Aibu to think

[namechangemango]

that this is not an appropriate use of my niece's DLA money?

My niece (16) is diagnosed autistic and has an emotional support dog. She gets DLA. She has told me that her dog had to go to the vet and my niece has billed her for it. It turns out my sister has had my niece pay for the cost of the purchase of the dog and all her toys and equiptment like her crate etc out of her under 18's trust fund, which has completely depeleted the balance and there are no plans for it to be replaced. My sister justified it to my niece that she needed the dog so it was an appropriate use of the money, Now I've read that under 18's aren't legally responsible for dogs.

Niece is also being charged for essential toiletries like face wash and clothes/shoes when they (genuinely) need replaced, travel etc. There has been words that there is going to be discussion of niece paying for her share of every other essential expense including food, and non essentials.

Her DLA amounts to a bit over 3k a year, she can't get a job at the moment due to continuing education. Sister doesn't earn much money herself.

I feel I should report this but sister would know it was me and I'm estranged from most other family (on my side) as they are toxic. Without getting into details she's been supporting me with personal issues

Could your sister afford the dog without using the money? If the dog is there to support your niece then I think it's a fair use of the money. The money is for things that will help managing her needs -which this dog does.
The toiletries is another matter and depends on personal finances of the family.

Sister and husband earn £20k a year combined in benefits/pension (early pension) the bulk of which earned by her husband

I agree, if the dog is to support your niece then it’s a legitimate use of funds. Perhaps your sister couldn’t afford the dog otherwise. What do you feel would be reasonable for your sister to spend the DLA on instead?

Dog yes. Isn't DLA to help towards the extra costs of having a disability?

Toiletries etc no. Not at 16. That's a Parents job to pay for.

I think spending on the dog is fine if the dog is there to support her needs. Toiletries are just a normal part of having a child so I do think that is mean.

I agree that the dog is fair enough.

DLA should be used for the reasons it is awarded - so if for example her mobility is affected in a way that means she goes through shoes faster than usual, or if sensory issues means her diet is restricted and expensive, then these could be legitimate uses for the money.

I agree, if the dog is for the benefit of your niece and it's her support dog it's not unreasonable at all for her to fund the expenses from her DLA especially if her parents are on a low income. Dogs are expensive

The toiletries are a different matter though

This is what DLA money is for, to help the claimant manage their condition better with the support of aids, therapy etc. The dog would come under this. It's not like your sister is using the money for herself and having expensive haircuts, manicures etc.

There is nothing to report.

Her autism doesn't affect her in a way that means she goes through clothes/shoes any faster than a non-atypical person, she is vegetarian because she doesn't like what happens to the animals, her diet isnt restricted as a result of her autism

Yabu. Loads parents use dla for everyday living for their child. It's to be spent for nieces benefit on neice which is being done - its not nieces pocket money

Don't make their life any more difficult than I'm sure it already is.

Surprised to hear I'm the one being unreasonable. Glad to know her DLA's being spent correctly after all when spent on the dog. I still don't think she should be paying for all essentials as well. Fancy living on over 3k a year?

You sound like an amazing sister 🙄. Have you got any children with additional needs yourself?

Do you have other concerns, or are you jealous about the family's supposed "free" money?

I can assure you, I would pay DLA back 10-fold if my child could do things she can't as a result.of her disability. It's not free.

3k a year isn't bad to cover a dog and toiletries though is it? She's not having to pay rent or food costs presumably.

Living off 3k per Yr?? She is 16 what expenses other than dog, phone and toiletries does she have?

I don't think you understand the way the system works OP.

Your DSis (who is clearly on a very low income) will have to account for how the DLA money has been spent. If she cannot prove it has been spent on DN, then there could be financial repercussions, which would impact DN and the family. So including the dog/toiletries etc is just a legitimate accounting strategy.

Dogs and their vet bills are an expensive luxury so I think it only fair that the cost of it comes out of your nieces DLA. I think it’s really tight of her parents to charge her for basic toiletries and clothing when she is only 16 and in full time education though.

I'm estranged from most other family (on my side) as they are toxic.

You're not coming across well here yourself.

This is bizarre. She's old enough to marry, have sex, leave home, join the army, but not buy her own toiletries?

The dog is exactly the sort of thing the dla is for, the other stuff not so much!

If all their income is £20k pa and that has to cover housing, bills, food, travel, etc etc then they're probably struggling to afford even the basics, let alone vets bills, and even toiletries, so have to use all the money that's available to the whole family, even if it's the niece's DLA and better off families would be able to let DN save the money for later in life.

WHOAH lol! My teenager spends her dla on things that help her disability. She also likes to buy toiletries and makeup. You know some nice sprays and stuff. Probably because I'm skint on carers allowance as I'm her full time carer. Do you know how much i get for being her carer? 67 poxy quid a week. So yeah she prefers her more expensive stuff where as I usually get her basics from supermarket.

I'll just sit back here in the bad parent zone

@namechangemango

Surprised to hear I'm the one being unreasonable. Glad to know her DLA's being spent correctly after all when spent on the dog. I still don't think she should be paying for all essentials as well. Fancy living on over 3k a year?

DLA/PIP are not means tested and are not meant to be 'lived on'.

Sorry YABVVVU. My child receives DLA. It goes into the "pot" of income that I receive. Out of that "pot" comes everything he needs including activities, piano lessons, clubs, the endless clothes and shoes (sensory issues), toys, books so on and so forth. I think it's perfectly fine for your sister to use that money for a support dog. I mean give your head a wobble. Why would you report your own sibling? You sound awful.