bloody awful carers allowance amount is. They get £81.90 per week for caring for someone at least 35 hours per week. That’s £2.34 an hour!

In our case that means hoisting from bed - wheelchair - changing bench etc, giving medication/food/hydration through a feed tube in his stomach, giving oxygen and managing seizures …..the list goes on.

But it’s ok, if that’s not enough to live on, the carer can earn £151 a week (that means working 13 hours at minimum wage). And who is going to look after the disabled person whilst they’re at work?

There will always be stories of benefit fraud somewhere. It’s just a shame that most people know nothing about carers allowance or the lives carers live so when they read these stories, they just think ALL carers are benefit scum.

Fully agree.

In addition, the cliff edge is a bad idea anyway, especially in a society where we don't have enough workers. Obviously a lot of carers can't work at all, but some are able to (I say this as someone who would qualify for CA but doesn't claim it due to working).

And yet we've come up with a system where we miss out on their skills and labour because computer says no. Unfair and idiotic.

It is well known exactly how much you can earn on carers allowance.
But I do think the allowance on how much you can earn and how much you get in carers should be higher.
I care for 3 people and obviously only allowed one lot of carers allowance.
I love the people I care for but I know I am saving the government 1000s and have had to give up my life and mental health to do so.
Not like I can go home after a 9 hour shift its 24/7.

The issue is not the same. These people claimed carers allowance when not eligible. Claiming benefits when you earn too much isn't right

It's made very clear that there is a threshold before you're not entitled any more. And it's mentioned at every renewal.

Not dismissing the fact that carer's allowance is pitiful & in no way compensates for loss of earnings the government does make clear how much you can earn before you lose the benefit. On the other hand we have been fed a lot of false information over the years with respect to our eligibility to carers allowance by well meaning social workers etc so maybe educating them might be a first step to make sure over-claiming does not occur.

It's a stupid, shitty system.

Well that was an interesting contribution to the debate @HelloMiss

Typical mumsnet

AIBU?? Yes

No im not

What's the point...

I think one of the issues is that DWP have the information that a carer's earnings have exceeded the limit, but don't act on it sometimes for years, so the overpayment stacks up.

I’m sure I’ve read that the amount of benefits that could be paid out but aren’t because people don’t know or aren’t t able to claim them far exceeds the amount of benefit fraud.

The carers allowance form is one of the shorter and easier forms to complete, but it still requires a certain knowledge of the system and literacy.

The issue here is that there is complete reliance on possibly highly over-whelmed, stressed, claimants with varying levels of understanding of the system and literacy levels providing complete accuracy of information on a form which some may find inaccessible. The second issue is that issues with incorrect information are not brought to light, in some cases, until a point when claimants owe vast sums of money despite the government having access to all the relevant information much earlier on. I don’t think this is acceptable, especially when dealing with vulnerable families who frankly may barely have space to think as a result of their caring duties.

I’m sure there are people who abuse the system. One of the claimants in that Guardian article sounded like he and his son were poorly informed more than anything though. There were other courses of action he could have taken to stop his son handing over all his money to drug dealers other than stopping his son’s benefits, like having his son’s benefits paid to him instead.

There is absolutely no good will or grace in the system for those who aren’t claiming the wrong thing, so it doesn’t surprise me that they insisted on one big payment.

I got a fine once because I went away for a week and forgot to declare it before I went.
When I got back I remembered so I contacted them with the dates (this was probably 2-3 weeks after I should have done it)- I got an enormous (to me) fine.

I did point out that I could have not told them at all and they never would have known, not to mention that I had accrued several weeks ‘holiday allowance’ so I hadn’t actually been paid ANY money I wasn’t entitled to but they weren’t interested in that.

I applied for (and was awarded) Carers Allowance in November as I am a carer for my elderly mother.

It does explicitly say the maximum amount you can earn weekly in the supporting notes on application and in the documents received with the award notification (and how to contact them if your earnings fall outside the maximum amount, or on any change of circumstances that may affect the allowance.

It is a little naive not to understand that you are using your own NI number for your application, and also is a reference ID on your tax reference, so of course it’s not rocket science to assume that they can randomly check (or have threshold notification) if a carer is earning - and paying tax and NI on those earnings - whilst in receipt of the benefit.

I do agree that if a threshold violation has been reached, or is within a nominal amount of being reached, the Carer should be notified and warned.

I do have sympathy for anyone who claims Carers Allowance (because it’s a derisory amount, and the cost savings from full time Social Care budgets are probably well into the tens or hundreds of thousands a year per person needing care).

Frankly, it’s bloody shit. I’ve had to mothball a successful business to stay under threshold, and for an effective 50+ hr week of care I provide is less than someone on minimum wage earns (gross) for an 8hr day.

Thank fuck I have a DH on a good salary to cover the short fall.

Maybe if this or successive governments actually paid a fair allowance for carers (even minimum wage would be a blessing) then the temptation not to commit fraud would be eradicated.

So many take the piss, that’s the problem. People who are full time self employed, but claiming to care for someone and when questioned there’s no response and claims get cancelled

Any stats on fraud and CA to back up this statement? I don't think the fraud rate is that high, same with disability benefits.

Yeah, I think the Guardian should have looked into that story a bit more, it doesn't quite add up to me. There are plenty of clearer cases where DWP has overreached.

I think the main problem is the cliff edge that means if you earn 1p over the earnings limit you lose the whole lot.

Tapering might help, but that would make it more costly to administer. I think CA should either be non-means tested like PIP or the earnings limit should be much higher.

I am not sure about the cab driver bloke, tbh. His story is a bit convoluted. But DWP should not have been able to force him to sell his house-can they do that? Why didn't they just put a charge on the property?

But there are plenty of other examples of DWP being far too draconian.

I'm a carer and claim carer,s allowance they make it abundantly clear how much you can earn whilst claiming carers allowance, you also have to declare it when claiming, tax/ universal credit ,so i find it hard to beleive he ticked the wrong box.

Did you see the article about 50 million benefit fraud the other day?

So many take the piss, that’s the problem. People who are full time self employed, but claiming to care for someone and when questioned there’s no response and claims get cancelled.

The amount you get for GENUINELY caring for someone and giving up your life to do so is not enough. There should be more support, more carers, I’m not sure it should fall to one person to provide that care. I certainly wouldn’t want to do it, I admire those who selflessly do give up their lives to care, wash, dress, feed and monitor their loved ones.
I’ve done it for a few weeks (diagnosis until death).

Why dont they dump them in prison? The carers will probably enjoy the break and social services can get their arses in gear and provide some actual support!

Your point can’t have been very strong if you’re prepared to bow out that quickly OP!

It’s a bit far fetched to try and claim this is in any way similar to the post office scandal. The people involved in that didn’t make any mistakes and desperately tried to solve the problems they were given, the person in your first link made a big mistake and ignored the letters reminding them to check.

While it is right that they pay back the money they wrongly claimed, it does seem harsh that it couldn’t have been paid back over time meaning that he would have kept his home.