High Court to hear challenge over impact of benefit cap on disabled and carers

A High Court judge has given the green light to a judicial review challenge over the impact of the ‘benefit cap’ on disabled people and their carers.

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions had sought to have the claim rejected.

Mr Justice King gave permission and ordered that the hearing should take place no later than 30 October 2015.

Law firm Hopkin Murray Beskine said the claimants were two families. In both cases an adult relative provides full time care to their elderly and disabled grandmothers.

The firm added that the carers were only able to perform their roles with the support of state benefits, covering their housing and living expenses. Both are in receipt of Carer's Allowance.

“To qualify for Carer’s Allowance the benefit claimant has to be providing full time care – upwards of 35 hours a week – to a severely disabled person who receives Disability Living Allowance (DLA),” it said.

“This means that anyone receiving Carer’s Allowance is by definition not available to work, because they must be providing care. The Secretary of State has provided an exemption from the cap to those who receive DLA – but not to their carers. Two categories of carer only are exempt: carers for children or spouses. Any carer who provides care to another adult, such as a parent or grandparent, is caught by the cap.”

One of the claimants, Ashley Hurley, was brought up by her grandmother and provides her with the care and support she needs.

Hurley said: “I had understood that the benefit cap was meant to encourage people to work and to address the problem of children growing up in workless families. I do not understand why it should apply to me as I do work, looking after my grandmother.

“If I did not care for my grandmother, then I suppose that we would have to ask the council to pay for care for her. It would certainly cost the State more to pay someone to provide the care that I provide, and my grandmother would be very distressed about having care provided by strangers. Indeed, I expect that both her mental and physical health would rapidly deteriorate if this happened. I do not feel that I would be able to allow this to happen, and I do not understand why the government would think it was better for the State to care for my grandmother instead of her own family.”

Rebekah Carrier of Hopkin Murray Beskine said: “My clients have been hit by the benefit cap because they are disabled or they provide essential care to their disabled relatives. They are not skivers – they are strivers. They provide full time care and save the State money.

“The Government seeks to justify the cap by the financial savings achieved but the long term consequences of this arbitrary benefit cap are likely to have not only devastating consequences for individual disabled people and those who care for them, but serious financial costs. If Ashley Hurley is forced into stopping her work as a carer, the State will have to pick up the tab and arrange alternative care. This is not a fair or sensible policy.”

Carrier has instructed Caoilfhionn Gallagher and Sam Jacobs of Doughty Street Chambers.

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a challenge to the impact of the cap on adults with disabilities in March 2016.

Last year the Court of Appeal upheld a High Court ruling that the benefit cap discriminated against disabled adults but the discrimination was justified and therefore lawful.