Back in 2005 a 'small home' in Poole was deregistered by the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The home became instead part of Poole's Adult Placement Scheme, which itself was registered with CSCI. This removed the barrier to payment of the DLA care component for the residents, as they were no longer resident in a care home as defined.

Trouble was, for two years Poole's Social Services Dept overlooked this source of income for the residents (they also forgot to kick off HB claims). In October 2007, Blackpool was finally asked to reinstate DLA care payments, which they did, but only from October 07. They seem to think it key that no HB claims were made till then. I also suspect that they will try to say that there are restrictions on arrears anyway.

Now, I reckon that:

1. HB is a red herring - only the status of the accommodation matters.
I am slightly anxious about the money paid to the proprietors under AP legislation, but the latter is not the 1948 NA Act, I think; and

2. DLA care was suspended, ie there was underlying entitlement awaiting a lifting of the suspension from the appropriate time. As far as I know, there is no limit to arrears payable on lifting a suspension.

Any help, please ?

Jim

I can't offer any help - I think your absolutely right. Just go with it along the grounds you've identified.

Yes, HB is a red herring for DLA. However, DWP thinking is who is paying for the cost of the accommodation, and assume it is the LA SSD. We used to send in copies of the tenancy agreements for our AP's who deregistered and that was sufficient. If no written agreements the the DWP might want evidence that no LA funding.

If DLA suspended (which it usually is) and not terminated then benefit must be reinstated from the day after registration ceases. Not subject to any time limits.

Many thanks to you (and Tony Bowman). The usual suspects, eh !

Jim