WTC Notification letters – disabled element

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
  • #19813

    Please can someone help me ascertain whether a claimant is receiving the disablement element of WTC.

    To qualify for the Disability Premium one of the criteria is that the claimant (or partner) is in receipt of the disability element or the severe disability element of Working Tax Credit. How is this shown on the WTC notification letter?

    I have seen notifications that state “you are disabled”. Am I correct in assuming that this means that the claimant (or partner) is entitled to the disability premium, and for the severe disability premium it says “you are severely disabled”.



    After speaking to the Tax Credit office I have been told that the specific claimant to which my query relates receives the disabled element on the basis that he “ticked the right boxes”. The IR has not verified the information and the claimant does not receive DLA or any other similar income.

    Would anyone award the disabled premium on this basis? I appreciate that the law suggests we should, but VF and our auditors would suggest otherwise.


    The IR are working under different criteria for this award. However, in general terms, I disagree with your sentiments. The LA is not there to police the rest of the welfare state and nor is that the intention of VF, even though some LA’s seem to think it is. If a decision by the IR (or other agencies) is statutory binding, then it must be followed, right or wrong.

    Otherwise, what are you going to do when most HB / CTB claims are made either via CMS or the Pension Service? Refuse to accept them and undermine the entire strategy of a one stop shop approach?


    I think that the problem here is that it is hard for us LA staff to accept that even though the LA’s are still subject to stringent rules about levels of evidence for HB & CTB claims – the IR are not.

    After sitting with an auditor just recently for several days I can appreciate Mark’s comments.

    To have 2 schemes with such differences is confusing for everyone – not least joe public!!!!


    😕 It seems that the DWP and Inland Revenue are lackadaisical when it comes to evidence/proofs when compared with Local Authorities.

    VF is not employed in a half-hearted manner. We want real proof.

    I appreciate the Inland Revenue/DWP making it easier for some folk(my mother included!) but some times they seem to be laissez-faire in there actual methods.

    Ultimately we’ll all use the same damned form then we can experience the serene tranquillity we all desire.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.