Do I risk gambling with reporting changes to DLA?

[CoffeePlease91]

I have already posted about my daughter’s behaviour. She has been receiving highest care rate DLA for some time now and low mobility… however because her behaviour has got worse over the last few months I think she might meet the ‘severe mental impairment’ criteria for the highest rate of mobility instead.

For example the criteria states 1; has to be receiving high care rate DLA which she does. 2; a state of arrested or incomplete physical development of the brain. It states that autism meets the first part of this requirement. The second part is severe impairment of intelligence which they say is hard to prove because majority of autistic people are able to learn etc. My DD goes to a SEN school but isn’t able to qualify for exams because she is not able to sit and answer the questions and understand them etc. I don’t know if that makes her qualify for this part or not? And 3; severe behavioural problems which she would definitely qualify for because she self-harms and injures herself often.

I just don’t know whether it’s worth the gamble incase they say no and end up changing her care rate back down too which could mean losing a lot of money that goes on paying for all the things she needs and I couldn’t afford to pay for it all out of the other household budget.

Her DLA isn’t due to be renewed for another 3/4 years.

Any advice?

High rate mobility you'd need proof she needs restraining while out and about.

@RainyDays22 yes she does, she often needs two people walking either side of her holding her arms to prevent her from running off x

@RainyDays22 she also needs restraining out and about when trying to hurt herself x

Then yes it's worth a gamble. X

So how have your costs increased that would justify an increase in money taken from a struggling taxpayer and being given to you? If your outgoings have increased directly due to her needs, then you should make a claim. But if it’s a case of “it’s there so I want it” then it’s immoral. Especially when everyone is feeling the pressure.

What a load of rubbish! It isn't about the costs increasing. It's about the OP's DD getting the support she needs.

You'll be shocked to know that the person in question doesn't need to actually receive the care they 'need' to be awarded DLA/PIP. They just have to need the care.

Don't be a dick. If you were being paid as much as someone doing the exact same job as you you'd be entitled to request an increase in pay.

People with lots of disabilities don't get anywhere near as much financial or practical support as they should. If she's entitled to more money OP should absolutely get it. It's not getting taken straight out of a struggling taxpayers pocket.

I personally wouldn't risk making any changes for that reason. I joined a few support groups for it whilst I was making the application and there seems to be zero consistency with regards to assessments, its just potluck on who's dealing with your case and what understanding they have of the condition.

She sounds severely disabled from your description, and I would think she should get ot, whether or not she will is another matter.

@CoffeePlease91 Have a look on the 'Benefits and Work' website, loads of help and advice on there for anyone claiming disability benefits.
@BigChesterDraws Jog on with your ridiculous and wholly incorrect opinion.

I understand your dilemma as I received high rates on both myself
As it's not due for renewal for 3/4 years and your DD's needs are significantly higher I would
An extra £160 per month would enable you to purchase a lot more aids to help her
Remember the descriptors are repeatedly reliably and safety and she definitely meets those
With high Mobility You have an automatic right to a blue badge and tax exemption too

@BigChesterDraws
Do take your judgement and ignorance as you run away( knowing you won't qualify for DLA/ PIP)

I do understand your hesitation though. I didn't ask for reconsideration for DD1, even though I was sure she met the criteria. She had been given HRM in the past. When she transferred to PIP she was given enhanced mobility without an interview, just on paperwork.

Smi is aimed at those who for continuous close supervision isn't enough to stop unpredictable behaviour that causes harm to themselves or others or destruction of property. They would usually attend special school and have a severe learning disability ( although it is possible to qualify with autism without a severe learning disability).

The assessors will look for evidence that restraint and physical intervention is frequently required. They are particularly interested in evidence from school, respite provision etc. Things like behaviour support plans and reports from incidents. They often speak to the school and are interested in behaviour throughout the day and night not just when outside.

For the poster questioning why - children with smi are very difficult to take out and about in public. They generally require multiple adults to keep them safe and cannot use public transport.

Yes it is worth it. I did this and they said no to HRM. I then went yo tribunal and I was successful. It would help if you could get something from a professional that backs up what you are saying.

It does sound like it would be worth it, it seems unlikely she would be downgraded

@BigChesterDraws I claim DLA for my son, my DH earns 6 figures - do you think it’s immoral that we are claiming benefits paid for by the struggling tax payer?

"With high Mobility You have an automatic right to a blue badge and tax exemption too"

With dla tax exemption only applies if the car is for the sole use of the person who gets DLA which wouldn't apply if the car is the family car.

If you don’t have a blue badge yet do apply for one as you can get it for hidden disabilities even if you don’t get HRM.

ODFOD

The only thing I would be wary of in your case is the fact she's 3?

If she was 5 - 6, or even 4.5 I think you'd have a much better chance of HRM because carrying her or having her in a buggy or wheelchair to keep her safe would be "abnormal" (not the best word but I can't think of a better term, sorry) whereas at 3, you could reasonably expect a parent of a totally NT child to be using buggies etc if there are long distances or busy places.

I understand one of the criteria is "state of arrested or incomplete development of the brain" but to use the fact she can't sit exams as justification is a bit slippery considering she's 3.

Up to you of course, but I think if you're not desperate for it and would prefer less stress I'd wait until she was at least 4, closer to 5.

@BigChesterDraws I wouldn’t take the money, I would have the car instead so I would have a safe and reliable vehicle to transport my daughter in, if you actually was aware of anything to do with disabilities you would know that actually they are one of the most UNDER funded departments across councils and so on - that’s why there aren’t enough school places for children who need them, parents aren’t being offered respite when they desperately need it and so on.

For all of the helpful people thank you for all of your advice! My daughter hasn’t been in school for several months because we relocated and they didn’t have an available school place until this September so I’m a little bit worried there isn’t anybody that can back up what I’m saying if that makes sense? Her behaviour just started becoming self harming as she was leaving her old school. I have spoken to her paediatrician about it who has offered medication (antipsychotics) and she has also been referred to CAHMS now I believe on an urgent basis x

Whoooopps I read "and 3" as "she's 3".....

Please ignore my post sorry!!

@Tha she’s not 3, she’s in primary school x

@Tha no problem at all! Xx

@Tha i think she’s older than three.