Deposit for house has to be used before receiving any JSA?

Voyager2002

barnaby-bear wrote: »

A straightforward mortgage and lump sum redundancy would run into problems and questions but the correct offset / overpayment wrapper means that with uncertainty and time to plan and sufficient planning you can make sure your "savings" and debts are combined in a useful way.

Yes, but most of the people who get to buy a home will spend far more time in work than unemployed. And for most such people, the costs of an offset mortgage will make it a worse choice than a more straightforward product.

In any case, when redundancy is a real possibility it is too late to start arranging a new kind of mortgage.

BongoTheWhippet

Voyager2002 wrote: »

I would also add that your brilliant scheme constitutes fraud, and is IMHO highly immoral.

There is another way of course, simply withdraw the monies and buy a safety deposit box, after all I'm not getting any interest on the money.

I could even buy gold because that's not savings, or an investment, or a means-tested asset.

Then everyone would be happy! :cool:

Voyager2002

BongoTheWhippet wrote: »

There is another way of course, simply withdraw the monies and buy a safety deposit box, after all I'm not getting any interest on the money.

I could even buy gold because that's not savings, or an investment, or a means-tested asset.

Then everyone would be happy! :cool:

No.

If you have the money in cash, it disqualifies you from means-tested benefits.

If you spend it on something you don't need (whether gold or on-line gambling) you are likely to fall foul of the rules on deprivation of capital.

Anyway, you are likely to receive contributions-based JSA for up to six months, and should be able to find some kind of job during that period. You are not helping yourself by worrying now about what might (but probably will not) happen at the end of the six months, and your whingeing about the benefits system is offending many people. As explained above, I suffer from these rules to a far greater extent that you are likely to, but I don't feel any need to abuse the system. No set of rules can be completely fair to everyone, and in the past I have been helped by the DSS. Your turn will come when your circumstances are different.

SomeBozo

BongoTheWhippet wrote: »

There is another way of course, simply withdraw the monies and buy a safety deposit box, after all I'm not getting any interest on the money.

I could even buy gold because that's not savings, or an investment, or a means-tested asset.

Then everyone would be happy! :cool:

Has anyone else had enough of discussing how to deprive yourself of cash in order to claim off the state?

The guy has a wad of savings (for the purpose of benefits the reason for the cash is irrelavant) and is having a bit of moan (fair enough) about the system.

But now its decended into how best to "dispose" of their cash so they can claim off the state.

Bozo

BongoTheWhippet

Voyager2002 wrote: »

No.

If you have the money in cash, it disqualifies you from means-tested benefits.

I'm so glad you feel so strongly about the injustices of the income-based JSA system. Now here's a one point lesson in how it really doesn't feel that strongly about your welfare.

SomeBozo wrote: »

Has anyone else had enough of discussing how to deprive yourself of cash in order to claim off the state?

The guy has a wad of savings (for the purpose of benefits the reason for the cash is irrelavant) and is having a bit of moan (fair enough) about the system.

But now its decended into how best to "dispose" of their cash so they can claim off the state.

Bozo

Okay then. Here's an interesting thought. My wife earns enough to buy a small flat with my savings - how about she buys me a flat, and I go and live in it? That way, according to the means benefits tested criteria, I'd be doing The Right Thing.

That would make the whingers here happy, the benefits office happy, the deprivation of capital police happy, and me! Problem solved, no?

:rolleyes:

Voyager2002

BongoTheWhippet wrote: »

I'm so glad you feel so strongly about the injustices of the income-based JSA system. Now here's a one point lesson in how it really doesn't feel that strongly about your welfare.



Okay then. Here's an interesting thought. My wife earns enough to buy a small flat with my savings - how about she buys me a flat, and I go and live in it? That way, according to the means benefits tested criteria, I'd be doing The Right Thing.

That would make the whingers here happy, the benefits office happy, the deprivation of capital police happy, and me! Problem solved, no?

:rolleyes:

Indeed.

However, since your household will have at least one income coming in, it is unlikely that you would qualify for any means-tested benefits

Your best option is to use all resources available to you, including the on-line job details provided by the DWP, in order to find another job.

SomeBozo

BongoTheWhippet wrote: »

I'm so glad you feel so strongly about the injustices of the income-based JSA system. Now here's a one point lesson in how it really doesn't feel that strongly about your welfare.



Okay then. Here's an interesting thought. My wife earns enough to buy a small flat with my savings - how about she buys me a flat, and I go and live in it? That way, according to the means benefits tested criteria, I'd be doing The Right Thing.

That would make the whingers here happy, the benefits office happy, the deprivation of capital police happy, and me! Problem solved, no?

:rolleyes:

If you were to put 50% of the effort into getting a job as you are trying to work out how to fiddle the system you would not be in this position.

Bozo

Voyager2002

SomeBozo wrote: »

If you were to put 50% of the effort into getting a job as you are trying to work out how to fiddle the system you would not be in this position.

Bozo

Yes: that was my thought.

Not to mention the fact that even if his efforts are rewarded and he ends up receiving all the benefits to which he might have any kind of vague claim, or feel he does, the sums involved would be far too small to justify the effort involved.

BongoTheWhippet

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Indeed.

However, since your household will have at least one income coming in, it is unlikely that you would qualify for any means-tested benefits

There would be two separate households though. I'd live in the flat bought by my wife. During the day anyway.

Second thoughts - its a silly idea - property is absolutely tanking right now with no hope of recovery for the forseeable. Gold it is. Not in any of the means tested categories so a safe bet.

Thanks everyone.

Oldernotwiser

You got one thing right - it IS a silly suggestion!!