Broke of london. I can understand what you rae saying. Without saying too much on here as a professional involved with dla for children a lot..it must be shown as expenditure somewhere. I think in this threads case it is no as the threads owner says it has not been offset. It will create problems if the team around the child are aware that monies for the disabled child are not shown as expenditure either the way you mention or down directly on the expenditure sheet in the exact total of dla awarded or more.
I think this is one of those issues which can run and run. Working in the line of work I did I know of many parents who were not spending DLA on their child and others who would spend more.
I don't think the issue is whether it is legal to take into account, but hopefully anyone reading this who is proposing an IVA will gain the knowledge that they need to specify they have additional expenditure which should be taken into account.
- At the end of the day the child is part of the household and needs clean clothes /warm food - so if people spend it on a washing machine and cooker then so be it. Ok it is not directly spent on the child but the child will benefit from it - The aim of DLA is to make life a bit easier for the child, and as part of the household ,hopefully a bit easier for everyone
Think we will all have to agree to disagree on this one. Yes u can spend it on a washer. It was awarded to the child and somehow it should be shown as expenditure so the family actually get the cash and its not swallowed up by creditors. That's what my issue ad the posters issue is. Not what its spent on but that they actually reeive it somewhere in their expenditure budget.
There are many things that an individual could put down as additional expenses and it's worth spending time when working out your expenditure to consider everything you spend... ie - your electricity / gas etc may be a lot higher due to having to have the heating on all day, extra washing.
For mobility I would list taxis, petrol money to friends and family to take you and the disabled child places. It's all about 'covering' the DLA so that you or a child is not disadvantaged. As I said previously I have a motability car so the issue was not there when doing my income and expenditure.
I would say anyone who is having DLA taken into account at present should raise this at the review stage with a list of additional expenditure and if it means calling a variation meeting then so be it. In my opinion, to propose an IVA with DLA taken fully into account is a bit sticky as benefits can be reviewed at any time.
i dont think anyone disagreeing with anyone - most of us are saying the same thing ! to benefit child and family - the issue is how the IVA company/see the DLA
Like most issues - it seems IVA companies all have diffrent approaches
Agree that it should all go down as expenditure which is what the thread is all about. It would be easier to have it straight out as on my iva under care. However this forum is about opinions and everyones is different. If it was not down as taxis etc or straight out in the full amount under care I would be fightuing it and if this landed on my desk I would fight for it to go down as expenditure anywhere within the iva. What it is spent on isn't the issue. The issue is that the thread holder wasn't getting the dla offset in their iva. This thread could run and run after all it is opinions. However I would fight for it to be down as expenditure personally and professionlly
It should be listed as an income and offset IN FULL as expenditure, quite a simple process really. It may be that an IP firm may ask you to breakdown the costs a little more thoroughly, but that is simply because we may be asked the question by creditors and so have to provide the answers. The end result is the same in reality, it isn't the creditors money, nor the debtors as it is for a specific purpose and should be spent as such, and therefore the creditor has no right to ask for it in repayment of the debt.
Regards.
Cert DR
23+ years in debt advice
I do not post for anyone other than myself
Well, I do know that the benefits people are (quite rightly) very keen that this particular benefit is NOT to be used for repayment of debt, and have heard threats that if they find out that it is then they will withdraw it. Now, I will stress that this is purely anecdotal and there is no link that I know of that I could share with you, but as it comes direct from discussions at a very high level between one of our IP's and the benefits people themselves I have no reason to doubt it.
Regards.
Cert DR
23+ years in debt advice
I do not post for anyone other than myself
Size 5 exactly what I have been saying. Professionally if it landed on the desk at childrens services or the dss or "the team around the child" ( anyone involved with the child) that it was not offset somehow it would cause problems and probably be investigated . It has to go down as expenditure
I suspect that DLA is included where income is low and it 'helps' to get the IVA accepted. Rightly or wrongly different IP's are treating it differently and I would just say to anyone, ,ake sure they include enough additional expenditure to warrant the benefit being disregarded.
I don't think that DWP would be able to legally withdraw the benefit (having worked there for 28 years I cannot recall anything in legislation that would allow them to do this).
Maybe not, or maybe it was just the impression that they may that they wanted to put across. Either way, it is only right and proper that this particular benefit is not "dipped into" to pay debts with.
Regards.
Cert DR
23+ years in debt advice
I do not post for anyone other than myself
The experiences size 5 has had happened . Also I can vouch that my dept would act. However different branches of different depts may have different answers . I think we are all saying the same thing that it should go down as expenditure. However no one can agree where. As the forum is just opinions we should leave the reader of the thread to make their own decsion. The thread could go on and on and on....
- most of us are saying the same thing ! to benefit child and family - the issue is how the IVA company/see the DLA