Carer Prem where AIF does not contain Carer’s Allowance…..

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • #20258
    Kevin D

    Curious one this, brought up by the Welfare Rights Section at the LA I’m currently with.


    – Clmt on Savings Credit only (not G).
    – AIF given to the LA makes no mention of ent to CA (either actual, or underlying @ £0.00). Pen Svc may, or may not, be aware of u/ent to CA.
    – Clmt is able to satisfy the LA of underlying ent to CA.
    – LA assess HB/CTB, but do not award the Carer Prem as AIF has been followed (i.e. no CA)

    Issue: Where the AIF does not contain CA (actual or underlying), can the Carer Prem be awarded?

    The options argued so far:

    No – Carer Prem cannot be awarded as AIF doesn’t contain CA (for info, I’ve seen PC EDTs show £0.00 in underlying ent cases – this was not the case in the instance here).

    Yes(1) – CP should be awarded as LA’s are only required to follow the AIF in terms of income / cap and the AIF rules do not prevent LAs from awarding Premiums.

    Yes(2) – CP should be awarded, but only upon an amendment to the AIF, showing ent to CA @ £0.00 or above.

    My opinion? I no longer have one…. 😯

    Help / reference to relevant regs etc would be much appreciated.



    I would definitely go with Yes (1): the Applicable Amount is determined in accordance with Part V of the Regs and Schedule 2A, whereas income is determined in accordance with Part VI.

    Paragraph 9 in Sched 2A makes no reference to Careres Allowance (actual or underlying) having to form part of the claimant’s “income” – it simply says that he or she has to be entitled to it.

    On a related point, as with most of the 60+ provisions, Sched 2A.9 borrows the sloppy drafting of the Pension Credit Regs themselves. These are curiously understated on the position of people who only have underlying entitlement to CA. You have to compare and conrast the words “entitled to” in para 9 with “entitled to and in receipt of” in para 6(2)(a)(iii) (severe disability). I read this as meaning that underlying CA is enough to get the premium, whereas only actual entitlement blows out the SDP. But it is far less clear than in the proper HB Regs and the IS and JSA Regs, where much stronger provision is made for underlying CA.

    In conclusion, I think the award of the premium is an LA matter and it doesn’t have to follow the AIF; I also think underlying CA is enough to get the premium.


    Resurrecting this extremely old post…
    If the AIF [i:f308b086b0]does [/i:f308b086b0]include CA, are we saying that clt is entitled to carer premium? Does the savings credit award not reflect this? If we show CA separately and award a premium aren’t we allowing it twice, so to speak?


    Following on from above, I have a case whereby the Pension Service has requested a recovery of Carer’s Allowance from the Pension Credit.

    i.e. They have taken into account Carer’s Allowance from 14/2/11 but the Carer’s Allowance was awarded from 22/11/10. In order to avoid an overpayment of Pension Credit iro Carer’s Allowance they have requested that the Carer’s Allowance Unit make a recovery from 22/11/10-13/2/11 – this also involves paying the carer premium. This is standard procedure for Pension Credit.

    However, I am not sure whether Carer’s Allowance should be taken into account on the HB/CTB claim separately to the Qualifying Income for the period 22/11/10-13/2/11 to avoid an overpayment of HB/CTB or whether this would be penalising the client. My gut feeling is that to get the benefit as correct as possible we take Carer’s Allowance into account from 22/11/10-13/2/11. The Savings Credit which would normally increase with an award of Carer’s Allowance would not be correct but as the change is minimal I think this would be the correct action to take.

    Any advice?

    Many thanks.

    Carol H

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.