Forum Home → Discussion → Benefits for older people → Thread
Attendance Allowance
That chimes as very true. AA stakeholder research session was interesting. Populated by people who thought that doing regular AA reviews would be viewed as a positive thing for claimants. The direction of travel is disturbing.
Our experiences echo pretty much all of the posts.
One very recent recent example DM rings client on receipt of the MR and on the DM’s advice i.e. you have not had enough falls (client has incurred injuries from falls) withdrew their MR.
Hi, I noticed this in our service, lots more AA refusals. I put in an FOI to check on % of AA claims refused, paid etc by quarter since April 2022. They responded to say they would have to charge me for that, but if I changed the request to % success etc from Oct 23 they might be able to provide it. Re-submitted and waiting for response.
This could just be that it is a narrower/more recent time so it is easier to check, but made me wonder if they only started gathering those stats from October
Yes, I’ve had a couple, both changed on either MR or Appeal but it is just so unusual to have AA refused at all (obviously unless someone is in really good health).
Had a couple of claims refused recently, claimants with cancer. First decision was overturned on MR within 2 days. Second one they have twice refused to take MR from client on basis that it is more than a month since the decision and there is ‘no such thing’ as a 13 month final deadline. On the second call they took a complaint about the refusal to take the MR on the first call but still refused to lodge the 2nd MR request
I have completely given up trying with telephone MR’s and now just use the CRM1
Saves time waiting on the phone and fruitless arguments with call handlers
Hi all. CPAG, RNIB and Age UK have now put out this briefing which covers the use of explanation calls in AA: https://cpag.org.uk/news/mandatory-reconsideration-2024
realised I hadn’t shared the final FOI info on this..
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/attendance_allowance_success_rat#incoming-2575715
basically looks like 22 - 23% were refused from Oct 23 onwards, but there is no data before that to compare to.
Another FOI early in this thread shows the amount of AA appeals had shot up so it does all indicate a change
Coping strategies?
Isn’t the whole point that it is help that is needed, not what is currently being given. So if they are suggesting using coping strategies, that would indicate help/difficulty for that task? Bizarre.
I have an AA appeal coming up. MR decision ( part quote part paraphrased) “If by using an aid this negates the need for help from another person, then you are said to be carrying out tasks independently.” “by using aids currently in place, in your own time and manner, resting between tasks…......this can be achieved independently”
So client has a need, uses a piece of equipment - so doesn’t have a need according to the Decision Maker. AA has gone to Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass.
Coping strategies?
Isn’t the whole point that it is help that is needed, not what is currently being given. So if they are suggesting using coping strategies, that would indicate help/difficulty for that task? Bizarre.
I have an AA appeal coming up. MR decision ( part quote part paraphrased) “If by using an aid this negates the need for help from another person, then you are said to be carrying out tasks independently.” “by using aids currently in place, in your own time and manner, resting between tasks…......this can be achieved independently”
So client has a need, uses a piece of equipment - so doesn’t have a need according to the Decision Maker. AA has gone to Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass.
I would be very interested in knowing the outcome and wording used in the appeal decision. I deal with AA very regularly and I have always ticked “needs help with” if even when using aids they still struggle and ideally would need help for it to be properly safe, done in a reasonable time, or done effectively (similar to PIP but obviously account for some difference due to age).
[ Edited: 1 Jul 2024 at 12:57 pm by Dave_Cov_89 ]Despite being reassured earlier in the year that whilst explanation calls would still take place, this wouldn’t lead to MR requests being declined by telephone, we’ve started hearing about the practice creeping in again. This is a summary from one of our local advisers:
I have had a client ring me today following submitting a mandatory reconsideration. They received a call from the DWP, which was described as “an awful conversation”, client said they went through all the points the original decision maker went through and kept asking whether they really wanted to go ahead with the mandatory reconsideration. The client also said their GP has said they live independently, but they do not have an option as they now live alone since spouse passed away, they rely on the use of aids and neighbours checking in on them. They said that the call was to try and get them not to proceed as the caller asked “so do you still want to go ahead with it” – The client has said yes they do but is understandably upset by this call and feels like it will not be a good outcome.
We’re going to follow up with DWP on this one and will obviously advise on the substantive case but wondering if anyone else is hearing similar reports recently?
[ Edited: 30 Oct 2024 at 08:55 pm by Paul_Treloar_AgeUK ]Coping strategies?
Isn’t the whole point that it is help that is needed, not what is currently being given. So if they are suggesting using coping strategies, that would indicate help/difficulty for that task? Bizarre.
I have an AA appeal coming up. MR decision ( part quote part paraphrased) “If by using an aid this negates the need for help from another person, then you are said to be carrying out tasks independently.” “by using aids currently in place, in your own time and manner, resting between tasks…......this can be achieved independently”
So client has a need, uses a piece of equipment - so doesn’t have a need according to the Decision Maker. AA has gone to Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass.I would be very interested in knowing the outcome and wording used in the appeal decision. I deal with AA very regularly and I have always ticked “needs help with” if even when using aids they still struggle and ideally would need help for it to be properly safe, done in a reasonable time, or done effectively (similar to PIP but obviously account for some difference due to age).
Sorry Dave Cov I only just noticed this.
Appeal was allowed.
The Appellant qualified for Lower Rate AA as he reasonably required frequent help during the day.
” The panel concluded on the evidence as a whole, including the Appellant’s oral testimony at the hearing, that although he stated in his application that he managed with aids, the time it took him to perform activities was excessive and frequent assistance during the day from another person was reasonably necessary at the date of the DWP’s Decision”
Appeal held 2.5 months ago, client still awaiting the back money as DWP still processing it. The questioning was very through. not quite under a Mastermind lamp but far more thorough than it used to be at a Tribunal.
Thank you juliem
The section of that quote - “although he stated in his application that he managed with aids, the time it took him to perform activities was excessive and frequent assistance during the day from another person was reasonably necessary” - is something I will be keeping in my notes for future use.
It’s a shame and shocking to hear they are taking over 2.5 months to pay, but at this point are we really surprised? Just had a PC claimant who was told on 24th June she had been awarded, first payment has gone in this week.