[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Experts: One pace forwards,please. - Page 2 - Carers UK Forum

Experts: One pace forwards,please.

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
Although the council felt able to suggest how much support I needed for Eliot,doing the same is apparently not possible when it comes to Owen,and they've told me to suggest a figure as a basis for horse-trading.Unusually,they didn't suggest that I go to Disability Solutions (a local benefits advice group) for help."The onus" they said "is on you,Mr.Green".The councillor who was 'supporting' me repeated "Yes.The onus is on you".
bowlingbun wrote:If you are caring you get CA. End of. SDA is for those not receiving care. So the LA don't like it. Tough!!!! At least you know why now.
I think...I actually ...get it.(Which is unusual for me!).
Owen is forgoing a benefit so that he can be with his family,who are caring for him when he's at home?
If I remember rightly, the SDA is designed to cover extra care costs for someone who is living ALONE. So he's obviously not living alone in the place he's living, as he has carers, so you are not really depriving him of anything. After all the LA provide care where he is!
bowlingbun wrote:If I remember rightly, the SDA is designed to cover extra care costs for someone who is living ALONE. So he's obviously not living alone in the place he's living, as he has carers, so you are not really depriving him of anything. After all the LA provide care where he is!

Hmm.Ha.But.Remember he's got a fake tenancy at the former Care home,so in theory he is alone.He's not allowed to leave-kept there by a Court order,and the staff are the same...The social-worker came last week to say that people in these 'tenancies' are in future to be regarded legally as being in a situation analogous to being in Care.Which is interesting.I think the 'tenancy' thing,which Owen has no say over,is intended to channel benefits/funds to the local authority without any questions from Ofsted.(Except that they are now asking questions,it seems).
My son was in one of these fake tenancies a few years ago. £200 a week rent for a room no larger than 8ft by 10ft, but in theory the rental included all sorts of services like window cleaning which never actually happened! It means, though, that the house rental is paid for by Housing Benefit, not Social Services. Apparently, in my area, some of these fake tenancies ended and the people living there left entirely in the lurch, had to find new homes!!! So much for a tenancy!
It sounds horrible,BB.
What they've done with Owen and Eliot,is secured a deceleration from 'experts' that they are learning-disabled,and had their right to chose where to live (which is the council's stated policy for the disabled) removed.Now,they're held in the same council-bungalow,but they have to pay rent to their landlords...the council! (And the council sign the agreement with the council,acting for both the 'tenants' a.k.a. inmates,AND as the landlord!
I've been talking to the DWP and a local disability support group,and think I've made sense out of last week's meeting.

(1)It started with the Local Government Officer telling me he was my 'friend'.

In fact,he blocked two year's worth of Carer's Allowance for myself and DLA for my son.The DWP was wanting to pay the benefits but couldn't until he signed a form asserting that Owen was at home two nights a week.The LGO said I was "raking up past history" by mentioning this.

(2)We went to the Ombudsman over (1),and she ruled that Owen should have two day's worth of DLA for his time at home.Although he was registered for DLA,he didn't receive it five days a week because he was in care.The DLA was paid as Boarder Payments,which is the name given to DLA when the recipient is not a householder.
Although the LGO said that I was "failing to focus" by mentioning the Ombudsman's ruling,the DWP told me last week that Boarders' Payments are "an element of DLA" and is the method of paying the benefit for those in care.

(3) The LGO informed me last week that I was harming Owen financially because he was losing out on a special benefit paid to those on High-rate DLA who are householders.Owen started his 'tenancy' (actually a method of getting those in Care off the books; he now has to pay rent and household bills for what was his unit,but is still held under a court-order).
Apparently,this is true.I was made to feel very guilty about this,but now realise that:
the LGO didn't tell me any of this before.If he had done,I would have put in an application to be the carer of the son who lives with me.Since he doesn't get the supplement,not being a householder,he would not have suffered financially.
At no time has the LGO discussed any of this with me,just announced his decisions.

(4)The LGO now apparently accepts that Owen needs food and drink,heating for his room,etc.,despite denying this for years.Although he set a figure for Eliot's support three years ago,it is apparently up to me to tender for Owen's.As he put it "The onus is on you,Mr.Green".It's not clear why.


Interesting word "onus".

Comments welcome.
John,
Since the onus is on you, I'd take the initiative before they change their minds and work out a figure... Factor in food, heating, toiletries, spending money for Owen, plus a bit more so if they settle for a lower figure than you suggest you are not out of pocket.

Melly1
Hi,Melly.Good call.I'm concerned that they're going to make this a whip to beat me,with my having to prise receipts off the guy at the market selling crisps.
Once he'd twigged that the meeting was about Owen,rather than Eliot,the LGO opined that he understood that Owen "only had Ensure" for sustenance!

I can't help but wonder why nothing was said about the two and a half years I've gone without any support?
There's a meeting on the 22nd to consider Owen's best interests.Once again,I'll say that the council's refusal make any contribution to his financial support constitutes financial abuse (there are billboards all around town urging us to report abuse of the disabled to the council.There will be an awkward silence ,as though I'd broken wind.Then the chairman,a fresh-faced youth,will say "Could we focus on the issue please,John? We all have Owen's best interest at heart.I suggest we start with his day care.Donna,how happy does he seem with that?". Like asking Abraham Lincoln's wife "Apart from that,what did you think of the play?".

What am I missing?