What can money/savings be spent on for ESA purposes?

13

Comments

  • pmlindyloo
    pmlindyloo Posts: 13,049
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Forumite
    Since this back payment of council tax is disregarded for a year I really do not think that spending it over that one year period can be seen as deprivation of capital if it is used for reasonable purchases.
  • epitome
    epitome Posts: 3,199 Forumite
    It could be disregarded indefinately on the current ESA claim.

    But whether it can be spent willy nilly during a "disregard for a year" period is not known to be a fact yet.
  • Under what circumstances could it be disregarded indefinitely? It was not due to an official error you see. Basically we discovered he was entitled to council tax exemption so applied for it and requested backdating, as he'd been paying council tax all this time.

    If it could be disregarded indefinitely that would be perfect.
  • baza52
    baza52 Posts: 3,029
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    TELLIT01 wrote: »
    I would strongly suggest ignoring Baza52's very bad advice. Spending money quickly after you receive it does not mean it can't be considered deprivation of capital. I would go so far as to say that anybody discovered to be doing what Baza52 suggests, drawing large amounts of cash in order to hide it and continue to claim benefit, is likely to be charged with benefit fraud.
    Its not fraud.

    Are you saying i am wrong about being able to spend income on what you want?
    Who said anything about hiding money?
  • TELLIT01
    TELLIT01 Posts: 16,384
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper PPI Party Pooper
    Forumite
    baza52 wrote: »
    Its not fraud.

    Are you saying i am wrong about being able to spend income on what you want?
    Who said anything about hiding money?

    I acknowledge that I misread your previous post. You can spend your benefit as you wish and can withdraw it as soon as it hits your account. Where I still maintain you are wrong is in your assertion that you can effectively give away your benefit payment and spend savings in order to reduce capital in order to maintain benefit entitlement. That can still be treated as deprivation of capital despite the fact that you seem to have got away with doing precisely that.
    Getting away with something doesn't mean that it's OK to do it. Use the analogy of speeding, lots of people do it and many don't get caught. That doesn't prevent people who are caught from being prosecuted.
  • baza52
    baza52 Posts: 3,029
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    You might not like the idea of someone giving benefits away but its perfectly legal to do anything you want with your income.
    It is also perfectly legal to use your savings to support yourself.

    It is just as moraly right as someone paying excess salary into a pension pot to avoid paying higher rate tax on it.

    Remember this site is about entitlement and not policy.

    Your speeding analogy does not compare in this case as speeding is against the law whereas doing what i suggest is perfectly legal.
  • baza52
    baza52 Posts: 3,029
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    Just to add for the OPs benefit,

    If you do decide to go down this route i would suggest having all benefits paid into 1 account and a seperate account for capital.
    This way the account the income goes into will always be at £0 if you draw it out when it is paid and then all the other capital will be in the other account and that is the account you pay all bills, shopping etc from.
  • Mersey_2
    Mersey_2 Posts: 1,679 Forumite
    TELLIT01 wrote: »
    It still needs to be reported if it takes savings over the £6k limit. If DWP don't know the source it can create problems further down the line.



    I think the reason for the correction, was because you actually said it still needs to be reported even if savings below £6k.


    Although as I commented on the OP's other thread to CIS re data sharing: why don't Councils simply report such backpayments as a matter of course to the DWP, rather than leaving claimants to waste time and the cost of doing so. It would be bizarre in the extreme if one arm of Govt (DWP) launched a fraud investigation due a claimant receiving redress from another arm of Govt (local govt).
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
  • Mersey_2
    Mersey_2 Posts: 1,679 Forumite
    gray1404 wrote: »
    It was not due to an official error you see.



    It's arguable that it was, as councils have a duty in that regard and the smi rebate is a statutory right.


    As you may have seen on the Martin Lewis Money Show last week, even though a council had arranged eg a care package and so on, they had failed to action the smi rebate. Although I understand the LA simply reimbursed - on top of the refund of Council Tax paid - £25 as a gesture to cover the cost of the unnecessary telephone calls, rather than admitting maladministration.
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
  • TELLIT01
    TELLIT01 Posts: 16,384
    First Anniversary First Post Name Dropper PPI Party Pooper
    Forumite
    Mersey wrote: »

    Although as I commented on the OP's other thread to CIS re data sharing: why don't Councils simply report such backpayments as a matter of course to the DWP, rather than leaving claimants to waste time and the cost of doing so.

    It shocked me when I started working at DWP to discover that there is little in the way of formal communication between what could broadly be called government departments, whether that be at local or national level.
    It should be possible for a change to be reported to one body and that information to automatically be fed through to all other interested parties. Sadly that isn't the case and it doesn't look as if it ever will be.
    Until and unless that does happen, it remains the responsibility of the individual to report everything umpteen times.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.6K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.5K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards