ISA Rules and the DWP

q64ad

OK then, as the bank loan is obviously creating a diversion, let's replace the bank in the hypothetical situation with a well meaning family member and a zero interest loan.

zagfles

q64ad wrote: »

OK then, as the bank loan is obviously creating a diversion, let's replace the bank in the hypothetical situation with a well meaning family member and a zero interest loan.

Same thing. Money in an ISA is capital to the DWP.

q64ad

zagfles wrote: »

Same thing. Money in an ISA is capital to the DWP.

And if the loan is repaid, then is that seen as deliberate deprivation of capital?

zagfles

q64ad wrote: »

And if the loan is repaid, then is that seen as deliberate deprivation of capital?

Probably even more likely than if it was a bank loan.

le_loup

Ah! So this is a scam to say I'm giving a family member cash "to pay off a loan".
Nice try.

Archi_Bald

What the scammers seem to forget is that the DWP and the LAs have seen it all before.

uknick

OP

Why don't you ask DWP if you pay off a family loan from your savings will this be regarded as deprivation of assets? Or, don't you want to be officially told you can't do it?

I will add this though.

A family member, who has now passed away, reduced their savings to just below the benefit threshold by lending them to another family member. They then claimed benefits declaring assets below the threshold. The other family member paid the loan back on a regular basis. This arrangement was kept secret from other family members and friends until after his death.

I can only assume this was because both parties involved knew it was deliberate deprivation of assets.

colsten

uknick wrote: »

A family member, who has now passed away, reduced their savings to just below the benefit threshold by lending them to another family member. They then claimed benefits declaring assets below the threshold. The other family member paid the loan back on a regular basis. This arrangement was kept secret from other family members and friends until after his death.

I can only assume this was because both parties involved knew it was deliberate deprivation of assets.

You make it sound as if it's alright to deprive yourself of assets if you just keep schtum about it. Well, it is not, it's cheating the benefits system, and I hope every single smart !!! who thinks they know better will be found out and punished.

uknick

colsten wrote: »

You make it sound as if it's alright to deprive yourself of assets if you just keep schtum about it. Well, it is not, it's cheating the benefits system, and I hope every single smart !!! who thinks they know better will be found out and punished.

What part of my post makes you assume I condoned it?

I think it is disgusting to fiddle benefits. There are enough people losing their benefits under the current government rules that actually need them. If fraud was not so prevalent then there would be more to go round to the people who actually qualify.

If I'd known about it prior to their death I would have told them to stop it or I would report them.

Would I have reported it without warning them? I know the correct answer is one should always report fraud, but it would have been a difficult decision as it was a close family member who'd been led astray by the person getting the loan, another family member.

colsten

uknick wrote: »

What part of my post makes you assume I condoned it?

it just sounded like it.

uknick wrote: »

I think it is disgusting to fiddle benefits.

This clarifies your position, and I agree with you