Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
DLA paid to support housing costs, claims IDS
The right honourable Iain Duncan Smith, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, has given an interview to LBC, and reported by the Telegraph, about the spare room subsidy and the estimated numbers of tenants affected who have a reported disability. In casting doubt on the figures (and we all know that statistics are an area of particular expertise for the right honourable gentleman), he says (my emphasis):
”...The whole of the social housing network, two-thirds of them declare as having some form of disability. I’m not saying they’re right or they’re wrong. I simply say that’s their declaration. There’s no ongoing check. About a third are in receipt of something like DLA, which of itself is a payment to support housing costs.”
Which somewhat flies in the face of his own department’s guidance with respect to making Discretionary Housing Payments (my emphasis again):
3.9 For example, you may decide to disregard income from disability related benefits as they are intended to be used to help pay for the extra costs of disability.
I’m sure this is entirely unrelated to the forthcoming Judicial Review hearing of Sandwell Council’s policy of taking DLA into account when assessing a couple’s entitlement to DHP’s when faced with the spare room subsidy, which is set to take place on 31 October 2014.
Mine’s a double, cheers!!!
[ Edited: 14 Aug 2014 at 01:59 pm by Paul_Treloar_CPAG ]Oh, and just for the record, Mr Duncan Smith also appears to have forgotten one of the key findings in the case of Burnip as well (my emphasis):
45. First, I think it is necessary to draw a clear distinction between the benefits which Mr Burnip was entitled to claim for his subsistence, and those which he was entitled to claim in respect of his housing needs. His incapacity benefit and disability living allowance were intended to meet (or help to meet) his ordinary living expenses as a severely disabled person. They were not intended to help with his housing needs.
Not much room for equivocation there…..
Oh, and just for the record, Mr Duncan Smith also appears to have forgotten one of the key findings in the case of Burnip as well (my emphasis):
45. First, I think it is necessary to draw a clear distinction between the benefits which Mr Burnip was entitled to claim for his subsistence, and those which he was entitled to claim in respect of his housing needs. His incapacity benefit and disability living allowance were intended to meet (or help to meet) his ordinary living expenses as a severely disabled person. They were not intended to help with his housing needs.
Not much room for equivocation there…..
Plenty of room. We are talking about IDS here…..............................
Even the below-the-article commenters of the Telegraph accuse him of having a veracity shortfall…..
[ Edited: 14 Aug 2014 at 02:05 pm by Andrew Dutton ]Someone also needs to tell him that The Disability Discrimination Act doesn’t exist anymore.
Someone also needs to tell him that The Disability Discrimination Act doesn’t exist anymore.
Well spotted Sharon, I missed that particular pearl of wisdom.
I suppose, in his defence, the Equality Act 2010 has only been around for nearly 4 years….so much to learn and so little time.
You are clearly ‘an ill-fitting anorak dancing on the head of a pin’!!!!
All of youse!!!! Outside, now!!!!! Come an’ have a go with the Perugia aggro!
His rubbish is now being picked up all over now
I just hope mr J Public care enough to act on this next May.
I cannot bear the thought of another 5 years of this lot. Doesnt bear thinking about…
Someone has even submitted an FOI request on this now. Be very surprised if they receive any sort of meaningful answer.
DWP has just published ad hoc statistics on income of disabled people before and after housing - could maybe be related to forthcoming JR on taking DLA into account for DHPs? -
It’s pretty difficult to see what other purpose this “report” is intended to be used for - what does it show? It shows that disabled people receive money and that they receive less money after paying housing costs, the same as everyone else who has to pay for housing. I’ve noticed how these ad hoc reports never proffer any explanation as to why it’s been felt necessary to produce them in the first place.
Someone has even submitted an FOI request on this now. Be very surprised if they receive any sort of meaningful answer.
There’s an answer.
Disability Living Allowance (DLA) provides a contribution towards the extra costs faced by
severely disabled people as a result of their disabilities. Broadly, entitlement to DLA is based
on walking difficulties and/or the need for personal care which results from severe disability.
The individual’s medical condition is not necessarily the key factor. Rather it is the disablement
that results from it and the effects of that disablement. DLA is not intended to meet the specific
costs associated with disability; it is for the individual to decide how to spend the money in a
way that best fits their circumstances. They could, for instance, save the money and use it for
adaptations to their home.
I bet the poor person who had to type this is still in the foetal position under their desk.
<i>”...The whole of the social housing network, two-thirds of them declare as having some form of disability. I’m not saying they’re right or they’re wrong. I simply say that’s their declaration. There’s no ongoing check. <b>
The more I think about it, the angrier this makes me. He might just as well come right out with it and call them all liars to their faces. I just can’t abide the snidey tone. Horrible man.
There’s an answer.
Disability Living Allowance (DLA) provides a contribution towards the extra costs faced by severely disabled people as a result of their disabilities. Broadly, entitlement to DLA is based on walking difficulties and/or the need for personal care which results from severe disability. The individual’s medical condition is not necessarily the key factor. Rather it is the disablement that results from it and the effects of that disablement. DLA is not intended to meet the specific costs associated with disability; it is for the individual to decide how to spend the money in a way that best fits their circumstances. They could, for instance, save the money and use it for adaptations to their home.
I bet the poor person who had to type this is still in the foetal position under their desk.
Thanks Sharon.
I have to say that the closing statement “They could, for instance, save the money and use it for adaptations to their home.” is bordering on the disingenuous in trying to establish a link between DLA and housing costs. Whilst it is true that someone could choose to do that, they could also choose to use it to pay for special diets, extra travel costs, laundry, living aids, etc etc etc etc.
Indeed, as they note, it is for the individual to decide and the attempt to seek making justification for taking into account DLA payments as an income resource when assessing entitlement and eligibility to payments such as DHP’s is a particularly low strategy in my opinion.
[ Edited: 27 Aug 2014 at 01:28 pm by Paul_Treloar_CPAG ]There’s an answer.
Disability Living Allowance (DLA) provides a contribution towards the extra costs faced by severely disabled people as a result of their disabilities. Broadly, entitlement to DLA is based on walking difficulties and/or the need for personal care which results from severe disability. The individual’s medical condition is not necessarily the key factor. Rather it is the disablement that results from it and the effects of that disablement. DLA is not intended to meet the specific costs associated with disability; it is for the individual to decide how to spend the money in a way that best fits their circumstances. They could, for instance, save the money and use it for adaptations to their home.
I bet the poor person who had to type this is still in the foetal position under their desk.
Thanks Sharon.
I have to say that the closing statement “They could, for instance, save the money and use it for adaptations to their home.” is bordering on the disingenuous in trying to establish a link between DLA and housing costs. Whilst it is true that someone could choose to do that, they could also choose to use it to pay for special diets, extra travel costs, laundry, living aids, etc etc etc etc.
Indeed, as they note, it is for the individual to decide and the attempt to seek making justification for taking into account DLA payments as a income resource when assessing entitlement and eligibility to payments such as DHP’s is a particularly low strategy in my opinion.
It really is a ridiculous response. Someone wrote that and has to look in the mirror every day. Poor lamb.
If only it were so. IDS isnt thick, he knows EXACTLY what he is doing.
He really is a nasty piece of work.
To simply wave away any link between his reforms and the increasing use of foodbanks, return of malnutrition, the well documented deaths as well as refusing to consider any evidence presented to him that he doesnt like shows clear traits of psycopathy, not thickness.