|
No, but as a person who calculates and payes them I have some sympathy for what you are trying to say...
The way I look at DHP's and DLA is as follows,
I look at the total 'reasonable' expenditure of the person applying for DHP's ('reasonable' carries with it huge amounts of discretion, but I would not allow £50.00 per week for a TV Licence, or £50.00 per week for electricity, (but then I might allow that amount for electricity in a large household etc…))…
If I am taking into account the extra costs of heating or dietary requirements because of a disability, then I consider it reasonable to look at the income available to provide for those needs. In local authority’s where I have performed that function, I have however disregarded DLA (Mob) because of S.73 (14) of the Social Security (Conts & Bens) Act 92, which reads, “A payment to or in respect of any person which is attributable to his entitlement to the mobility component, and the right to receive such a payment, shall (except in prescribed circumstances and for prescribed purposes) be disregarded in applying any enactment or instrument under which regard is to be had to a person's means”.
When calculating DHP’s it is therefore very likely that I will in some way be factoring in the mobility of the person concerned, and the above section indicates that it should be disregarded, (though there is scope to argue it does not apply, I do not support that argument… Unless/until precedent is set, I will continue to disregard DLA(M) (but not DLA(C)), but as DHP’s are not appealable to TAS, this issue will have to wait until someone has the funds to mount a JR on an LA that does not disregard DLA(M)).
So you could try this argument to the LA as it should then have to give you reason(s) why it does not consider that DLA(M) can not be disregarded, (see page 884/885 of 15th Ed CPAG HB/CTB Regs guide "Analysis" of the DHP regs, but especially para 3 of page 885).
My only other advice is to give FULL & COMPLETE itemised expenses. So arguments that I have successfully made on behalf of benefit claimants to other LA’s starts to digress into the ‘best’ dietary requirements of those with for instance, Hepatitis (C) & bleeding disorders etc. as their current expenditure is heavily weighted to dietary requirements and heating (even in summer), to prevent damage to their liver etc. These arguments have met with success…
|
