A new bit added to the IS Technical Manual

blind-as-a-bat_2

After the change regarding child benefit, the IS has now added THIS to the Technical Manual Some may find it helpfull in understanding how an IPA is calculated when benefits are involved.

Fermi, you may want to add it to the sticky

fermi

Ta! I will do.:)

blind-as-a-bat_2

Thanks fermi, and a quick bump, just to keep it up so to speak

Its one of the better explanations i have seen

Holes_in_my_pocket

I get incapacity, a war pension and a Royal Mail pension i was intially told that i would not get a IPA due to main income is benefits.

wonder where i stand now as recently sent in IPOQ

RichesToRags

It still says if sole income is benefits then the OR should not seek an IPA but if it is made up of benefits and other income then the % IPA taken from surplus should not exceed that of the 'other source' of income. So say you have a surplus of £300 but your income other than benefits is only £200 they can only take the % from the £200

blind-as-a-bat_2

RichesToRags wrote: »

It still says if sole income is benefits then the OR should not seek an IPA but if it is made up of benefits and other income then the % IPA taken from surplus should not exceed that of the 'other source' of income. So say you have a surplus of £300 but your income other than benefits is only £200 they can only take the % from the £200

Correct, but i hve to admit slight concern they needed to consult ministers to come to that conclusion.

Me think's the IS is struggling to cover there cost, and that worrys me:rolleyes:

RichesToRags

blind-as-a-bat wrote: »

Correct, but i hve to admit slight concern they needed to consult ministers to come to that conclusion.

Me think's the IS is struggling to cover there cost, and that worrys me:rolleyes:

Yeah it reads as though they were looking at taking IPA's from those soley on benefits, then got told NO from ministers so shuffled things around to include benefits in calculations without actually looking as though they are taking money from them.

I'd also like to hear how they justify including CB when government legislation states it must (from Nov) not be taken into account when calculating HB, in order to help children out of poverty.

blind-as-a-bat_2

Not to mention it was a statemant from the high court, The IS's boss, saying CB was NOT to be included.

Still have not found anything saying the high court recinded that statemant.

Maybe the IS would like to post the proof it was recinded seen as they seem to be watching this forum so closely i hope they take up the invite, but doubt they will;)

So_Sad_Angel

I assume when it states `spouse` it should really say `co-contributors` to household expenses/outgoings?

If my daughter comes to live with me & pays board then do I not need to declare it? I have no `spouse` ...guess I`m just being picky.....I`m just in that kind of a mood at the moment!

blind-as-a-bat_2

So_Sad_Angel wrote: »

I assume when it states `spouse` it should really say `co-contributors` to household expenses/outgoings?

If my daughter comes to live with me & pays board then do I not need to declare it? I have no `spouse` ...guess I`m just being picky.....I`m just in that kind of a mood at the moment!

No your not, it should be clear, and that is not

however

I can not help feeling that is covered elswhere, but would need to remember where:o

The problem with the Technical Manual is you can never just take one bit on its own and base an argument on it, as you need to take it as a whole.

The problem with that is i doubt many of the employees of the IS can do that, including line managers, and most probebly the OR's themselves, as it is such a huge set of rules/guides

That in itself explains a lot though, and why it is so inconsitantly applied:rolleyes:

debtinfo

This is the bit, i think

31.7.17 Income from adult children and other adult members of household
In the same way as it is reasonable to expect a working spouse/civil partner/partner to contribute to the income covering household expenditure (see paragraph 31.7.16), it is also reasonable to expect that where adult children or other adult members of the household such as an elderly relative have an income, they will contribute to the household expenditure, if only to cover the cost of their food. Any contribution thus received should therefore be assessed against household expenditure within the IPA/IPO calculation, but it must be noted that an IPA/IPO claim can only be made against the surplus arising from the bankrupt's income