to think the Carer's Allowance scandal shows the uncaringness of the DWP

[cakeorwine]

In a nutshell - if you get Carer's Allowance, you are supposed to only claim it if you earn below a certain amount. If you go over that amount, you can't claim it.

If you go over that amount and don't tell the DWP, you have to pay it back. But say you went over by 30 p. you would have to pay back not 30p but ALL of it.

The DWP know if you have earnt over the amount. But they don't tell you. They let it build up. And then prosecute you.

‘They’re heartless’: how one woman fell victim to the carer’s allowance trap | Carers | The Guardian

"On weekends when her daughter stays with her father, Moon worked part-time at Tesco earning £9.50 an hour. This would comfortably keep her under the earnings threshold of £127 a week at the time, especially when deducting allowances for fuel and pension payments – or so she thought.
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) contacted Moon in 2019 to say she had breached the earnings limit and would need to pay back every penny – or she would be taken to court.
Moon, terrified, contacted Citizens Advice for help. It analysed her payslips going back to July 2016, when she started work at Tesco, and found that – even on the strictest understanding of the DWP’s rules – she had exceeded the earnings limit by about £3 most of those weeks. Some weeks it was as little as 50p over.
She appealed for clemency but the DWP refused to budge. It refused her offer to pay back the amount she was not entitled to – about £800 over the course of three and a half years.
Instead, she would have to pay back every penny of carer’s allowance over that period – known as the DWP’s “cliff edge”. It amounted to £11,292.75 – plus an additional £50 civil penalty."

And the DWP response:

“Claimants have a responsibility to inform DWP of any changes in their circumstances that could impact their award, and it is right that we recover taxpayers’ money when this has not occurred.”

Regarding the comment above saying about ir being income based - it’s not means tested in the same way

i can claim carers allowance now as I left my job, but I am not entitled to any other benefits due to savings.
I have a lot of savings which we are now living off which I’m able to do
but I can still claim carers allowance

yet a mum with no savings can’t earn more than 150 a week

same as spouses

you could have a Single mum earning 1.00 over the threshold who wouldn’t get it
but a mum with a husband who is on a full wage who does.

There was a segment on Jeremy vine about this last week. And one caller who earned nmw was under threshold then due to a nmw increase was over the threshold. Hadn't thought to check. And as vine said you'd think carers allowance would be raised inline with nwm. He owed £1000s

Another callers is now paying back £50 a month for the rest of her life because she was prosecuted

Tax credits worked like that though ,some years people owed money and some years people were owed money .

Crazy isn't it. There must be a better system. As others have said I think they just want to make it so difficult so that people stop claiming. It's the same with universal credit, so many requirements/ having to work certain hours, meeting minimum income floor for self employed, It's all so complex that they hope people will just not claim.

Year, but you owed money rather than sat at home worrying about a prosecution over a cliff edge amount.
Someone does a claim late with caters and you’ve committed fraud. I get my allowance usually before I even see my pay that month. I don’t know my exact pay sometimes until I see the amount that cleared into my account

I claimed carers allowance. I look after my DF and drive 20 miles each way to do it. Thought it would help with petrol costs.
8 weeks later DF gets a bill for rent arrears £400 . Apparently the calculations for HB change when someone claims carers allowance. So I had to pay it and carry on paying £50 per week.

What baffles me about all benefits though, is that it says "this is the amount the government have decided you need to live on" yet rents can be double the LHA and have to be topped up by that amount etc. The amount they calculate must be based on the cheapest area in the country because it does not reflect the actual costs of living, nor the fact that it rises it seems on a daily basis.

If someone can't work for any reason but can't get their even basic living costs covered everything spirals out of control - health conditions, mental health, housing situations, nutrition, addiction perhaps etc etc.

There is an industry built around poverty issues which doesn't seem to benefit the actual poor.

I sometimes suspect there is an element of eugenics by stealth embedded in these policies. People die from exhaustion, neglect or horrifically at their own hand simply because the speed of modern life outstrips the vulnerable's ability to keep up, or the people trying to care for them.

It reminds me of that old adage about the justice system that better 10 guilty men go free than an innocent be convicted. But it's inverted for the crime of being poor.

Out and out fraud such as the recent 50 million UC case is of course awful - not least because it brings every person genuinely in need of support under suspicion by officials and the public. I actually wonder in that case whether there was a bit of insider help for kickbacks going on, because honestly, getting UC is no picnic.

I'm in a catch 22 of increasing debt and imminent homelessness. I am trying to support two elderly parents through a sudden decline and the implication that a good job would sort me out is unrealistic when I might not even have a home soon.

I'm lucky it's just me and touch wood bar high blood pressure and possible nervous breakdown I'm going to survive. But many others are in far worse positions and it really worries me that the only value put on people is their ability to be economically productive units.

This.

I had to give up my job to care for my dad when he was put on the end of life pathway at the outset of the first lockdown.

The only way I could afford to do so was thanks to a modest inheritance from my uncle the previous year, God only know how others manage.

Even with that advantage I’m only just getting back on my feet now as the whole experience left me the panic disorder, GAD and PTSD.

Yet another reason not to vote Tory…the whole system needs a massive rethink whoever forms the next government.

I think employers should pay a fair wage rather than people needing top up benefits.

BUT carers' allowance is, as the name suggests, for caring, and it shouldn't be affected by how much you earn. If you care, you care. Lots of people do it alongside work, but they are still saving the State bucketloads of cash.

No. It comes separately. UC will also be reduced by the amount of the CA. If you need to claim UC and are in receipt of CA, you will need to advise UC and ask for Carer's Element. You have to be careful and align your claim periods or it gets a bit complicated.

What upsets me most is that if you make an error, or what they judge to be an error it’s treated criminally.
If my employer processes a claim late, or if an expense is disallowed then people are hit punitively. I can lose a months allowance, or even face prosecution. And it’s really complex.
My actual real case is I usually earn £0 or well under for 3/4 weeks then every 4/5th week I earn over.
I can’t claim that though. I have been told it’s monthly. If that 4th week falls in the same month or a claim is late then I’ve made a fraudulent claim!

There are three real points of unfairness here. Firstly the cliff edge nature of the cut-off, meaning that inadvertently earning a penny over an arbitrary limit at the wrong point cancels out the validity of the entire claim. Secondly, the DWP's system of allowing the now 'invalid' claim to continue, in spite of being in possession of earnings data, thereby hitting already poor individuals with frightening and impossible bills without taking any steps to warn them about it. And thirdly, limiting earnings at all in order to claim the pitiful and insulting amount allowed to provide full time (ie 35 hours) care.
I've helped to care for an elderly relative as part of a team of adults. Six of us, and it still wasn't enough. I can't imagine doing that single-handed and then having the years of effort and exhaustion thrown back in my face as if I were deliberately scamming the system.

And here's a leak of some DWP plans that will really make things worse for disabled people: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/14/leak-reveals-tory-plan-to-cut-cold-weather-cash-for-disabled-people

Tories, Torying. I do not see how anyone with a heart can vote for them.

My first reaction to this was personal relief that I didn't claim carer's allowance when I could have. I found myself housing and feeding and driving about a friend's mother, and I think only once was CA mentioned, and no info about claiming it. I did have emotional blackmail from hospital discharge when I refused to have her back

There are several threads running on MN at the moment about the carers allowance scandal and how family carers are treated. The NHS workers are conspicuous by their abscence. Its like tumbleweed. Yet post a thread about how can we improve the NHS and its like a klaxon has gone off and the health workers on here (not all of them but a good amount of them) are lining up to patient blame and moan about how families arent doing enough yet post a thread about how family carers are being treated re CA and they couldnt give less of a shit!

I don’t understand why you’re only allowed to earn such a small amount before you lose it.

I claim carers allowance for my autistic son, but he’s at school from 8.30-3.30 5 days per week. I work when he’s at school but can only do 2 days a week before losing carers allowance.

I’d love to work an additional day, my work would happily let me and it technically it would make a big difference to us financially. Except I’d lose carers allowance which would make it pointless.

I’d love to work an additional day, my work would happily let me and it technically it would make a big difference to us financially. Except I’d lose carers allowance which would make it pointless.

have you checked if working 5 days means you are better off? I work 5 days during school hours. It's financially much better than CA plus the £151 (but also extremely stressful as I never get a break)

DWP staff are there to apply the rules. Any lack of caring is down to the government of the day.🤷‍♀️

Carers allowance is quite frankly, shameful. To hound people like this is cruel.

I’ve had to claim recently. My DH is bed bound with cancer, and I’m trying to juggle a 3 and 4 year old.

I gave up my job to look after everyone. All for the princely sum of £300 a month.

@JenniferBooth I am an NHS worker. I post on lots of topics. I don't necessarily mention where I work if it is not relevant to the topic. I very much doubt that I am alone in that.

at times they don't apply the rule correctly - simply because they are complex and confusing and not even all DWP staff seem to understand them even though it's their job. How can carers who juggle work and caring, often without a break or respite be expected to do it?

@pointythings Fair enough but these threads are filling up nowhere near as quickly as the NHS ones do

@JenniferBooth it's not just NHS. It's everybody. As long as people aren't pushed into a caring position, they don't understand it. A friend told me I am lucky to stay at home if I wish and get 'paid' for it and it's unfair as she has healthy kids and needs to work and no option to give up employment (I cannot either - I am still working albeit very reduced hours and adjusted lifestyle). But I think this is how many people view us - getting paid and not having to work whilst looking after a loved one. Noone (unless been there) seems to understand the sacrifices that come with it and how it wrecks and takes away your life and leaves many in poverty.

There is only one way that people will understand it but it would never happen

I know. and the gov knows this as well. Just a day of strike would grind this country to a hold. Would. It's especially bitter considering how many days so many others were able to strike.