"Penalised" for getting contribution-based JSA (help with eye tests etc)

nannytone_2

the only alternative would be to get rid of conts based benefit and everyone claims income relayed.

but those that have worked for years, but have a working partner, would get nothing at all

poorlittlefish

I'm by myself and the only income I have coming in is the JSA - £71.40! Thank goodness I was sensible enough to build up some savings, otherwise I wouldn't be able to keep up with the mortgage or anything else, yet if I have zero savings I'd still have to pay for things that those on income-based JSA don't. To me it's an unfair system that penalises those who have paid thousands in tax and NI over those that haven't.

wildwestfan

nannytone wrote: »

the only alternative would be to get rid of conts based benefit and everyone claims income relayed.

but those that have worked for years, but have a working partner, would get nothing at all

The only sensible solution is to actually double the contribution based benefit and still guarantee it for 6 months. Or certainly make the payment in proportion to the earnings in the contribution years.

nannytone_2

poorlittlefish wrote: »

I'm by myself and the only income I have coming in is the JSA - £71.40! Thank goodness I was sensible enough to build up some savings, otherwise I wouldn't be able to keep up with the mortgage or anything else, yet if I have zero savings I'd still have to pay for things that those on income-based JSA don't. To me it's an unfair system that penalises those who have paid thousands in tax and NI over those that haven't.

in your position ... you are entitled to everything that a person on income based JSA is apart from help with your mortgage.
but even on income based JSA, that only kicks in after 13 weeks.
you only get conts based for a maximum of 26 weeks anyway

i would also assume that in order to have obtained a mortgage, then those people would also have been working and so would have faced the same obstacle that you are now hitting ( conts based JSA for the first 26 weeks)

so it isnt quite right that they are getting something that you arent. they also had to go through the period where it wasnt available to them either

sniggings

same with the budgeting loans, you can not access those loans if on contri JSA, so instead of the 26 weeks wait you have on IB JSA to access a budgeting loan, you have to wait a full year!

but I agree with the others, you can still claim free eye tests etc if your income is low, so that's fair enough but not the budgeting loans.

schrodie

What isn't fair given that IB & CB JSA pay the same amounts is if you're just over the threshold for the low income criteria or you partner works just over the number of hours allowed.

So having paid into the system all your working life you get the same dole as someone who hasn't paid in a penny and out of that have to pay for all prescriptions etc if you fail the low income test.

nannytone_2

life isnt fair though is it?
the system is already collapsing under the strain and the only solution you give is to double benefit for people that have paid years of contributions.

but you also complain about ESA WRAD conts being limited to 365 days ...

yet some of those people may only ever have worked and paid in for 2 years to qualify...
do you really think they should receive conts based benefit forever regardless of household income purely because they worked for 2 years?

sniggings

schrodie wrote: »

What isn't fair given that IB & CB JSA pay the same amounts is if you're just over the threshold for the low income criteria or you partner works just over the number of hours allowed.

So having paid into the system all your working life you get the same dole as someone who hasn't paid in a penny and out of that have to pay for all prescriptions etc if you fail the low income test.

well the chances are if you do not qualify for the low income free stuff, it would mean your partner is working, if they are working even just a couple of hours a week they will be better off than someone on incom based JSA and chances are they will be working at least 10 hours or more a week so they would be much better off, so sorry the person that has been working is benefiting by quite a bit over someone just on IB JSA a lot of the time.

schrodie

sniggings wrote: »

well the chances are if you do not qualify for the low income free stuff, it would mean your partner is working, if they are working even just a couple of hours a week they will be better off than someone on incom based JSA and chances are they will be working at least 10 hours or more a week so they would be much better off, so sorry the person that has been working is benefiting by quite a bit over someone just on IB JSA a lot of the time.

Not necessarily it can in some cases, and these are taken into account when the DWP carries out an impact assessment on their [disastrous] welfare cut proposals, work out better if the working partner gives up their job thus allowing the gateway to other (means tested) benefits to be made available, but now to both parties.

sniggings

schrodie wrote: »

Not necessarily it can in some cases, and these are taken into account when the DWP carries out an impact assessment on their [disastrous] welfare cut proposals, work out better if the working partner gives up their job thus allowing the gateway to other (means tested) benefits to be made available, but now to both parties.

your argument was IF you didn't qualify for the low income benefits you would be no/not much better off, that's just wrong, it would mean you WERE better off, and as said most people would work at least 10 hours a week so chances are you would be at least £60 a week better off, if not a lot more if your parnter were to work full time.

I agree some people are not any better off, I was no better off after working 20 years, no savings etc but put on contri based, no partner so I was on exactly the same a someone who hadn't worked and I also had to wait 1 year to claim a budgeting loan instead of the non worker only having to wait 26 weeks, a lot of people with a working partner would be much better off, the income based claimant would have to have about 10 prescriptions a week to be getting more.

there are not many other benefits I can think of that would be availble to the IB JSA claimant as apposed to the contri based claimant if they were on a low incom or for that matter not on a low income.

edit I take it all back, if you need to claim housing benefit that could mean the income based person is better off or at least no worse off that the person that has worked and on contri based JSA.