To think actually, this IS about benefits?

[Apprenticefan]

I feel desperately sorry for this woman over the awful loss of her son, but although she maintains that all this isn't about benefits, I can't help but feel it is. AIBU.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240349/Mother-youngest-British-soldier-killed-Afghanistan-gone-hunger-strike-benefits-axed-death.html

I'm disabled and can't work. We have gone to great lengths to protect ourselves, so should DH get killed I would be able to being up my DC without turning to benefits.

The article doesn't actually say she can't work. It says she claims disability allowance for Hypermobilitl Syndrome. She might be able to work in some jobs, TBH. The way DLA is going there may be a chance she will have to.

Seriously, you can not expect to get over £200k and still receive means tested benefits!

Wills people, they are very important if you want some control over what happens after you are gone.

Ophelia that isn't a very fair comparison though is it?

I am pretty sure that if for instance I had Stephen Hawkin's disabilities I wouldn't be contributing quite as much as he does, because I ain't that smart.

Based on friends who have gone to Afghanistan and Iraq with the Armed Forces, I thought they all had to write their wills before they left so there must have been a will written (hopefully). You write your will and your "in case I am dead" letter.

I have every sympathy for her loss but not for her case.

Ophelia That's pretty horrible. Not everyone who is disabled has the brains to be able to work like him.

The normal people with disabilities, extremely painful disabilities at that will have a bit more of a problem sustaining working hours and actually being able to contribute every time they would need to.

I don't understand the £300. Does that mean she gets £15,600 a year in benefits above her DLA? So if she were to have to dip into the capital she would have enough for 13 years. Plus a few if invested wisely. By which point her sons will be at work/FE.

I can see that this leads to the capital not actually adding anything to their lives. Although at the point they turn 16 or 18 she could give them a lump sum. But without the will there really can't be another way.

However, for those two boys I can see no good outcome to what their mother is doing. I hope they are ok.

Plenty of 'normal people with disabilities' work too you know. Not every disability makes working impossible!

Did I say that? Didn't mean it to come across like that, obviously I didn't mean every person with a disability.

Fair enough, I didn't mean to completely jump all over you!

I'm just not seeing how the disability makes any difference at all in this case.

It's fine, I'm tired and probably not writing very clearly.

Tbh, I think given that her Son didn't make a will when he had thought about it enough to discuss with her, then she should be using the money instead of doing what she is doing.

As someone else has said, she could be putting away a large sum for each of them and using the rest to bring them up and for day to day living.

I only said what I did as I don't believe saying that she should re-train or/and get a job is really looking at the situation clearly. If she can't work, she can't work.

I agree that if she can't work then she can't work, but there are many disabled people that can't work who don't qualify for means tested benefits. Either because their spouse earns too much, they got compensation for whatever it is that made them disabled, they come from a rich family, they got an insurance payout on diagnosis of a progressive illness that results in disability, they earned enough to have assets before they became disabled, etc etc. There is no reason that this woman should be treated any differently to them.

I don't believe she should be treated any different at all.

I thought CTC were means tested though?

I was under the impression that army personnel made wills before going to warzones. I do wonder if this was really his wishes or if this is the best argument she can come up with to try to justify her wishes to keep the money and the benefits.

I think she is a very greedy woman who is letting all her sons down by this behaviour

CTCs are means tested, so as someone with hundreds of thousands in the bank, she isn't entitled to them. She would still be entitled to her DLA though.

It says she gets CTC though?

Buy a house with the money, there's the investment in her sons future. Then she will get benifits back.
She's stupid an clearly it is about the money.
And yes not every disabled person is incapable of Woking, but would assume from what is written that she can't/doesn't work.
DLA is not means tested so she would still get that.

As somebody else said the sensible solution would be to buy a house and then she would still be entitled to benefits. She can't keep the money and have the benefits under the present rules.

You're right it does! I hadn't noticed that, it makes it even worse! She's doing all this because she won't get her free rent and free council tax! Selfish cow!

Yes CTC is means tested but there is a certain rate of ctc that is given if a child is disabled, no matter what is earned. Not sure it's same for adult but think they still get something.

Outraged I don't know what you mean. Sorry, really quite tired.

Lisa I don't think you do, I don't get any extra in CTC.

If she gets Hrc she could get £4k in ctc even with the money in the bank

www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/taxcredits.htm

Ah right okay, fair enough.

Under the CTC section it only mentions disabled child elements, not adults?

The capital wouldn't count for tax credit purposes, as savings are assessed differently for tax credits than other benefits. It's just the income from the interest on savings that count with tax credits, so she's still allowed to get them provided the interest she receives on it doesn't bring her over the tax credit income threshold. (In the near future this will change when tax credits are merged into Universal Credit, so capital will make a difference).

There is actually precedent for her case - some types of payouts aren't regarded as capital by the DWP for the purposes of income-related benefits (see here). For example, payouts to London bombing victims, payments from the Skipton fund (if you were infected with Hep C through NHS transfusions), payments made by the UK govt to Japanese POWs and some WWII payouts. So it's not unreasonable for her to argue that this should/could fall into a similar category.

It's a real shame for her, and the will should of course have been written into trust. But she certainly can afford to pay for her other children's living costs with the payout. I doubt the hunger strike will make a difference though, especially now there are major changes to the benefits system.

It's only means tested benefits she can't claim. So she will still get either incapacity benefit or ESA, depending on whether she has been switched yet. And she will also get DLA.

DLA has two rates for mobiity and three for care, by the amount she is getting it looks like she only gets one payment, possibly the lower mobility part.

Actually I'm sure she should get more than £140 a week as she also gets child benefit. Not that she needs it if her sons are not living with her.

The best soloution?

Probably to buy a house or two, one for each boy. Live in one, rent the other out and live on the rent from the other. Write a will leaving the houses to the boys, or even put them in the boys names now with a clause that she can live there for X years.

And yes I did check house prices in the area.

w.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/bredenbury/bredenbury/hr7-4tf/?include_retirement_homes=true&include_shared_ownership=true&new_homes=include&price_max=150000&q=Bredenbury%2C Bromyard HR7&radius=15&resultssort=newestlistings&search_source=refine