To apply for DLA for DD when we have a household income of over 300k?

Its already not in favour of neurodivergent people. My autistic son's PIP assessor had no knowledge of autism and made assumptions of what he could do. It felt like it was a deliberate attempt to get his points down so he could get less financial support. My son decided not to appeal because he couldn't cope with it and I agreed with him; I think the appeal system would have wrecked his mental health.

know nothing about anything. I have not studied the benefit system, so don't milk it for all it's worth like you obviously have, as you say you are severely disabled.

Now who’s nasty ? If you’d actually read my posts l’ve said several times l worked as an outreach worker for the disabled, which is why l have a knowledge of a range of benefits.

in all your posts you’ve been defending the right of disabled people to claim the benefits they’re entitled to, but now you’re accusing me of ‘milking the system’ because l’ve disclosed that l’m severely disabled. Assuming l’m claiming the disability benefits to which, as you’ve said numerous times here, disabled people are perfectly entitled, how is that milking the system ?

I’m simply trying to explain to you why the benefits system is the way it is, and other posters have also replied to you in the same way. You’re either not reading the replies or you’re not understanding what’s being said because you keep repeating the same things and asking the same questions, and in the process posting incorrect information. My concern is that MN is a source of information and many people come to these types of threads looking for benefit advice, so when you post it needs to be factual and accurate.

In answer to you question, yes many benefit claimants are tax payers. Many claimants work and claim income related benefits which are taxable. Many other income replacement benefits are taxable such as ESA (a sickness benefit) and state pension, to name a couple. Disability benefits are not taxable but they can be claimed while working because they are paid to cover the extra cost of disability.

I apologise if you think l’ve been rude to you, but it’s really frustrating trying to explain how the present disability benefit system works , to someone who clearly doesn’t want to hear it. We all have our own ideas of how things should be, but unfortunately that’s not the reality. So in the interests of not derailing the OP’s thread any longer, l’ll bow out of the discussion now and leave you to it.

I don't agree with you, and I said some benefits.

. ''This has been explained to you several times. You’re talking nonsense.''

While I have the opportunity: why are you so nasty? You can give out information without being rude. You know nothing about me. Just because I am not so knowledgeable about benefits as you assure everyone you are an expert, doesn't mean I know nothing about anything. I have not studied the benefit system, so don't milk it for all it's worth like you obviously have, as you say you are severely disabled.

I am a taxpayer, so why would I know about means tested benefits? If you are able to tell me that people on benefits pay tax, then that is another thing I don't know about. If taxpayers can still claim income related benefits, tell us, let everyone know.

I’ve worn myself out answering this poster, as have several others, and she’s clearly either not reading or not understanding the replies because she’s asking the same questions over and over again, despite comprehensive answers. I’ve given up now, beyond correcting completely wrong information. As has been pointed out by other posters, many people visit these thread for information on benefits and would be put off by this posters assertions if they remained uncorrected.

The top rates of disability benefits wouldn’t even begin to cover the cost of a week in a care home, let alone the cost of hospital treatment on top of personal care. It’s utter nonsense.

While you continue to post incorrect information publicly, people will correct you publicly. You have an outdated and incorrect view of the benefits system and have posted about benefits which were phased out years ago as though they still exist, and have cited the national assistance act which was phased out years and years ago and superseded by numerous rounds of welfare reform. People visit these forums to get information about benefits. As a former disability benefit adviser I would be failing disabled people if I didn’t point out your errors to avoid people reading your posts thinking they are not entitled to claim, when in fact they are.

No, it means that someone in hospital is having their care needs met, so don't get money to have it provided outside of hospital at the same time.

No, it absolutely does not mean that they are paying for their treatment. This has been explained to you several times. You’re talking nonsense. It’s only disability benefits which are affected as well as some add ins, but largely other income replacement benefits are not affected by hospital stays - neither is state pension. It’s the care component of disability benefits which is the issue here. The care component of AA, DLA and PIP contributes towards the cost of your care.

When you go into hospital the state is effectively funding your care as part of your stay - the medical staff are taking care of your needs. If they continued to pay care benefits they would effectively be paying for your care twice. You get a concession of 28 days and then benefit stops if you are in hospital beyond that, or have consecutive stays within a certain time frame. Mobility allowance is also affected after 28 days because you are in hospital so don’t need it but if you have a motability vehicle paid for by your allowance you can get a three month extension.

Do your really think that an allowance paid at the maximum of £108 per week for AA and £184 per week for PIP and DLA even begins to cover what it costs to treat and care for you in hospital ? Seriously ? Have a look at care home fees. They can top £1000 a week and that’s just for care, not hospital treatment. Can we stop with this nonsense now.

Put it in her savings account and use it for legal representation to get the EHCP details met or access extra support at uni or where ever

If people on benefits have to surrender that benefit if they are in hospital for 4 weeks or more, does that not mean they are paying for their treatment?

People who are not receiving benefit do not pay for their treatment. Those receiving benefit have to give it back to the Government, because the law says they cannot receive benefit and have hospital in patient treatment at the same time.

I believe that equates to their having to pay toward their treatment, because they still have to pay for their commitments. It is only morally wrong?

It is not impossible for some parents to take courses leading to better qualifications while the children are at school. It is impossible for some.

There’s a not insignificant number of disabled children not in school.

Obviously, compared to your superior knowledge of the whole system of disability benefits, pensions and credits, I am lacking in that direction. I am sorry you felt the need to point that out publicly.

It is no excuse, but I have been in receipt of DLA for decades and it has taken enough effort and stress to live on what I get from that. I was not aware that some benefits lead to means tested benefits and that if you receive one benefit, there is the possibility of having a Credit benefit even if you thought your income didn't qualify you for that.

I do get the Band reduction from the local authority, and very pleased to receive that. I am not sure, though, that even with a disability allowance added to the minimum income level, I would be able to apply for Credit as well. Worth considering though.

I made a suggestion. I am not advocating compulsory study for all people. There could be parents of disabled children who are able to study for qualifications - if there were places of study they could go to without having to pay for it. At the end of courses, not only would they have qualifications, but their own children would have the help of parents who had studied in order to help them.

Why you should put a damper on suggestions by finding fault with them, rather than help achieve something with wise words of encouragement, I don't know. Perhaps if you were disabled you might be more encouraging, rather than give people an excuse not to do something beneficial to themselves.

Every child is entitled to education no matter what their abilities/disabilities are. The Government HAS TO provide education for all children in a place suitable to their needs.

If Sir Keir is really serious about helping people qualify for better employment, and he particularly gives the care sector a mention, then he should put his money where his mouth is and make creche available for mums and dads of disabled children to enable them to study for qualifications which will lead to better employment. There are ways of helping parents to work and study while the children are at school, even make arrangements for them when illness strikes them down.

There must be parents of disabled children who cannot get even part time employment. If Sir Keir is serious, and his electioneering was truthful, then he should ensure that parents can go out to work and be able to socialise with others while they are on social security benefit, not only to benefit themselves, but be able to help their children to socialise. Perhaps he could start courses similar to the TOPS courses, which were 9-5 and students were paid a wage to study. Not only did they study for employment qualifications, but it got them used to getting up and going to work in the morning and coming home at night.

It is not impossible for parents to take courses leading to better qualifications while the children are at school. There is also the Open University and night school.

Disabled people are already discriminated against.

The second disability benefits become means tested is the second those right on the cut off end up missing out and being discriminated against due to their disability.

i know someone who has a son who was left disabled due to faults at his birth. They have since had a compensation package but their son is still disabled and as such still entitled to disability benefits

The Disability Living Allowance and Personal Independence Payment, should NEVER be means tested. People in receipt of that are entitled to the same enjoyment of life as everyone is.

If you are well and healthy and strong, depending on what you want to do and the money you have to do it, you can do anything you like.

Disabled people cannot. No matter how hard we try, if we cannot walk more than a few feet or yards, we are limited in what we can do. Without the DLA/PIP, what would you imagine their lives would be like? It is so hard, and the forms are so long - a book of around 50 pages - that almost every minute of the 24 hours of the day have to be accounted for: how many times do you need this, or this, or that in a day, a week?

With children, if they qualify it, the parents must NOT refuse it for any reason. IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE CHILD to receive the benefit regardless of what their parents' income or whether they want to receive it on behalf of their child. Adults can choose their own wheelchair, according to their needs. They have the ability to know and search for what they need. CHILDREN DO NOT. They have to rely on their parents or guardians to supply their needs, and parents should not refuse it, no matter what their income is.

That you should even say you would deny a child's human right to live a better life by having their complicated needs provided shows how little people know about human rights and entitlement.

Although that is true. Ministers and the PM have their own aides who also analyse and present information. They do not rely just on the civil servants.

I mentioned the control of the civil servants. An MP is only as good as the information they are fed.

For carers who can manage studying, The OU has a carer scholarship.

Many of what are called rising 16s are eligible for PIP, but not all of them are. The criteria for PIP are different than the criteria for DLA.

It’s not the training that’s the problem. It’s parents finding the time in between caring for their disabled children and in most cases, working. Caring in itself is a full time job. Where would they find the time to train ?

Most MP’s will be familiar with disability benefits because it’s government who legislate for it, and MPs vote on that legislation as well as any amendments. Civil servants in the form of DWP are there to award and pay benefits in accordance with legislation.

l haven’t said any of this. Pension credit is paid to pensioners whose income falls below the pension guarantee level. Here is a link to age uk which explains it in more detail.https://www.ageuk.org.uk/information-advice/money-legal/benefits-entitlements/pension-credit/#:~:text=Pension%20Credit%20is%20a%20means,separate%20from%20your%20State%20Pension.

lf total income falls below the standard pension credit guarantee then pension credit is payable to top up to that level. Its means tested and counts all forms of income except disability benefits. If a pensioner is disabled and already claiming AA/middle rate or higher care component of PIP/DLA the level of pension credit payable is higher to take into account the cost of disability. If the pensioner makes a new successful claim for AA then they are entitled to the severe disability addition of pension credit, worth up to £81. It also qualifies the claimant to extra help with things like housing and council tax where appropriate. When a pensioner qualifies for a disability benefit they are advised that they may be eligible for all these things.

As has previously been advised, you can’t claim disability benefits if you’ve been hospitalised for more than 28 days. Bed blocking is complicated and has nothing to do with the level of disability benefits and everything to do with whether you are entitled to care from the local authority - it is they with whom hospital staff liaise to arrange suitable care on discharge and in some cases it can be provided free for up to four weeks depending on eligibility. But in many cases it’s not available immediately so the person remains in hospital until it can be arranged. Disability benefits can’t change that because they’re not paid at anything like the level needed to afford private care. Local authority care is based on what the person can afford to pay. Private carers wouldn’t be subsidised in the same way and would be unaffordable for most people in this situation.

Family credit no longer exists. It was replaced by working tax credits around 2003 and in most cases there are now no new claims to wtc because they’ve been replaced by universal credit, although some people still claim as a legacy benefit.

There’s so much wrong with this post l don’t know where to start. You’ve even contradicted yourself in parts.

There are no new claimants to DLA for any age, but whatever they call it when you get it, you travel through life with, and if you are not getting the full amount, you can claim more when you need it, but there is a limit.

This is incorrect. DLA for a child changes to PIP at age 16. PIP is a totally different benefit to DLA with different eligibility rules. And those adults who are on DLA as a legacy benefit are subject to having their benefit change to AA if they become ineligible for DLA at review or they fail to renew by the given date. Also those people on DLA as a legacy benefit are unable to make a fresh claim to either component unless they were claiming it beforehand. So for example if your award was for care you would not be able to claim mobility and vice versa.

If a child under 16 already has the non means tested benefit, it is rolled over, but whether it is regarded as a new claim or not, I do not know now, and it is easily obtainable on google if I need to know, and yes, adults receiving DLA/PIP do not have to apply for AA. It is all there on google.

Disability benefits for a child are not ‘rolled over’ at age 16. Child DLA and PIP are different. DLA ends at 16 and PIP is treated as a new claim, but you can ask for the medical evidence used for DLA to be considered for PIP. And as above, DLA legacy claimants/PIP claimants reaching age 66, would have to claim AA if their DLA/PIP was stopped for any reason, as their are no new claims for either benefits past that age.

The OP wants to apply for the benefit which is now called PIP

No she doesn’t. She wants to apply for child DLA. PIP and child DLA are not the same benefit.

The fact is that regardless of how much money comes into the family coffers, if they do not claim it on behalf of a child who needs it, that child is entitled to appeal against the parents on the grounds that he/she is entitled to the money and that the parents must claim it on behalf of the child because THE MONEY IS THE CHILD'S and they DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT not to take awau their child's opportunity to live as their peers without disability

The parent is the advocate and the appointee for the child. The decision as to whether or not to apply for benefit is parents’ decision until the child reaches age 16 when the child can make a PIP claim in their own right. If they do not have the capacity to do so and the parent has the authority on decision making, then that continues to be their decision.

It is no different to the cases where parents refuse to send their child to special education schools, because of publicity. That is child abuse too. There are parents begging local authorities to place their children according to need, yet there are other parents who cannot face their child's need for special education.

Parents of children with special needs, along with the professionals who support them are best placed to decide whether their children would benefit from mainstream or alternative education methods. It’s far from child abuse to decide to send a disabled student to a mainstream school and learn alongside non disabled peers if that’s the best solution for them. I grew up in an era where disabled children were expected to attend ‘special schools’ which offered little in the way of actual education. My parents fought long and hard to get me into mainstream schooling at a time when that was far from the norm. Physical disability doesn’t mean intellectual disability and there are many parents fighting for the right for their disabled children to receive support in mainstream schools. You seem to be suggesting that disabled children don’t belong in mainstream education, and that, along with some of your terminology such as ‘special’ children, and ‘slow children is downright offensive. And there is no compulsion for disabled children to leave school at the earliest opportunity. Since you’re so fond of google, try searching EHCP - in some instances there are provisions for disabled children to be educated after standard school leaving age.

So, yes, l think you’ve proved quite comprehensively that your knowledge of the benefits system and educational provision for the disabled is not up to scratch. It’s certainly not to a standard where you should be arguing the toss with those posting from professional experience of these matters.

I thought that the pension credit was an allowance to the state pension when those who retire do not have a profession pension, and have to rely on the state pension.

Now you are saying that if a pensioner has age-related disabilities, the pension credit increases because the AA is increased.

I did not know that the pension credit is not only based on income, but on health and disability as well. It strikes me as rather unfair on those pensioners who have to have their pensions topped up by pension credit, but are only disabled by old age, not old age related disabilities.

I thought the AA was given to pay for extra help for disabilities in old age. I thought the pension credit was connected to the amount of income. Now you say that if you qualify for the higher AA you also qualify for more Pension Credit?

I wonder how many other people know that you get more pension if you also get more AA,

What about the other pensioners without a private pension? What is the difference between Pension Credit for someone who also needs care and those claiming the Pension Credit who do not?

If an elderly person is trapped in a hospital bed because there is no one at home to care for them, why don't they claim AA (if they are in hospital presumable the ward clerk will do that) and get increased Pension Credit as well? At minimum wage paid by social services to care staff they could have a good hour a day domiciliary care, which is more one to one than residents in care homes get.

Does Family Credit work in the same way, that if whoever in the family works and is able to claim Family Credit gets an increase of Family Credit when they are disabled and claim PIP?

Absolutely claim it but spend it on your daughters needs that u are currently funding
save the money you are spending now and you can decide what to do with that

you will pay an enormous amount in deductions probably 2.5 times as much as I earn
your funding other people’s benefits get some for your daughter