DLA Turned Down

[justlikethehotels]

Morning all

Just a quickie ... G has been turned down for DLA. She was diagnosed in 2011 age 13 and initially received middle rate care for one year but we've now been told she's not entitled to anything.

We asked them to look again at their decision (she's 15 so she doesn't need DLA), sending in new evidence, disputing the school report (she doesn't need any extra help because she's hardworking and dedicated, apparently ... nevermind the fact that she's no idea who or where she is when she's hypo), and suggesting they get a report from the medical team (doh!) ...

They apparently did this and have decided their original decision was correct ... we're waiting for a copy of the report from the consultant (how long does it take to print and post something) but just wondered what everyone else's experiences of DLA are at age 15 as this seems to be the main reason for turning her down!

Ta muchly!

 

[Copepod]

Middle rate care is awarded on the basis that someone needs continual supervision and / or frequent attention for bodily needs. In case of a child, the child must need more attention than a child of similar age without the problems - more of an issue with younger children (all of whom need lots of care) than for teenagers. So, if DWP perceive that "most of the time", a child is managing their own care (and if they do everything themselves at school, you can see how they come to that view?), then they will decide not to award DLA.

Make sure you appeal NOW, so that you are within the time limit - and go to tribunal hearing in person (better success rate for oral than paper hearings), submitting copies of any reports, letters etc that you have ahead of time, so that panel members can read before hand. For a child under 16, the parent (or someone else) is appointee, but if a 15 year old is willing to speak, then most panels will prefer to hear from them, too.

I think that a 1 year award to a 13 year old seems on the short side, to put it mildly; an award to age 16 would seem to have been more appropriate, but it's too late to appeal that decision now.

 

[Redkite]

Hi, this is getting more common. The DWP have their own guidelines suggesting a cut-off of 12 for children on injections, and 14 for children on a pump. For children newly diagnosed, a 1 year award is suggested. But each case is supposed to be looked at on its own merits. I recently successfully appealed when my son's renewal got refused, as he definitely needs more help and supervision than another child of his age who does not have d. I don't know whether you test during the night, but that is also one of the criteria. I got a letter from his DSN, and drew attention to his 11 page school care plan, the significant extra support needed on a recent school residential trip, and any other examples where he clearly needed more support than others his age. I had asked the DWP to send me their "statement of reasons", and I then argued against each one in turn. Don't give up, and make sure you appeal on time. Good luck! 🙂

 

[HOBIE]

Things have got a LOT LOT easier than in the sixties. (when given the big D aged 3) They didnt have test strips,thin needles,docs that knew what was going on & pumps in the old days 😉