Disabled child, mum works and will get full 80% contribution to child care costs via WTC. Sure Start or Social Services may also contribute to child care costs, under a number of possible scenarios. Social worker is concerned about possible double funding issues, fraud, etc.

Child care costs may be under £175, Sure Start or Social Services may contribute 20% not covered by WTC. Can't see a problem with that.

Child care costs may be over £175 if child needs one to one at nursery and higher hourly rate is charged, Sure Start or Social Services would make up the difference between the 80% of £175 and the actual child care cost. Again I can't see a problem because there is no double funding.

The social worker's concern is that the parent would not be making any contribution. I can't see that matters. Any thoughts? Key thing to me is that the WTC contribution and SS or SS contributions don't total more than the actual cost.

Wed 13-Aug-08 09:16 AM by Victoria Todd

Hi Brian

Having had a quick look at the regs, I am not sure that it works out quite so easily.

Under SI2002/2008 (Income thresholds) you only get 80% of the lessor of your maximum childcare costs or actual relevant childcare costs for the period as defined by WTC regs.

Under the WTC regs - Reg 14 states that 'charges incurred for child care are charges paid by the person'

My understanding is that she would only get 80% of what she actually pays, not 80% of the total cost of childcare.

That would mean if the costs were actually £175 per week for childcare and social services paid say £35 per week of that - she would only get 80% of 140, not 80% of £175. At least that is my reading of the regs.

Interesting to see if anyone else has any views on this?

Victoria

I am not sure I agree, Victoria. I think in Reg 14 'paid by the person' must mean charges that the person is liable for, rather who physically makes the payment. I assume the part 'paid' by Social Services' will be being paid on her behalf.

Section 12 TCA says that 'Childcare charges' are charges of a prescribed description incurred in respect of childcare by the person....'

'incurred' would also suggest that liability is the issue.

Otherwise, there could a spiralling downwards of entitlement as Social Services try to keep up with a reducing WTC entitlement. I appreciate that this does not necessarily mean that what I have said earlier is correct!

Tony

Off the top of my head, the fact that childcare paid for using childcare vouchers from your employer cannot be counted I believe is derived from Reg 14 also/

That would be because the parts covered by the voucher are classed as paid by the employer, not the claimant. So in this case - would the part paid by social services not be treated in the same way?

I did think about whether you could read Reg 14 as 'liable for' rather than actually paid....but based on the childcare voucher analogy I came up with the above.

Victoria

I take the point, Victoria

I'll have to give it a bit more thought - doesn't seem right though if Section 17 Children Act payments from Social Services, specifically paid for children in need, are treated in a similar way to vouchers

Brian, who would the payment be made to? Our Children's Dept would look to pay such a payment to parent as an enabling measure and s/he would pay the child care provider. However, it might be paid direct if the parent could not be relied upon to make the payment.

Tony

Thanks for adding a bit more info re Section 17 - I too will have a look further into this.

Are these payments made to the parent specifically for childcare? Or are they made under a more general heading?

Victoria

Section 17 payments are made in a wide variety of situations for various needs - they are essentially last resort payments made usually to prevent children coming into local authority care or as interim payments to facilitate care placements - they are usually only used for short or medium term needs. I am assuming Brian is referring to Section 17 payments as it is Section 17 payments that have been used when I have come across similar here.

I have not previously advised that they would reduce WTC child care element entitlement but I am being a little more cautious just at present! I haven't had time to look into it any further yet.

As far as I understand it Section 17 payments are usually disregarded for TC - CPAG Handbood, p1268 note 144, says this is because they are not listed as income under Reg 3 TC(DCI) Regs

Tony