JSA claim - savings over £5500

CCFC_80

ceridwen wrote: »

Well - it certainly needs to be a lot more than £6,000 of savings one is allowed. One unexpected large bill for ones house and - bingo - that could be most of that £6,000 gone in one fell swoop and nothing much left to supplement Dole Money for however long one is on it. On my very simple lifestyle I sat down and worked out what I would have left to live on from Dole Money after paying bills and it would only be £20 per week - and with no allowance built-in at all for inflation. Thats with me having realised years ago that things were going to go the way they are now in Society and planning/cutting/preparing and making sure those bills are as low as they can possibly be - if I hadnt done that I would be lucky if I had 20p a week to live on after them:eek:. So - I can see its necessary for people to use their savings to subsidise inadequate Dole Money if it comes to it - as there is no way anyone could live on that level of money for more than a few weeks - if that. Also - in this day and age - there is no way of knowing how long one might be on the Dole for - it could be months...it could be years...

I honestly think a more realistic figure of allowable savings would be more in the range of £15,000-£20,000 to take the above into account.

Well said, either
1) Raise the threshold
2) go back to the old way when contribution based benefits was for 12 months.
3) stop child benefit and maternity pay for the better off.

ceridwen

andy46 wrote: »

Well said, either
1) Raise the threshold
2) go back to the old way when contribution based benefits was for 12 months.
3) stop child benefit and maternity pay for the better off.

Well - I'll agree with all the above three. I would implement all three if I had that "one day in Power" we would all like to have.

It does make me "spit feathers" when some people complain about the fact that people are trying to hang on to a bit of savings they've managed to get from their "ordinary person in the street" level income, as opposed to blowing the lot on consumer goodies just to make sure that they have the use of their own money themselves - but, in the very next breath, those who condemn people for wishing to hold onto their own savings are probably claiming child benefit/maternity pay, etc.

Unemployment is something one has no control whatsoever over - it can happen to the best of us (I've been unemployed before myself - and the thought never crossed my mind in a million years that it might happen to ME:mad:. As far as I was concerned unemployment was something that only ever happened to other people - I felt sorry for them - but honestly never expected to be on the Dole Queue myself ever - well I was....so so much for having felt invulnerable there....). Having children on the other hand is definitely under ones control and a personal choice and yet they expect the rest of us to pay for it:mad:

CCFC_80

ceridwen wrote: »

Well - I'll agree with all the above three. I would implement all three if I had that "one day in Power" we would all like to have.

It does make me "spit feathers" when some people complain about the fact that people are trying to hang on to a bit of savings they've managed to get from their "ordinary person in the street" level income, as opposed to blowing the lot on consumer goodies just to make sure that they have the use of their own money themselves - but, in the very next breath, those who condemn people for wishing to hold onto their own savings are probably claiming child benefit/maternity pay, etc.

Unemployment is something one has no control whatsoever over - it can happen to the best of us (I've been unemployed before myself - and the thought never crossed my mind in a million years that it might happen to ME:mad:. As far as I was concerned unemployment was something that only ever happened to other people - I felt sorry for them - but honestly never expected to be on the Dole Queue myself ever - well I was....so so much for having felt invulnerable there....). Having children on the other hand is definitely under ones control and a personal choice and yet they expect the rest of us to pay for it:mad:

It looks as if we are singing from the same hymn sheet but why should
someone who has just blown 16k of their savings, then shortly afterwards get made redundant be entitled to JSA and the other guy who kept their 16k savings be made redundant and not qualify for anything.
Obviously the lesson is;Do not save anything as the government will look after you when you are poor.:mad:

ceridwen

Errrmmm...I think the lesson is to keep ones savings at exactly the right level - hence my question asking for clarification of whether its the £6,000 we are told - or £5,500 to be exact - as I personally have decided to aim for that exact figure whatever-it-is and give away anything over that level if need be to make sure its not whipped off me just because I havent blown it on consumer goodies I neither need nor want...

real1314

ceridwen wrote: »

I honestly think a more realistic figure of allowable savings would be more in the range of £15,000-£20,000 to take the above into account.

You'd have a range from £20k up to £30k? Blimey, that's some allowance!

Look at it like this; If you have £16k, you'd lose £40 a week benefits, but you could supplement your JSA/whatever by £80 a week and have £40 a week extra coming in overall; you could adjust the amounts as the £40 "penalty" reduces so that you always have £40 extra a week. Doing this would mean that after 52 weeks, you've had £40 a week extra income and still end up with £12k of savings left. After 2 years you'd still have over £9k.
You'd also be able to use any interest you gain from the money. Of course, the reduction in capital would be subject to a DWP decision, but that's another issue.
It doesn't seem that bad a deal to me, to get 2 years of taxpayer support that could easily reach £20k for a single person, or could be £40k for a couple with 2 kids and still have £9k in the bank.

I would ssuggest that £16k for an 18 yr old is far too generouss, and that maybe the allowance should increase with age, but no doubt someone who wanted to give their 18 yr old money might disagree.

ceridwen

Err....but I said "£15,000 to £20,000" - NOT "£20,000 to £30,000"

One could make age specifications I suppose - in my own mind I allow for higher savings because, at my age, my chances of getting another job are much lower than most - hence I'd anticipate my savings having to make good inadequate dole money until retirement, as well as serve as "emergency savings".

Again - because I know my own circumstances - I am aware that the fact that I have managed to buy a home of my own and therefore now dont require any money from the DWP for rent or mortgage payments if it came to it should merit me getting some "credit" for saving them money I feel. I would only be due for £64.30 and my Council Tax covered for me - whereas if I were still living in rented accommodation (as in my younger days) then they would be paying out £50 or more a week for my housing costs as well. So my financial prudence has helped them as well as myself.
The fact that I have never claimed any money for children in any shape or form has helped Society one heck of a lot and Society has saved literally tens of thousands of £s on helping me with my personal decision to have children.

So - I think from this that one can never know the exact circumstances of someone claiming benefit. Some are claiming housing money/money for loadsa kids/etc and have no real intention of doing any work of any description. Others of us would be claiming only a bare minimum amount for ourselves only - and working our backside off in voluntary work, delighted to have the chance of doing some useful work for once - rather than a standard "job".

At a younger agegroup though it could be that they might appear to have a lot of savings - but in fact it was all money set to one side to be a deposit on buying a home - and therefore not available to use to let the DWP off paying due benefits.

ceridwen

<cough> no-one has yet answered the question as to whether its exactly £6,000 or £5,500 one is currently allowed for savings....

i would like to know purlease - as I want personally to know whether to start giving any unspent money of mine away to things/people of MY choice once I reach £5,499 or whether I can have a measly £500 extra and would therefore start giving it away at £5,999.

Yes I am serious - but NO please dont send begging emails:D

CCFC_80

ceridwen wrote: »

<cough> no-one has yet answered the question as to whether its exactly £6,000 or £5,500 one is currently allowed for savings....

i would like to know purlease - as I want personally to know whether to start giving any unspent money of mine away to things/people of MY choice once I reach £5,499 or whether I can have a measly £500 extra and would therefore start giving it away at £5,999.

Yes I am serious - but NO please dont send begging emails:D

The threshold starts at £6000 pounds-Don't know where anyone got this figure of £5,500 from !!!!!

Vader123

ceridwen wrote: »

i would like to know purlease - as I want personally to know whether to start giving any unspent money of mine away to things/people of MY choice

Is it just me that finds this mindset pathetic? (I won't comment on ceridwens post history!!!).

Lets say ceridwen has £500 over the threshold for means tested benefits.

Instead of just waiting for that £500 to run out she would rather give it away.

LOL

Vader

redz

andy46 wrote: »

The threshold starts at £6000 pounds-Don't know where anyone got this figure of £5,500 from !!!!!

The application form for income based JSA does/or did ask for details of savings if they are £5,500 or over. I'm assuming that it is because if a person is just below the £6000 threshold there may be a possibility that they may have deliberately deprived themselves of some savings to receive the full entitlement to JSA.