underlying entitlement to carer premium

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #23461
    lindaosb
    Participant

    should a carer premium premium be awarded when it is known that the person would be entitled to underlying entitlement to carer’s allowance were they to apply for it or do they have to actually claim underlying entitlement to carer’s allowance first? The Zebedee,Ward & Lister book 05/06, page202 says they do not have to make an actual claim but their book 06/07, page 208 no longer says this.

    #12703
    Anonymous
    Guest

    If you are aware that the DWP would award a Carer’s Allowance but for the payment of another overlapping and larger payment of benefit, you should award the Carer’s Premium.
    I am unaware of any need to “apply” or “claim”. 8) (Can you claim an underlying entitlement, anyway? 😕 )

    #12704
    lindaosb
    Participant

    Thank you. This is how I had read it. Do you have any clues as to why Pension Credits dont seem to automatically give the Carer Premium in these situations?

    #12705
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Again from memory of an old thread on these boards…

    You cannot presume to [i:cd6be104c9]know[/i:cd6be104c9] that the DWP would agree that there is an underlying entitlement to Carer’s Allowance – there may be factors of which you are unaware that would influence their decision. Hence, the claimant does actually have to obtain confirmation from the DWP that underlying entitlement exists before you can award the premium.

    If I further remember rightly, WZL were advocating that you [i:cd6be104c9]could[/i:cd6be104c9] assume underlying entitlement from a very dodgy reading of a CD. This got shot down in flames on, of all places, the Rightsnet boards.

    #12706
    Kevin D
    Participant

    I broadly agree with Andy that it cannot be assumed by the LA that there is underlying entitlement to Carer’s Allowance. An analogy could be drawn from [b:dcfdf8a81c]R(H) 03/06[/b:dcfdf8a81c] in which it was found that incapacity for the purposes of “old” HBR 11 (yes, I know it’s changed) could only be determined by the DWP. Essentially, what did the LA know about incapacity? It seems logical (uh oh!) that the same reasoning should be applied to other DWP bens.

    Regards

    #12707
    lindaosb
    Participant

    thanks to all of you for your help.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.