Hi all,
Just wondered if anyone had any experience in getting the carer's element of UC backdated.
This is long, I'm sorry in advance!
I'm new to UC, started claiming in February and said on my claim form that I'm a carer for my two DC. I'm also a carer for DM, but I didn't list her as there was only space on the form for one person you care for, so I put one DC - DP put the other DC on his form.
I'm self-employed so I was called in for an interview. I told the UC woman during the interview that I care for DC, and also my DM. I explained that I had only just submitted the forms for DLA for the DC (I should have done this years ago but I'm also autistic/ADHD and I really struggle getting things done).
The UC woman said that as DC hadn't been awarded DLA yet, I couldn't be classed as a carer for them, but I could be classed as a carer for what I do for DM. She has cerebral palsy and has quite significant care needs, certainly over 35 hours pw, which is all on me.
The UC woman said as I was a carer for DM, I had no required work activity. I had my accounts etc ready but she didn't want to look at them as she said it didn't matter. I just have to report whatever I earn each month, no checks needed. And the reason for that is that I'm a carer for DM, and listed on the system as such.
Fast forward to April, and I discovered there's a carer's element of UC that can be paid - and I hadn't been paid it. I spoke to UC and they said I had to report it as a change on the system. I explained it wasn't a change and that they had recorded me as a carer back in March, but hadn't awarded the extra money. They said because I didn't list DM on the original form, it was classed as a change, even though I'd told the UC woman about it in March, and on the basis of what I'd told her, she'd classed me as a carer.
I'm now being paid the carer's premium as part of the UC, but they have refused to backdate it. They say there were no exceptional circumstances that explained why I didn't tell them about the change.
I am finding this hard to understand.
The UC woman accepted me as a carer, and entered me on the UC system as a carer. She didn't tell me I had to report a change online as well. Surely, if I had to report a change online to be classed as a carer, she should have assessed me for work activity? The fact that she accepted me as a carer suggested to me that I had done everything necessary to tell them? She didn't tell me about the extra carer's element of UC, nor did she tell me that I would have to update my online journal.
It's not a change because I told them about it in March. I accept that I shouldn't have it backdated before March because I didn't put it on my original form. But from March onwards, they had been "told", albeit face-to-face, and not online.
If they can't accept this info face-to-face, then they shouldn't have accepted me as a carer. Surely by classing me as a carer as a direct result of information I provided face-to-face, they can't say that I didn't tell them? How could I possibly have known that I would have to report it online as well, when she said she would change my status to that of carer based on what I told her....??
I've asked for reconsideration, but I don't hold out much hope. It all just seems really unfair - either she shouldn't have classed me as a carer, should have checked my working activity and should have told me to report a change online and wait to be accepted, or else if she was able to accept information given face-to-face, I shouldn't be penalised for "not telling them"?
It doesn't seem to be logical at all but maybe I'm missing something... We are in a dire situation financially, so the little bit extra backdated would really help a lot. What are my chances of getting it agreed?? On a scale of 1-10, is it anything more than 0? 😅