IB transfer to ESA

sunnyone

NASA wrote: »

So, let me understand this, you had been receiving £105 and will receive £105 still? So you havent actually had an overall reduction in benefit?

That, to me, means you are not worse off.

My IVB is going down, it started last year and I should recieve over £108 now (2009-10) on last years increases but instead its going down until additional pension based on NI contributions is removed in 2 years and I go down to the basic rate of IB of currently £89 pw.

£108 is £19 more per week than standard rate IB, add in this years reductions and it is £1000 pa that people like me are losing, people who worked, people who didnt still recieve the same amount.

nogginthenog

sunnyone wrote: »

So the transitional protection is a joke then?

It costs a lot of money to challenge the goverment, I cant get legal aid or I would do it, its wrong and its stealing £1000 pa from people like me once the extra pension gos, I dont get age allowance but additional pension from pre-`95 based on my contributions till my accident.

Of course the people on means tested benefits arnt losing anything, there IS stays the same, it the people who worked that get s!it on as usual.

If you are receiving tax credits you can have a judicial review for free But if you loose you may have to pay costs.

sunnyone

nogginthenog wrote: »

If you are receiving tax credits you can have a judicial review for free But if you loose you may have to pay costs.

I dont receive tax credits and cant get legal aid or I would challenge the illegal removal of the trasitional protection, it only affects those on none means tested benefits and not those with IS top up so there arnt many of us who are prepared to rock the boat and even pay something towards it from our very limited funds.

People on IB have an income just above the IS rate to make sure that people who have worked are penalised when claiming benefits.

nogginthenog

I enclose a link to explain court fees, and who does not have to pay them
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex160a_web_0709.pdf

cit_k

nogginthenog wrote: »

In total, around 1.5 million claimants will go through the migration process, excluding credits only claimants, amounting to 10,000 cases a week for three years.

That would equate to (VERY roughly) 14 assessments per working day per medical centre for the next 3 years.

I have no idea what the resources are for tribunals, nor advance figures for failures, so cannot calculate how long it would take to process the inevitable amount of appeals.

stazi

Transitional protection is just that- protection for a transitional period.

In the case of ex-IVB customers, by the time the IB>ESA migration has taken place by 2014, I make that 'protection' for about 18/19 years. The merging of the IB TP rates to nearer the ESA rates will not be 'illegal', as it will have been passed by Parliament.

Unfortunetly for sunnyone, s/he calacuates a reduction in their benefit of about £1K. Others will have also/and yet to lose too. That's life-and it won't matter who you vote for on 6 May, as the Tories are as committed to savings in this area, as is the present administration.

NASA_2

sunnyone wrote: »

My IVB is going down, it started last year and I should recieve over £108 now (2009-10) on last years increases but instead its going down until additional pension based on NI contributions is removed in 2 years and I go down to the basic rate of IB of currently £89 pw.

£108 is £19 more per week than standard rate IB, add in this years reductions and it is £1000 pa that people like me are losing, people who worked, people who didnt still recieve the same amount.

Why should you receive £108 this year?

The benefit rates are set by parliament. They can reduce them or increase them if they want - and change the rules to suit themselves. You havent been deprived of anything, yet, as you cant miss what you never had.

sunnyone

NASA wrote: »

Why should you receive £108 this year?

The benefit rates are set by parliament. They can reduce them or increase them if they want - and change the rules to suit themselves. You havent been deprived of anything, yet, as you cant miss what you never had.

The goverment anounce the rate for benefit rises and every benefit rises apart from IB from which the only rise paid was on the £89 and a decrease on the age allowance/pension and nothing has been passed to to say that IB is totally diffrent to every other benefit.

My IB should have been £108 for the past year, that the whole IB with the rise announced.

I dont know what it should be for next year yet, you can miss what youve always had and then its been taken away unjustly.

SDA isnt being treated diffrently, nor is IS based on IB, just the rate for people who worked and paid in, as usual.

NASA_2

The relevant legislation was passed otherwise benefit rises/reductions wouldnt have happened. Again, you can keep saying that you should have been getting £108 but the reality is that the rules have changed, you are getting what you are entitled to.

[Deleted User]

cit_k wrote: »

That would equate to (VERY roughly) 14 assessments per working day per medical centre for the next 3 years.

I have no idea what the resources are for tribunals, nor advance figures for failures, so cannot calculate how long it would take to process the inevitable amount of appeals.

just going off those who have gone directly onto esa,i.e those who have claimed since oct.2008 the number of appeals is horrendous,looks like ATOS are upto their usual tricks and turning people down even when they obviously qualify,hence the large % of appeal successes.Looks to me like the whole transition from i.b to esa will be one long nightmare