esa wrag income based question?

JS477

MrsManda wrote: »

Do you have evidence of this somewhere? I haven't noticed this in the legislation (though admittedly I haven't looked into it in any detail)

This appeared on Rightsnet. Here

oldestrocker

Chorlie wrote: »

I'm also very confused with this topic.

I'm getting CB WRAG ESA and I have some savings, so if / when the 12 month rules comes in my payments will stop (my disability won't, but that's a different issues). But what will happen, will it be:-

1, Two fingers upto me and a come back once all my savings have gone...
2, Still classed as being on ESA, don't get any money but might get re-assessed in due time...
3, As '2' but will still get pension credits...
4, As '2 or 3' but can request to be re-assessed...
5, You get basic rate ESA...


Also if your condition get worse say a year or two down the line and therefore should then be in the SRAG, since you haven't paid NI for a few years can you be moved onto CB SRAG ESA or will you have to wait until you fall into Income Based ESA (ie, all your savings have gone).

I would imagine that it will follow the same rules as for JSA.
Contribution Based for 12 months
Then Income Based if you don't have enough money coming in.
If you do, then nowt!!

To get Contribution based ESA again, you will have to show that you have paid the correct level of NI in the relevant year!

JS477

But what happens if after your 1 year on CB ESA and surprise surprise you cannot find a job your condition deteriorates or another illness hits you?

oldestrocker

JS477 wrote: »

But what happens if after your 1 year on CB ESA and surprise surprise you cannot find a job your condition deteriorates or another illness hits you?

Then you could claim CB ESA, but only if you have paid the right level of NI in the right years.

If you have been off sick, and as its another year down the line, would your NI contributions stack up for another CB ESA??

Besides which, you could claim IB ESA. That is unless you have more household income coming in than the Government say you actually need to live on. And/or have savings.
Either way, why then would you need to claim ESA?

The Government are only bringing this in because people in the past have claimed CB benefits and stayed on them for years, even though they have other income/capital that would preclude them from claiming IB benefits. I think you could say that a lot of people have been taking the Mick out of the system.

As an example, prior to this new rule, there would be nothing stopping somebody with £1m in the bank, the wife earning £90,000 a year, and living in a £1.5m - mortgage free home - with the husband claiming upwards of over £96pw CB ESA for as long as you stay on it. Now that aint right!!!

Besides which this new rule will only affect those that are NOT in the Support Group. Being in the Work Group, you will have been deemed fit for work after a period of time anyhow, so I don't see the problem.

If you are as ill as you say you are, then you will be placed in the Support Group and nothing will change!!

johnsmi

Hi again,

Good question about how ill a person needs to be to be placed in the support group, Whilst I understand the the new wca puts more importance on what You can do rather than what you can't do, it would be interesting to know how ill a person needs to be, to be placed in the support group, (though I realise there is no hard and fast rules)

for example I suffer from social phobia which affects me when around people sweating trembling extreme anxiety, panic attacks which make me feel humiliated and takes weeks to recover from. I also suffer from depression am registered partially sighted.

I take it they would probably place me in the wrag unless somebody has a better understanding of how the criteria for the support group is.

Thanks for any clarification.

John

MrsManda

johnsmi wrote: »

Hi again,

Good question about how ill a person needs to be to be placed in the support group, Whilst I understand the the new wca puts more importance on what You can do rather than what you can't do, it would be interesting to know how ill a person needs to be, to be placed in the support group, (though I realise there is no hard and fast rules)

Guidance can be found by downloading the document:
Employment And Support Allowance ESA214 – The Work Capability Assessment which can be found here:
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/FinancialSupport/esa/DG_172012

Or to open the document (pdf.) directly click this link: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/@disabled/documents/digitalasset/dg_177366.pdf

Page 18-26 shows you the descriptors used to determine if you have a limited capacity for work - i.e. whether you are eligible for ESA

Pages 27-30 show the descriptors which are then used to determine whether you have a limited capacity for work related activity.
If you have a limited capacity for work related activity you are put in the Support Group.

Two4Tuesday

There are in fact hard and fast rules for eligibility to the Support Group. They are called the Limited Capability for Work Related Activity Descriptors. If you meet at least one of them, then you should be eligible for the Support Group.

As a new user here, I can't post the link, but a quick google search for "Limited Capability for Work Related Activity" should show them.


I am in the Support Group for ESA as I meet the descriptor 6a (a) due to lifelong problems incurred from multiple childhood surgeries.

EDIT: Thanks, MrsManda for posting the links. You beat me to the answer.

JS477

oldestrocker wrote: »

Then you could claim CB ESA, but only if you have paid the right level of NI in the right years.

If you have been off sick, and as its another year down the line, would your NI contributions stack up for another CB ESA??

Besides which, you could claim IB ESA. That is unless you have more household income coming in than the Government say you actually need to live on. And/or have savings.
Either way, why then would you need to claim ESA?

The Government are only bringing this in because people in the past have claimed CB benefits and stayed on them for years, even though they have other income/capital that would preclude them from claiming IB benefits. I think you could say that a lot of people have been taking the Mick out of the system.

As an example, prior to this new rule, there would be nothing stopping somebody with £1m in the bank, the wife earning £90,000 a year, and living in a £1.5m - mortgage free home - with the husband claiming upwards of over £96pw CB ESA for as long as you stay on it. Now that aint right!!!

Besides which this new rule will only affect those that are NOT in the Support Group. Being in the Work Group, you will have been deemed fit for work after a period of time anyhow, so I don't see the problem.

If you are as ill as you say you are, then you will be placed in the Support Group and nothing will change!!

I hear what you're saying (but don't necessarily agree) however there will no doubt be the case (and many of them) where someone when they're thrown off WRAG CB ESA after their one year, because according to the government their disability wasn't severe enough for them to get into the Support Group, will find it difficult to find and sustain a job due to their disability/sickness or the adaptations/considerations they require a potential employer to make; so just because you're in the WRAG I don't see how the DWP can determine when (or even if) you'll be fit for work, ATOS "healthcare professionals" notwithstanding. Being in the WRAG just means you didn't satisfy the very narrow/stringent criteria set by the government to get into the Support Group.

I know it shouldn't happen but given the choice between someone who has chronic health issues be they physical and/or mental and someone who doesn't have health issues I would suggest an employer may well prefer to take on the latter as an employee.

Also the loss of almost £5000 a year could prove very difficult for some families/couples if they aren't eligible for any income related benefits due to the partners income being just over the threshold to claim them, I think the threshold for a couple over 18 (no kids) is just over £102 per week to get Income Support and work less than 16 hours a week. So if you have a partner working full time (>16 hours a week on minimum wage) then you fail at the first hurdle (as far as I can see) and I've no doubt there will be many cases like this. So a £5000 drop in household income could prove very difficult.

Cameron has never liked the contributory benefits system and this I think is the beginning of the end of them thus wiping out the notion that paying your National Insurance Contributions and taxes during your working life will offer a [somewhat] decent if not minimal level of protection should you become unable to work due to illness or disability. The most you will be able to expect now is a year if you have a [full time] working partner and/or have [prudently] saved some money. Also presumably you will you loose your NI credits which go towards your state pension as these are credited when you receive CB ESA thus adversely affecting your state pension.

All this still doesn't address the question as to what would happen after the one year on CB ESA if your condition deteriorated to a level where you may be a candidate for the Support Group or you develop another/different debilitating condition.

I suppose we'll have to wait for the linking rules to be announced but as the DWP have realised the number of appeals concerning the decision to be placed into the WRAG and not the Support Group may well increase and perhaps cause the Tribunals Service to implode. :eek:

johnsmi

JS477 wrote: »

I hear what you're saying (but don't necessarily agree) however there will no doubt be the case (and many of them) where someone when they're thrown off WRAG CB ESA after their one year, because according to the government their disability wasn't severe enough for them to get into the Support Group, will find it difficult to find and sustain a job due to their disability/sickness or the adaptations/considerations they require a potential employer to make; so just because you're in the WRAG I don't see how the DWP can determine when (or even if) you'll be fit for work, ATOS "healthcare professionals" notwithstanding. Being in the WRAG just means you didn't satisfy the very narrow/stringent criteria set by the government to get into the Support Group.

I know it shouldn't happen but given the choice between someone who has chronic health issues be they physical and/or mental and someone who doesn't have health issues I would suggest an employer may well prefer to take on the latter as an employee.

Also the loss of almost £5000 a year could prove very difficult for some families/couples if they aren't eligible for any income related benefits due to the partners income being just over the threshold to claim them, I think the threshold for a couple over 18 (no kids) is just over £102 per week to get Income Support and work less than 16 hours a week. So if you have a partner working full time (>16 hours a week on minimum wage) then you fail at the first hurdle (as far as I can see) and I've no doubt there will be many cases like this. So a £5000 drop in household income could prove very difficult.

Cameron has never liked the contributory benefits system and this I think is the beginning of the end of them thus wiping out the notion that paying your National Insurance Contributions and taxes during your working life will offer a [somewhat] decent if not minimal level of protection should you become unable to work due to illness or disability. The most you will be able to expect now is a year if you have a [full time] working partner and/or have [prudently] saved some money. Also presumably you will you loose your NI credits which go towards your state pension as these are credited when you receive CB ESA thus adversely affecting your state pension.

All this still doesn't address the question as to what would happen after the one year on CB ESA if your condition deteriorated to a level where you may be a candidate for the Support Group or you develop another/different debilitating condition.

I suppose we'll have to wait for the linking rules to be announced but as the DWP have realised the number of appeals concerning the decision to be placed into the WRAG and not the Support Group may well increase and perhaps cause the Tribunals Service to implode. :eek:

1 I think the government will be aware that the Tribunal Service won't be able to cope and I would be very surprised if they don't find a way of mitigating this in their favour.

2 My personal view is that in the past where you could expect some support from your GP regarding your claim, things have moved so much beyond this now, that its more a matter of implementing government policy in this matter, and that the GP's (like most claimants will find the new system very confusing) opinion will be pushed well into the background. After all its their job to be a GP not a welfare expert for esa

3 where in the past some vulnerable people got the wrong decision the door is now open for many to get the wrong decisions with perhaps dire consequences in some cases.

I do agree the system definitely had to be changed, but is this the right way to do it? maybe in a few years we will all now the answer.

John

JS477

johnsmi wrote: »

1 I think the government will be aware that the Tribunal Service won't be able to cope and I would be very surprised if they don't find a way of mitigating this in their favour.

That would be difficult and unwise as the TS is part of the judaical system and is totally independent of the DWP.. and if there's one thing the judiciary hate it's being told what to do by politicians.

johnsmi wrote: »

2 My personal view is that in the past where you could expect some support from your GP regarding your claim, things have moved so much beyond this now, that its more a matter of implementing government policy in this matter, and that the GP's (like most claimants will find the new system very confusing) opinion will be pushed well into the background. After all its their job to be a GP not a welfare expert for esa

Having said that the very people charged with implementing ESA (and IB for that matter) are pretty ignorant of the regulations surrounding it.

johnsmi wrote: »

3 where in the past some vulnerable people got the wrong decision the door is now open for many to get the wrong decisions with perhaps dire consequences in some cases.

This is what happens when policies are ill thought out and aren't fit for purpose hence the review by Harrington.

johnsmi wrote: »

I do agree the system definitely had to be changed, but is this the right way to do it? maybe in a few years we will all now the answer.

John

I've no doubt the very first thing that went through Cameron and Osborne's nasty minds when they grasped power was to how to attack the most vulnerable in society to save money to give to their rich buddies. Compassionate conservatism...yeah :eek:

These welfare reforms have little to do with helping or supporting people back into work (where are the jobs??) and more about cutting the amount of money the government has to pay to the poorest and most vulnerable. However with the help of rags like the daily mail and express etc they can portray these people as scroungers and hence the least deserving and thus gain the support of the public when they slash welfare benefits.