I have a client who is receiving SDA of £15.52 per week and receives DLA middle rate care and higher mobility. Her husband gets an adult dependant addition for his wife of £50.73 per week as part of his SRP and also gets AA. They also receive PC and full HB/CTB. As part of their PC calculation they are getting 2 x SDP which is correct, however they are not getting any CA premiums. I am confident to apply for an underlying entitlement to CA for the husband. However my question is would the wife actually be paid CA or would she just be entitled to the an underlying entitlement to Carers Allowance.The reason being is that if the wife was paid CA they would loose their entitlment to PC and would loose their HB/CTB as they have savings over £16,000. Also would her husbands adult dependant addition of his SRP be effected if his wife was paid CA?

As I understand it when there are rival SDA and CA claims claimants have a free choice between them - because the Overlapping Benefit Regs don't set out a priority order. SDA is usually more so the choice will be between getting all SDA or CA topped up with SDA. Certainly I have regularly seen a form sent to people claiming CA in this situation asking them to make this choice. If there is an SDP at stake you always choose to be paid all SDA.

However the complication here is that the SDA is already being offset against the adult dependant addition. CA is more than the net SDA and so would be paid in preference, which you don't want. If the CA were also to be offset against the adult dependants addition, this wouldn't matter as the CA would be wiped out. My difficulty is that on a quick read of the Overlapping Benefit Regs and the Dependency Regs, and the relevant sections of the Act, I can't see where the authority is for offsetting either SDA or CA against dependants additions.

Reg.10 OB Regs is the main one but only covers benefits under Part II, SSCBA, ie. not non-contributory benefits. And if it did apply it would prevent payment of the dependants addition. Reg.12 OB Regs makes provision for SDA and CA but doesn't mention Reg.10. On the other hand it seems unlikely there is no provison for this offsetting.

So the preliminary question is why are they offsetting SDA at present? This should enable an answer to the actual question but I don't know the answer. Anyone else know?

But I certainly wouldn't claim CA without being sure, in the circumstances. You could always wait until she is pensionable age if that's noty too far away - then her own SRP would probably make a CA claim safe.

Richard Atkinson

The reference to "the Act" in reg 10(1) is a reference to The Social Security Act 1975 (reg 2(1) of the OB Regs), unless the context otherwise requires. Unfortunately it is not available online to check unless someone has a very old dog eared paper copy.

It makes sense in terms of the range of benefits covered in part 2 of the SSC&B Act for the context to otherwise requires but the reference seems very specific for that. Any more thoughts anyone?

I don't think SDA was around in 1975 but it could have been inserted by a later act. However, ICB is in the SSC&B Act so cannot have been inserted into the 1975 Act. Now I'm really confused. Pass my medication.

You are right about SDA not being around in 1975 - I seem to remember it would have been housewifes non-contributory invalidity pension for her - the name suggests the discrimination that resulted in its abolition!

As for the rest of it...........

Tony

Thank you so much for your reply, this is a tricky one isn't it. The only problem is my client is 51 and quite a way off from becoming a pensioner.

You might find this old discussion on overlapping benefits helpful:

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=100&topic_id=3149&mode=full