Is this a fair divide when it comes to Carer's Allowance?

[SunsetOnTheHorizon]

Mother has four siblings that support her with her daily and weekly tasks including emotional and mental support. We have been supporting ever since I can remember but recently one subling applied for carers allowance as she is now on eligible benefits.

Now, this particular sibling is noticeably more involved in my mom's daily issues. Making and canceling appointments, taking her to them, taking her shopping, walking, and anything else. It also includes daily conversations, helping her with her mental health, and if an emergency occurs - she's the 1st one there. The other 3 siblings also help out but not as much. It's more as and when. Once a week or once a fortnight. But when these other siblings take my mum out - mum ensures they are given petrol money.

Now the other siblings have kicked up a fuss, saying why is sibling 1 getting the whole amount. It needs to be divided up. When this sibling is clearly always doing more, much more.

AIBU in assuming Sibling 1 should share the amount?

If you're claiming the CA then I guess it changes from you being the one who happens to do more, to you being the one expected to do it all, with any help from your brothers and sisters being if they feel like it.
I think I'd be having a conversation where you agreed between you who is your mums main carer, and that if that's you, then the others can choose to do less for your mum if they wish. However if they want to divide the money then you need a system where you are four equal carers. Perhaps taking a week each on rotation.

Just to clarify OP.

Your Mum's siblings (ie your Aunts/Uncles) are doing the care?

Not that your Mum has 4 children and one of those siblings (ie your brothers & sisters) is claiming carer's allowance?

(Checking because it is unusual for it not to be the adult children doing the caring but leaving it to uncles and aunts.)

Sibling no 1 is doing most of the work and it can be exhausting. It's a huge responsibility. The others helping are only doing what anyone/any child should do to help their parent.

I voted wrongly above as I got confused with the question!

Only one person can claim.

More questions than answers here.

Is sibling 1 actually doing 35 hours per week of care? Presumably they are, unless they lied to the DWP about how much they're doing?

If that's the case, and the others are only visiting once a week or once a fortnight etc, then it's clear that there is only one carer and the others don't have any right to expect a share.

If the split is actually more even than that with Sibling 1 just doing a bit more than the others, then that changes the equation somewhat. Did Sibling 1 inform the others of their intention to claim carer's allowance before putting it in, and did the others support this plan?

Did the others have an opportunity to step up and do more? I would presume that they did, and chose not to bother, but I guess it's possible that Sibling 1 may have made this quite difficult if they are very controlling or something?

Ultimately, the carer's allowance should go to whoever is doing the bulk of the care.

What your sibling is doing can be exhausting, especially emotionally.

If she were to do domiciliary care - and there is always a shortage of these low paid workers who do an incredibly responsible and necessary role, she would get around £1400 per month for 20-25 hrs work.

Another one here thinking carers allowance is such a small amount it isn't even worth the hassle to share it.

But yes, the one doing most of the care should get it.

And if one week she only did 10 hrs, she would be paid pro rata £137.50, still more than carers allowance and no guilt for having done less than the 35hrs and no hassle from siblings.

Is sibling one doing a minimum of 35 hours a week of care? Five hours every single day at least. In which case they are eligible and should claim carers allowance.

If the parent requires significantly more than 35 hours a week care, to the extent that other siblings are also having to do care each week, then really the conversation should be had about whether professional care is required.

Is everyone involved clear about the difference between caring for someone, and just visiting and helping out a parent. Eg visit a parent each week for a couple of hours to keep them company and have a cup of tea- not caring

I used to do that much in a weekend. Caring can be constant and exhausting and there is no switching off or limiting it to 5 hours per day. It's not a job, otherwise it would be paid like one.

Yeah, scrabbling round for twenty quid is kinda pathetic really. You should tell them so.

This has been made clear on numerous occasions. Sibling 1 works and studies but all the care work (appointments etc) are arranged on when sibling 1 is available. And sibling 1 has made it clear to my mum that anything that needs doing goes through sibling 1. The other sibling do things on thier own accord, to spend time with my mum etc, but they are claiming that they are caring for her too. It's a bit messy now. Or is it?

Caring isn't limited to physical caring, it's everything they do which supports the Cared For to live their life.

The one who is doing 35 hours a week is entitled to Carer's Allowance.

none of them appear to be doing 35 hours a week.
that’s like a full time job.

ie you go there at say 10am and stay til say 3pm every single day. not just one hour phone calls and shopping twice a week for an hour a go and two hours of housework or whatever.

are any of them really doing a full time job for her? i’d suggest not and therefore to claim is apparently benefit fraud. sadly there is no hourly rate people can claim. i wish there was as caring us relentless and exhausting. i think the carers allowance should kick in for 14 hours a week. but as yet it does not sadly.

Clearly the siblings who does the most and qualified under 35+ hours per week rule should get the Carers Allowance. The other siblings would not qualify as doing less than 35 hours each week. It sounds like they just do normal visits and odd support for their Mum which they should not require paying to do especially as your Mum gives them petrol money. Who would even take petrol.money from their own Mother for dropping her somewhere?

When the carers allowance claim was made. The other siblings weren't actively involoved in my mums life. They were calling once a week or maybe fortnightly, sibling 1 was not in contact with them also. This is what is being mentioned. The other siblings wanted to have this information back then.

Are they all very poor?

This. If the money has been awarded to the person spending 35 hours or more caring then they get the allowance. If anyone else wants it, they'll have to do the 35 hours.

They are a disgrace. I would be telling them to sod right off.

Sorry to drip feed. I wrote the post late last night - hoping it made sense. I am sibling 1. I have been there for my mum when sibling 2 and sibling 3 had a huge row with her, triggering her migraines. She needed private treatment which mum paid for. She was crying everyday through the pain and the bust up. Sibling 1 was there all the way. Since then that has continued, that level of emotional support, keeping mum sane when things go crazy etc. I even nominated the other siblings to take the carers role and the allowance. But they said "they don't want the hassle." So what is the solution here. They want a slice of the allowance - how is it meant to be divided up? They don't want to take over the role.

The person doing 35 hours plus a week gets the allowance, end of. 35 hours a week is a huge commitment.

Edit because I can see you have clarified that it’s is your mothers children not her siblings that provide the care.
If her sibling 1 is providing 35 hours per week care and is eligible on grounds of income then sibling 1 is entitled to Carers Allowance. If her three other brothers/sisters (or you as her daughter) are also caring for 35 hours and eligible it’s up to your Mum who should claim. If everyone is providing 35 hours per week care I can see the moral case for sharing it

Sounds like the other siblings are fair-weather carers - stepping in only when it suits their personal plans.

The main carer - the person doing the lions share and who is the one on the hook for everything regardless of their own plans gets the allowance.

I would also recommend Hugh Marriott's book on caring. Ifnore the title designed to be an attention grabber on the shelf.

A lot of people will have a lot of opinions about how you privide care for someone. Unless they are the ones stepping up thenselves they should shut it. Block it out.

good luck xxx

This Adult must need an awful lot of care over a 24 hour period if they are all her carers.

I think you should have discussed it with them first. They would probably argue that they do more than you say. They clearly don't do 35 hours a week though and it's not meant to be shared. You can suggest that if one of them takes over everything you are doing you will transfer the money to them?