Income support suspended

nannytone_2

slightly different but.....

when my daughters middle child became seriously ill ( 6 weeks in PICU followed by another 3 in high dependancy and another 3 on a general ward) dkr obvipusly didnt go to work. at the stime her husband was a SAHD.
she also worked for the civil service, but hadnt been there long enough to be entitled to paid leave.
they received income support for the 8 months before she returned to work

sammyjammy

missapril75 wrote: »

Perhaps a bit harsh, but maybe subject to something. It would look a bit embarrassing, wouldn't it, if someone took a career break from a government department only to claim government benefits - especially if the DWP was the employer.

I think you took what I said the wrong way. I meant that if it is the rules that you cannot claim Income support whilst on a CB then the only option is resignation/dismissal or return to work, return to work seems to be a non starter for them and presumably they would not be able to continue claiming IS on the basis of the Carer Break.

missapril75

sammyjammy wrote: »

I think you took what I said the wrong way. I meant that if it is the rules that you cannot claim Income support whilst on a CB then the only option is resignation/dismissal or return to work, return to work seems to be a non starter for them and presumably they would not be able to continue claiming IS on the basis of the Carer Break.

I was just thinking that doing something against the rules isn't necessarily a reason for dismissal.
Especially for a valued member of staff

sammyjammy

Hmm and we both know how valued Civil Servants are - give them an excuse and they'll run with it!

t0rt0ise

sammyjammy wrote: »

I think you took what I said the wrong way. I meant that if it is the rules that you cannot claim Income support whilst on a CB then the only option is resignation/dismissal or return to work, return to work seems to be a non starter for them and presumably they would not be able to continue claiming IS on the basis of the Carer Break.

You keep saying 'carer break'. Do you mean a break to be a carer? In which case are you saying that that is different from just taking a plain career break that the others in the thread are talking about?

I'm not being a spelling lamer, I'm genuinely confused.

sammyjammy

I called it a Carer break as we know longer have Career Breaks in my Department any more, the only reason you can get one is if you are caring for someone, be that young children, elderly or other. You used to be able to have them for traveling etc but no longer.

sulkisu

sammyjammy wrote: »

I called it a Carer break as we know longer have Career Breaks in my Department any more, the only reason you can get one is if you are caring for someone, be that young children, elderly or other. You used to be able to have them for traveling etc but no longer.

Our department is different. They no longer allow career breaks solely for travelling, (unless for something like VSO) but they do for most other things such as volunteering, education and caring responsibilities. The more people that she speaks to, including a few who work at DWP, the more it seems that a mistake has been made. I remember when the child maintenance disregard for benefits came in and we had several lone mothers who suddenly took career breaks to stay at home and would have received benefits.

benefitbaby

I would strongly suggest the OP appeal the adverse IS decision as the error was not hers, she made the DWP aware of every detail and if IS was paid which should not have been then this is an error of the department and should not be recoverable froom the OP.

Having said the above I believe IS is payable as it is arguable the OP has not deprived herself of income as she had a valid reason for not being able to return to work (relationship breakdown and inability to afford childcare) and one could argue this is extended unpaid maternity leave.

fabforty

rogerblack wrote: »

I am not sure this is strictly correct - however, this doesn't help, as the reason it's not correct is that under IS rules, she's probably in remunerative employment, and not entitled to IS.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/dmgch20.pdf



[/FONT]

However in the document that you have linked to it does define remunerative work as follows;




[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]

[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]20212 Remunerative Work is work for which payment is made, or which is done in the expectation of payment[/FONT][/FONT]


1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]in which a person is engaged for not less than [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica][/FONT][/FONT]
1.1 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]16 hours a week [/FONT][/FONT]or

1.2 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]16 hours a week on average where the hours of work fluctuate [/FONT][/FONT]or

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]As OP's friend is neither engaged in work for any number of hours per week and is not being paid, nor expects to be paid, surely she cannot be considered to be in remunerative work?

[/FONT][/FONT]

pmlindyloo

fabforty wrote: »

However in the document that you have linked to it does define remunerative work as follows;









[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]20212 Remunerative Work is work for which payment is made, or which is done in the expectation of payment[/FONT][/FONT]


1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]in which a person is engaged for not less than [/FONT][/FONT]

1.1 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]16 hours a week [/FONT][/FONT]or

1.2 [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]16 hours a week on average where the hours of work fluctuate [/FONT][/FONT]or


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Helvetica]As OP's friend is neither engaged in work for any number of hours per week and is not being paid, nor expects to be paid, surely she cannot be considered to be in remunerative work? [/FONT][/FONT]

I am not sure that this helps.

As I read the OP's post they are not saying that her daughter is in remunerative work, they are saying that she is depriving herself of a income to claim benefits. The reason they are giving is that she is still officially employed and could be earning money.

I believe that is why they are asking her to confirm that she has had to take a career break in order to care for her child, not to claim benefits