Are dla back payments 'ring fenced'?

12 Months ago, I received approx £12,000 ish, in back payments of DLA, which included Carers Allowance for my wife.
An area that I am unsure of,is whether this money now gets taken into account in regard to claiming other benefits that I am entitled to. I currently get a top up of IS.
I'd be grateful for the answer to this question.
Thanks.

linsky wrote:

12 Months ago, I received approx £12,000 ish, in back payments of DLA, which included Carers Allowance for my wife.
An area that I am unsure of,is whether this money now gets taken into account in regard to claiming other benefits that I am entitled to. I currently get a top up of IS.
I'd be grateful for the answer to this question.
Thanks.

If the amount of arrears of DLA amounted to £5,000 or more, they are disregarded for the duration of the IS award. This also applies to other means tested benefits such as Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit.

There is no effect on the award of non-means tested benefits such as IB and Carer's Allowance

Thanks for the advice CD. It was by some of your guidance that I was awarded the back pay. I had a point of law which the first tier Tribunal overlooked. (I reall do think that they were so busy looking for reasons that were not there that made a hash of the point of Law.) The point was that my representative did not turn up as his Secretary had written the wrong date in his diary. The Tribunal did not ask me whether I would like an adjournmnet and we just carried on with the hearing. The DWP sent one of their representatives to oppose my application. Paradoxically, the rep from the DWP could see with his own eyes the very things that I was genuinally suffering from and offered both myself and wife some genuine words of empathy. He said very very little to the Tribunal to his opposition to my application. The Tribunal too could see that I was in no way exaggerating any of my symptoms whatsoever. The three of them were so cold and uncaring that it would be obvious that anyone else going before them that day would not have got any award whatsoever.

Getting back to the Upper Tribunal, just one side point that the Judge said was that "Given so an so's health conditions it would have not been appropriate for him try and represent himself"

That then gave me back some hope that are genuine people in Tribunals' Departments. But I will never forget just how cold and uncaring the first panel were.

When my second appeal was heard, I was represented. The DWP did not send anyone to oppose my appication (I will never know whether the DWP rep at my first hearing would have had any bearing on this) but my Representative made a few brief but clear points and I just answered a few questions. After being sent out of the room, in definitely less than 5 minutes, we were called back in and The Judge said "We are going to give you what your are asking for" ie High Rate Care and Low Rate Mobility.

In my opinion, there should be some oversight of extremely harsh Tribunals. My first hearing felt to me like I was in a Kangaroo Court. The case notes written by the then 'Chairman' now Judge; contained very many untruths, which staggered me to know that as a Lawyer, he plainly written in his own hand, things that simply did not happen or said.

Anyway CD, I certainly appreciate your help in my case.
I hope you are well (or as well as can be).

Many Thanks
Linsky

In my opinion, there should be some oversight of extremely harsh Tribunals. My first hearing felt to me like I was in a Kangaroo Court. The case notes written by the then 'Chairman' now Judge; contained very many untruths, which staggered me to know that as a Lawyer, he plainly written in his own hand, things that simply did not happen or said.

I can empathise with what you have said. Not only as you put it, are untruths recorded, omission of facts from the record of proceedings is/was also a pertinent factor. This is inevitable where the tribunal judge is responsible for compiling a written record of the proceedings.

Alarmingly, UT Judges (formerly SS Commissioners), appear to be unanimously in agreement that it is not necessary to take a verbatim transcript of the proceedings. This is all the more bizarre as a tribunal is a judicial body equivalent to a court, albeit more informal, and all other courts have a stenographer who transcribes the proceedings verbatim for the record. Quite why appeal tribunals are excluded from this practice, has always been beyond me!